9 ms·
India tells public to shun Starlink until it gets licence
- samstave 5y agodefine what value and relevance a license has for such? How easy will it be to shootdown starlink devices? I am sure it will be easy for someone to build an app that tracks your current GPS and the Starlink cause-ways and provide the telemetry data to shoot these things down with ease... Does Starlink have a ChaosMonkey for such scenarios built in? -- Imagine a world war - or even a war btwn 2 supers... killing starlink is going to be A#1 target.
- errantspark 5y agoNext to impossible to kill a starlink satellite and there are thousands of them, I don't think any country has the capability to to take starlink satellites down en masse by force. The US, russia and china could probably take down a few, but I doubt the stockpiles of anti satellite missiles of all three combined equal the size of the constellation. Guessing about that though. You could probably blow up a nuke on orbit to EMP a bunch of them at once but that would have a lot of collateral damage.
- mcguire 5y agoNot hard to kill one, but probably hard to put up enough stuff to kill many of them with a single launch. On the other hand, it would be much easier to take out the Starlink launch vehicles before they deploy the satellites and then wait a couple of years (given their 5-year lifetime) for the service to degrade.
- spyridonas 5y agoDoesn't hitting one of them be good enough for chainlink reaction due to space debris? They are all on the same height and pretty close to each other.
- sokoloff 5y agoThe debris field would move generally with its original momentum, meaning I wouldn’t expect hitting one to take out the others in the same string.
- ascar 5y agoIf you're hitting it with a rocket the explosion should considerably change the momentum, no? But not that it's really relevant anyway, these things are not close to each other at all in this context.
- shlurpy 5y agoHitting it with anything at those speeds causes and explosion. At low earth orbit (LEO) most vectors cause the debris to rapidly deorbit, but a few can cause a slightly raised orbit that could hit things behind it. The problem is, if such a chain reaction does start, it's not likely limited to a single orbital plane like starling, but to destroy every single LEO satellite and make LEO unusable for tens of not hundreds of years.
- wongarsu 5y agoI'm not sure I would call 1600 objects scattered over an area about as large as the surface of earth "pretty close together". There's plenty of empty space between them
- Jensson 5y agoCouldn't you fly up a satellite with a small gun and a propulsion engine? You don't have to be much faster than the starlink satellites to eventually shoot down all of them, and it shouldn't take a big gun to make a satellite stop working. At least it should be way cheaper to destroy it than to build the network.
- ninjanomnom 5y agoOrbital mechanics being what they are, you can't simply speed up to intercept something in orbit. Very roughly speaking, as you increase speed you increase the distance the opposite side of the orbit is from the orbited body. This means if you're trying to catch a bunch of satellites on a single orbital path you'll miss most since your orbit is different now. There are ways to do what you say but I dont know if any countries have managed to make a reusable orbital satellite killer like this.
- jhgb 5y agoSince you're talking about a "satellite train", so as to speak, I'm not sure you need to "speed up to intercept". If for example the orbital period is 90 minutes and the time between two consecutive satellites passing through the same point is 5 minutes, just make sure that your orbital period at the time of intercept is 95 minutes and then you can shoot down one satellite per orbital period. There's not a lot of maneuvering that the electrically propelled satellites could do on quick notice.
- sreevisakh 5y agoIndia is one of the 4 with ASAT capability, in addition to the 3 you mentioned. But it doesn't make sense to destroy even a single satellite (due to Kessler syndrome), if it is just to stop starlink service. The signal can just be jammed. Or even simpler - just monitor the uplink transmission and punish those who break the order.
- robscallsign 5y agoIt would be easier to attack/sabotage/JAM/DOS the ground stations.
- readflaggedcomm 5y ago>define what value and relevance a license has for such Government compliance? India is a democracy. Tech may move faster, but that doesn't mean it's right. Voters decide what's right, ultimately. The Amish are wise in this: wait for the community to approve technology, and only then apply it to their lives. The Government of India doesn't need to be held hostage by cybermancers, they can decide tech usefulness on their own time.
- throwaway2077 5y agosatellite internet is not a new technology. come on now, you've been a superpower for over a year. get with the times.
- dddnzzz334 5y agoIt isn't about protecting the interest of the voters but about having power to shut down and censor internet at will that the Indian government doesn't want to lose.
- jhgb 5y ago> India is a democracy. Tech may move faster, but that doesn't mean it's right. Voters decide what's right, ultimately. ... The Amish are wise in this: wait for the community to approve technology, and only then apply it to their lives. You mention democracy and then give an example of religious authoritarianism? What is the connection between the two?
- readflaggedcomm 5y agoThe Amish vote on how their community moves. People regularly leave. It's the same thing.
- jhgb 5y ago> People regularly leave People regularly fled from behind the Iron Curtain, too.
- quit32 5y agolol "tracks your current GPS" Starlink is not going to be A#1 target in space in a new world war. Reconnaissance and Mil Comms satellites will be.
- jhgb 5y ago> and Mil Comms satellites will be. Like Starlink in the future, then? Possibly? https://spacenews.com/u-s-army-signs-deal-with-spacex-to-assess-starlink-broadband/ https://spacenews.com/u-s-army-signs-deal-with-spacex-to-ass...
- samstave 5y agoYou ass: Obv I mean determining your current location and azimuth as relates to the starlink satellites you may want to shoot down. Jeasus... are like 25?
- enkid 5y agoShooting down thousands of satellites would extremely expensive and piss off every other space faring country
- naruvimama 5y agoCould be a piece of cake disabling mini sats with laser or microwave weapons, which I understand is rapidly seeing the light of the day.
- josephcsible 5y agoBecause heaven forbid the masses have Internet access that their government doesn't have the means to censor or surveil.
- shellfishgene 5y agoI don't think Starlink would currently work without base stations in India.
- josephcsible 5y agoCouldn't they make it work for most of the population of India by putting stations near the border in neighboring countries?
- bklyn11201 5y agoCould they bypass the laws of a nation state by using inter-satellite lasers? Yes! But what leads people to believe that Starlink is going to ignore the laws of powerful countries?!
- toast0 5y agoIndia is pretty sizable, and Starlink currently does not do any orbital routing, so you've got to be within a certain distance from a ground station so that the satellite has you and that ground station in view. I don't know what that distance is though --- maybe someone else can provide that. If Sri Lanka also doesn't allow ground stations, that would make it pretty hard to cover southern India. Even when there's orbital routing, there's likely capacity limits. If Pakistan doesn't block ground stations, it may be a good solution for people in Jammu and Kashmir to get around the frequent government telecommunications shutdowns; assuming lax enforcement.
- th3iedkid 5y agoPakistani sat phones , VoIP channels etc were always used for attacks in India[1] . So this too probably adds to that. [1] https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/tmc-claims-hollow-civic-poll-results-proved-people-of-tripura-have-faith-in-bjp-dilip-ghosh/articleshow/87960324.cms https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/tmc-cla...
- cptaj 5y agoIndia shakes fist at the sky
- AnotherZaphod 5y agoThey have already demonstrated the capability to shoot down satellites. Maybe the US should propose a treaty regulating the militarization of space, thus far they have rejected the ones proposed by other countries.
- asadotzler 5y agoSo, SpaceX started taking pre-orders for Starlink in India before they had license to operate Starlink in India. I understand India being upset, but a pre-order is not the same as service. SpaceX is not going to offer service in India until its licenses are approved. But what's the harm in taking refundable pre-orders?
- basisword 5y agoThey’re taking people’s money and promising a service they don’t yet know they will even be able to provide (e.g. if they don’t receive the license). That’s dishonest. It’s not a preorder in this case - more of a kickstarter.
- legolas2412 5y agoOn par with what Elon musk does for FSD. American regulators do not care.
- jessriedel 5y agoAll pre-orders have the possibility of not being fulfilled. SpaceX is a lot more capitalized than a random start-up or a kickstarter, so they are significantly more likely than a typical pre-order of delivering the product and of issuing refunds if they can't deliver. So I think you just have to have an objections to the vast majority of pre-orders in general if you have a problem with this. And if so, focusing on Starlink is clickbait and/or disingenuous.
- basisword 5y ago>> SpaceX is a lot more capitalized than a random start-up or a kickstarter, so they are significantly more likely than a typical pre-order of delivering the product In this case that’s not true. They don’t have control over whether or not the government approves them. A preorder should be deliverable bar some extreme unpredictable circumstance occurring.
- camhart 5y agoI disagree. Their product is already functioning. It's not a kickstarter. How is this dishonest? The only dishonest thing would be the government not allowing it for some unethical reason.
- quadrifoliate 5y agoThe reality is far more prosaic than many people seem to believe. Starlink has been reported to be taking "pre-orders" for the service at $99 in India; without having a license to operate [1][2]. This might seem like peanuts to the HN crowd, and the move to do pre-orders is completely in line with the "move fast" ethos of SV startups, but $99 is a non-trivial amount of money in rural India. IMO the Government is right to at least warn people that they might not get the service promised, even if they do end up getting their money back. Also, in case Starlink decides to take the dynamic and innovative step of just keeping the money, it is unclear what recourse these prospective customers will have. ---------------------------------------- [1] https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/telecom/telecom-news/telecom-ngo-alleges-musks-starlink-cheating-consumers-in-india-by-accepting-pre-order-deposits-without-a-licence/articleshow/86678167.cms https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/telecom/teleco... [2] https://www.pcmag.com/news/india-spacex-needs-a-license-to-offer-starlink-pre-orders https://www.pcmag.com/news/india-spacex-needs-a-license-to-o...
- mcguire 5y agoIf we all obeyed a dictum to "avoid selling things until you can provide those things", Silicon Valley would dry up overnight.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- JulianMorrison 5y agoI fail to see a downside.
- Ballu 5y agoThere is a difference in "avoid selling things until you can provide those things" and "avoid selling things until you are allowed to sell things".
- phendrenad2 5y agoWhat's the difference?
- Thlom 5y agoIndia is known to be really difficult to satcom providers. F.ex Inmarsat just recently got a limited license to operate their Ka-band service in India, but I think only on aircrafts and Indian flagged maritime vessels. Russia is also a bit difficult for requiring all terminals in their territory to register with the government, but at least fishing vessels can continue to use their satcom while in Russia as long as they register the terminal. Just saying, it can take a really long time to acquire a satcom license in India. I think Starlink I Ku-band, so might be easier than Ka-band license.
- dkdk8283 5y agoHow easy is it to enforce this? Can the signal be picked up on the ground?
- rajasimon 5y agoha ha yeah literally my thought. Why I can't just catch the signal now. It's all come to starlink hand right? Why starlink need Indian Gov permission?. On a side note. I'm living in India. Finally we see some promising speed from Jio and have good stable speed from Bharath Fibernet( 150 Mbps )
- perryizgr8 5y agoThe main way to enforce this is by restricting sale of the hardware. It's big and high tech, can't be smuggled into the country in meaningful quantities.
- tata71 5y agoCompetition and transparency cures all market woes.
- CyanBird 5y agoIt really doesn't, that just ensures that already giant western firms reign Supreme on the national markets of smaller countries But if you like to take that slogan and spread it around, then I am sure which you might be quite happy with said outcome?
- mukundmr 5y agoStarlink cost is 499$ for equipment and 99$ per month? That is way too high for broadband prices in India. Fibre internet of 100 Mbps is about 18$. Mobile 4G is even cheaper.
- wmf 5y agoStarlink might make more sense as cellular backhaul in some places.
- jhgb 5y agoIn that case, what's the problem? If nobody is going to buy it, then there's nobody that needs to be discouraged from buying it.
- foobiekr 5y agoIt’s about bribes.
- dddnzzz334 5y agoIt means losing the dictatorial control that the Indian government currently has over internet.
- minhazm 5y agoHow many people have access to this 100 Mbps fiber though? From what I'm seeing on Wikipedia, the internet penetration rate is around 50% of the population. Starlink isn't intended to replace existing reliable broadband solutions. It's meant to provide internet access to remote areas where running fiber to those areas is way more expensive. Fiber and cellular (usually needs fiber backhaul) would be prohibitively expensive to bring to many areas of the world and telecoms won't do it unless the government pays for it. But for $500 up front and $99 a month you can bring 150-300 Mbps to remote villages and schools. They don't need a dedicated connection per household, 300 Mbps is enough to split across potentially dozens of households or even a smalls school.
- mohanmcgeek 5y ago
- pm90 5y agoLots of comments dunking on Indian Government as grandstanding or too corrupt and quoting extreme examples to justify this position. Sorry folks, not every other non Western or non Western-allied country is a banana republic. India does suffer from endemic corruption but that doesn’t mean that every decision is tainted by that for fucks sake. It’s entirely reasonable for the Government to ensure that a foreign corporation is going to offer a legitimate service, and has proper mechanisms to address grievances, before it’s allowed to take money from it’s citizens.
- rconti 5y agoStreisand effect? Of course, if the goal is payoffs to the government, raising awareness of Starlink might be in the government's interest.
- jamesmishra 5y agoIndia's decision might sound silly--especially given how many people on Hacker News trust Elon Musk--but the Indian government is just worried in general about all types of businesses that could be selling expensive vaporware to poor people. I don't agree with the Indian government's decision regarding Starlink, but I also understand where the underlying logic originated from.
- frontman1988 5y agoIs starlink uncensorable? India has a high number of internet shutdowns and maybe doesn't want to lose control of that.
- known 5y agoIt happened before for BSNL services to protect Ambani/Reliance interests;
- vjancik 5y agoChina just outright banned all residential satellite dishes in response to Starlink. Gotta keep the people under control after all.