8 ms·

How about providing free internet to China and Russia, to give the people there proper information without government oversight?

wmf 4y ago
How about getting Tesla banned from China and possibly starting an orbital war that triggers the Kessler syndrome?
- espadrine 4y ago
  What would be banned are the dishes. China doesn’t need to send a missile to LEO (which would be unnecessarily costly for them).
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    China wouldn't need anti-satellite weapons to punish Elon Musk, since he has business interests in China. Hence "ban Teslas".
  - gpm 4y ago
    China has previously demonstrated anti-satellite weapons multiple times just to demonstrate they have them (and maybe make sure they work), I doubt they'd be that worried about the cost to demonstrate that they mean it and are willing to use them.
    - wcoenen 4y ago
      Russia has done the same demonstration last year [1]. And yet they have not destroyed starlink, even though SpaceX donated many dishes to Ukraine[2]. So there still seems to be some restraint around the concept of shooting down foreign satellites. I guess it's a "mutual assured destruction" type situation: once you shoot down a satellite, you'd better be prepared to lose your own. [1] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_188780.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_188780.htm [2] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/22/elon-musk-spacex-thousands-of-starlink-satellite-dishes-sent-to-ukraine.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/22/elon-musk-spacex-thousands-o...
      - true_religion 4y ago
        Ukraine isn't Russian territory even though Russia would like to believe differently. On the other hand, providing free media merely to subvert the people of main land China could be seen as a company over stepping it's bounds by far. I will bet China would sanction anyone who dealt with Starlink.
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  Nobody is going to disclose & use anti-satellite technology over internet censorship. Hell, China isn't even aiming for bulletproof terrestrial censorship - they are happy with "good enough".
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    > Nobody is going to disclose & use anti-satellite technology over internet censorship. This constellation is plausibly if not probably duel-use technology. You can bet that China is planning ways to disable it if war breaks out.
    - Nextgrid 4y ago
      If war breaks out is the key. They'd rather keep their ability to destroy it under wraps until it becomes a matter of national security. Disclosing it or using it prematurely over a benign issue such as internet censorship would be stupid.
      - MichaelCollins 4y ago
        In the unlikely event that SpaceX tries to enter the Chinese market illegally, I wouldn't put it past China to swat one of Starlink's satellites using a conventional anti-satellite weapon (one of the sort they have already revealed), just to make a statement. But I think SpaceX won't do this anyway; they'll continue to comply with local/national laws during peacetime. It's not in their interest to stir the pot and cause diplomatic trouble. But more to your point I agree; they won't try to destroy the constellation itself over something as petty as a few people using Starlink to circumvent their 'Great Firewall'. People sufficiently motivated to get around the firewall already can, without the need for Starlink. The CCP doesn't seem to care about it; the firewall doesn't need to be perfectly airtight to control the population, it only needs to be 'good enough'. And they wouldn't want to expose any new anti-satellite weapons they have, particularly soft-kill weapons that might be addressed after discovery with a software patch.
- tenpies 4y ago
  Also, the backbone of Tesla's production rests on the factory in Shanghai.
cududa 4y ago
You know both Russia and China are perfectly capable of targeting and destroying satellites, yes?
- closewith 4y ago
  Neither could destroy SpaceX satellites as fast as they can be launched. No State can. The issue would be whether they could cause enough damage to make the orbital plane (temporarily) unusable.
  - bpodgursky 4y ago
    The Starlink orbit is low enough that it would only be unusable for a year or so I'd imagine. Small debris will drop out quite fast.
  - FpUser 4y ago
    Are those protected from EMP that can kill scores at once?
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      The point of Starship is to launch hundreds at once, several times a week if it goes as planned (that's a few years away.) Forget Mars colonization, the only practical use for such a booster is to fight a war in LEO.
    - closewith 4y ago
      There's currently more than 3,000 satellites in the constellation. Killing scores or even hundreds isn't enough. The only known EMP weapons that could really impact the constellation is nuclear, and at that point, knocking out Starlink is the least of our worries.
  - 42e6e8c8-f7b8-4 4y ago
    I think a laser mounted on one of their satellites could get the job done. Their militaries may even have that already.
bgun 4y ago
I would make a joke about equating “free internet” with “proper information” but in 2022 that joke writes itself. And let’s not get started on the “without government oversight” part of your comment.
pphysch 4y ago
You think the USG that funded SpaceX/Starlink isn't going to have control over it...? While Starlink was marketed as a boon to rural democratic internet access, those promises have been walked back and its pretty clear that it the limited bandwidth is primarily intended to increase the Pentagon/ICs communications capabilities in the field, much like the Internet itself. The USG did not fund a swarm of satellites so that American (nor Russian, nor Chinese) farmers can watch Netflix.
- wmf 4y ago
  Why wouldn't the Pentagon want to blanket China with US propaganda?
  - pphysch 4y ago
    Sure, but how do you propose to "blanket" China with Starlink modems?
    - wmf 4y ago
      I'm sure there are plenty of ingenious smugglers in China.
      - MichaelCollins 4y ago
        You could, but what difference would it make? You'd only be able to get them to relatively few people, and the "Great Firewall" is already porous enough to let those with sufficient motivation slip through. China doesn't care about that; so long as their firewall still works for most people then it still works for population control.
      - ceejayoz 4y ago
        Most of the things they smuggle probably aren't intended to go on your roof where all the neighbors can see, though.
bparsons 4y ago
There are much easier, and more discrete ways for users to bypass content filters than installing a giant, radiation emitting antennae on your roof.
s_dev 4y ago
Because you can't give free internet to China or Russia to give people proper information without government oversight. It's not going to happen without the co-operation of these governments who will actively prevent you from doing that. That's basically why. That's not even mentioning the sanctions on Western technology entering Russia at the moment.
thrwycct123 4y ago
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
eagerpace 4y ago
Valid comments here but with the very recent developments on satellite connections direct to mobile phones, how long until you don't need a giant satellite? It may be sooner than we think. Certainly there are other enforcement mechanisms but the trend towards the internet becoming a ubiquitous utility is still making a lot of progress and this is the next paradigm shift.
- fasthandle 4y ago
  Indeed. Without veering of into another discussion, other enforcement includes apps and phone monitoring. This isn't limited to other apps on a phone but firmware, input methods, even simply switching IPs. As well as VPNs existing, international sim cards also 'bypass' internet filtering. Absolute restriction of the internet is not the goal. The goal is to not allow anything approaching a critical mass to do so, especially less technically literate who would not seek out VPNs etc unless they were marketed to or directly facilitated. The next is to all but remove the browser, email is truly dead having never been a big thing socially, with a domestic app orientated landscape; mobile penetration is far beyond lap/desktop. This doesn't make it better, but it is how it is.
fasthandle 4y ago
It's far more straightforward to use a VPN. And as much as a VPN might or might not stick out depending on it and how it's used, procuring and using a Starling dish would far more. Incidentally, HN is blocked in China. Am using a VPN.
dylan604 4y ago
I mean, they kind of are, right? If the Chinese and Russian people came up with their own gear to receive/send compatible signals with the signal, then they could use it. Of course, authorized accounts would probably be problematic. Getting Starlink branded gear to use will also be hard in those countries.
- wmf 4y ago
  No, they could not use it. I'm pretty sure the satellites turn off their transmitters and receivers when passing over unlicensed countries (if for no other reason than to save power).
  - dylan604 4y ago
    that's just a software update though if Starlink so chooses to do so. they cost like $0.50 a piece, so if Putin wants to spend money effort to take a couple out to prove whatever point, then it costs them much much more than it does starlink. and at the rate they are getting launched, it won't be a very long lasting worthless accomplishment
    - _joel 4y ago
      They make a loss on the terminals.
      - dylan604 4y ago
        I'm not worried about Starlink's bottom line. I'm just guessing that China would want Chinese hardware. Not sure what type of export restrictions this type of hardware would have applied to it related to these 2 countries. I was just implying that I'm guessing getting actual Starlink hardware through legit channels is probably not something that will be available.
  - _joel 4y ago
    They definitely turn off when passing over areas where there are radio telescopes, which was a bigger problem to astronomers than light reflections
dageshi 4y ago
Practical reasons? The government would restrict or ban import or sale of the hardware. They'd make them illegal and use possession of one as a reason to throw the owner in jail.
dbrueck 4y ago
Hey, if that's a cause you believe in, how about you start a non-profit to do it? You could really help some people.
tempie_deleteme 4y ago
what about providing 'proper' information without corporate oversight to people in the USA?
dreamcompiler 4y ago
Satellite terminals can become targets as soon as they turn on their uplink transmitter (and possibly even in receive-only mode unless their IF oscillator is perfectly shielded, which it probably isn't). This is why Musk tweeted to Ukrainian users "Turn on Starlink only when needed and place antenna as far away from people as possible." [0] [0] https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-is-using-elon-musks-starlink-for-drone-strikes/a-61270528 https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-is-using-elon-musks-starlink-f...
unity1001 4y ago
Yeah. Because there is 'proper' information without government oversight in the West. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10613795/Joe-Biden-deploys-teenage-TikTok-stars-blame-soaring-gas-prices-inflation-Russia.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10613795/Joe-Biden-...
mlindner 4y ago
They can't without breaking international law.

wmf 4y ago

How about getting Tesla banned from China and possibly starting an orbital war that triggers the Kessler syndrome?

espadrine 4y ago
What would be banned are the dishes. China doesn’t need to send a missile to LEO (which would be unnecessarily costly for them).
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  China wouldn't need anti-satellite weapons to punish Elon Musk, since he has business interests in China. Hence "ban Teslas".
- gpm 4y ago
  China has previously demonstrated anti-satellite weapons multiple times just to demonstrate they have them (and maybe make sure they work), I doubt they'd be that worried about the cost to demonstrate that they mean it and are willing to use them.
  - wcoenen 4y ago
    Russia has done the same demonstration last year [1]. And yet they have not destroyed starlink, even though SpaceX donated many dishes to Ukraine[2]. So there still seems to be some restraint around the concept of shooting down foreign satellites. I guess it's a "mutual assured destruction" type situation: once you shoot down a satellite, you'd better be prepared to lose your own. [1] https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_188780.htm https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_188780.htm [2] https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/22/elon-musk-spacex-thousands-of-starlink-satellite-dishes-sent-to-ukraine.html https://www.cnbc.com/2022/03/22/elon-musk-spacex-thousands-o...
    - true_religion 4y ago
      Ukraine isn't Russian territory even though Russia would like to believe differently. On the other hand, providing free media merely to subvert the people of main land China could be seen as a company over stepping it's bounds by far. I will bet China would sanction anyone who dealt with Starlink.
Nextgrid 4y ago
Nobody is going to disclose & use anti-satellite technology over internet censorship. Hell, China isn't even aiming for bulletproof terrestrial censorship - they are happy with "good enough".
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  > Nobody is going to disclose & use anti-satellite technology over internet censorship. This constellation is plausibly if not probably duel-use technology. You can bet that China is planning ways to disable it if war breaks out.
  - Nextgrid 4y ago
    If war breaks out is the key. They'd rather keep their ability to destroy it under wraps until it becomes a matter of national security. Disclosing it or using it prematurely over a benign issue such as internet censorship would be stupid.
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      In the unlikely event that SpaceX tries to enter the Chinese market illegally, I wouldn't put it past China to swat one of Starlink's satellites using a conventional anti-satellite weapon (one of the sort they have already revealed), just to make a statement. But I think SpaceX won't do this anyway; they'll continue to comply with local/national laws during peacetime. It's not in their interest to stir the pot and cause diplomatic trouble. But more to your point I agree; they won't try to destroy the constellation itself over something as petty as a few people using Starlink to circumvent their 'Great Firewall'. People sufficiently motivated to get around the firewall already can, without the need for Starlink. The CCP doesn't seem to care about it; the firewall doesn't need to be perfectly airtight to control the population, it only needs to be 'good enough'. And they wouldn't want to expose any new anti-satellite weapons they have, particularly soft-kill weapons that might be addressed after discovery with a software patch.
tenpies 4y ago
Also, the backbone of Tesla's production rests on the factory in Shanghai.

cududa 4y ago

You know both Russia and China are perfectly capable of targeting and destroying satellites, yes?

closewith 4y ago
Neither could destroy SpaceX satellites as fast as they can be launched. No State can. The issue would be whether they could cause enough damage to make the orbital plane (temporarily) unusable.
- bpodgursky 4y ago
  The Starlink orbit is low enough that it would only be unusable for a year or so I'd imagine. Small debris will drop out quite fast.
- FpUser 4y ago
  Are those protected from EMP that can kill scores at once?
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    The point of Starship is to launch hundreds at once, several times a week if it goes as planned (that's a few years away.) Forget Mars colonization, the only practical use for such a booster is to fight a war in LEO.
  - closewith 4y ago
    There's currently more than 3,000 satellites in the constellation. Killing scores or even hundreds isn't enough. The only known EMP weapons that could really impact the constellation is nuclear, and at that point, knocking out Starlink is the least of our worries.
- 42e6e8c8-f7b8-4 4y ago
  I think a laser mounted on one of their satellites could get the job done. Their militaries may even have that already.

bgun 4y ago

I would make a joke about equating “free internet” with “proper information” but in 2022 that joke writes itself. And let’s not get started on the “without government oversight” part of your comment.

pphysch 4y ago

You think the USG that funded SpaceX/Starlink isn't going to have control over it...? While Starlink was marketed as a boon to rural democratic internet access, those promises have been walked back and its pretty clear that it the limited bandwidth is primarily intended to increase the Pentagon/ICs communications capabilities in the field, much like the Internet itself. The USG did not fund a swarm of satellites so that American (nor Russian, nor Chinese) farmers can watch Netflix.

wmf 4y ago
Why wouldn't the Pentagon want to blanket China with US propaganda?
- pphysch 4y ago
  Sure, but how do you propose to "blanket" China with Starlink modems?
  - wmf 4y ago
    I'm sure there are plenty of ingenious smugglers in China.
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      You could, but what difference would it make? You'd only be able to get them to relatively few people, and the "Great Firewall" is already porous enough to let those with sufficient motivation slip through. China doesn't care about that; so long as their firewall still works for most people then it still works for population control.
    - ceejayoz 4y ago
      Most of the things they smuggle probably aren't intended to go on your roof where all the neighbors can see, though.

bparsons 4y ago

There are much easier, and more discrete ways for users to bypass content filters than installing a giant, radiation emitting antennae on your roof.

s_dev 4y ago

Because you can't give free internet to China or Russia to give people proper information without government oversight. It's not going to happen without the co-operation of these governments who will actively prevent you from doing that. That's basically why. That's not even mentioning the sanctions on Western technology entering Russia at the moment.

thrwycct123 4y ago

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

eagerpace 4y ago

Valid comments here but with the very recent developments on satellite connections direct to mobile phones, how long until you don't need a giant satellite? It may be sooner than we think. Certainly there are other enforcement mechanisms but the trend towards the internet becoming a ubiquitous utility is still making a lot of progress and this is the next paradigm shift.

fasthandle 4y ago
Indeed. Without veering of into another discussion, other enforcement includes apps and phone monitoring. This isn't limited to other apps on a phone but firmware, input methods, even simply switching IPs. As well as VPNs existing, international sim cards also 'bypass' internet filtering. Absolute restriction of the internet is not the goal. The goal is to not allow anything approaching a critical mass to do so, especially less technically literate who would not seek out VPNs etc unless they were marketed to or directly facilitated. The next is to all but remove the browser, email is truly dead having never been a big thing socially, with a domestic app orientated landscape; mobile penetration is far beyond lap/desktop. This doesn't make it better, but it is how it is.

fasthandle 4y ago

It's far more straightforward to use a VPN. And as much as a VPN might or might not stick out depending on it and how it's used, procuring and using a Starling dish would far more. Incidentally, HN is blocked in China. Am using a VPN.

dylan604 4y ago

I mean, they kind of are, right? If the Chinese and Russian people came up with their own gear to receive/send compatible signals with the signal, then they could use it. Of course, authorized accounts would probably be problematic. Getting Starlink branded gear to use will also be hard in those countries.

wmf 4y ago
No, they could not use it. I'm pretty sure the satellites turn off their transmitters and receivers when passing over unlicensed countries (if for no other reason than to save power).
- dylan604 4y ago
  that's just a software update though if Starlink so chooses to do so. they cost like $0.50 a piece, so if Putin wants to spend money effort to take a couple out to prove whatever point, then it costs them much much more than it does starlink. and at the rate they are getting launched, it won't be a very long lasting worthless accomplishment
  - _joel 4y ago
    They make a loss on the terminals.
    - dylan604 4y ago
      I'm not worried about Starlink's bottom line. I'm just guessing that China would want Chinese hardware. Not sure what type of export restrictions this type of hardware would have applied to it related to these 2 countries. I was just implying that I'm guessing getting actual Starlink hardware through legit channels is probably not something that will be available.
- _joel 4y ago
  They definitely turn off when passing over areas where there are radio telescopes, which was a bigger problem to astronomers than light reflections

dageshi 4y ago

Practical reasons? The government would restrict or ban import or sale of the hardware. They'd make them illegal and use possession of one as a reason to throw the owner in jail.

dbrueck 4y ago

Hey, if that's a cause you believe in, how about you start a non-profit to do it? You could really help some people.

tempie_deleteme 4y ago

what about providing 'proper' information without corporate oversight to people in the USA?

dreamcompiler 4y ago

Satellite terminals can become targets as soon as they turn on their uplink transmitter (and possibly even in receive-only mode unless their IF oscillator is perfectly shielded, which it probably isn't). This is why Musk tweeted to Ukrainian users "Turn on Starlink only when needed and place antenna as far away from people as possible." [0] [0] https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-is-using-elon-musks-starlink-for-drone-strikes/a-61270528 https://www.dw.com/en/ukraine-is-using-elon-musks-starlink-f...

unity1001 4y ago

Yeah. Because there is 'proper' information without government oversight in the West. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10613795/Joe-Biden-deploys-teenage-TikTok-stars-blame-soaring-gas-prices-inflation-Russia.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10613795/Joe-Biden-...

mlindner 4y ago

They can't without breaking international law.