3 ms·

Yeah no, Starlink wouldn't even connect since the AWS Lambda that checks whether your subscription is still valid has gone offline forever. Which isn't that big

Yeah no, Starlink wouldn't even connect since the AWS Lambda that checks whether your subscription is still valid has gone offline forever. Which isn't that big of an issue really because all the datacenters are gone and all the uplinks as well, so Starlink is now an intranet. I mean, perhaps they do have solid and tested contingency plans for events like that, or the military has some sort of access they could use to rig it into something useful, but I don't really believe it.

bpodgursky 4y ago
If that exists, that user validation is all happening on the BE for Starlink, and while it may go down, there's no reason Starlink (assuming the actual engineering team survived in some fashion) wouldn't be able to cut it out of the loop or replace it. I also have no particular reason to think that Russia would use their very limited ICBM stockpile to target data centers rather than military facilities.
- dividedbyzero 4y ago
  To the best of my knowledge Russia retains hundreds of ICBMs and about a thousand warheads ready to fire at a moment's notice. Unless I've missed a crucial bit of news, I'd expect a majority of these to function as intended, as everything I read on that part of their military suggests they're operating a lot better than their army. In that case, an all-out nuclear war would mean hundreds of warheads raining down on the US with on average larger yields than the US ones to make up for less reliable targeting, and even optimistic projections for that and the effects of US retaliation assume three-digit million deaths right away and at least one growing season lost to nuclear winter. All infrastructure close to major population centers, military installations, ... would be gone, as would be anything susceptible to EMP from high-altitude detonations. I don't see Starlink software engineering and the infrastructure they require to remain operational in such a scenario.
- somenameforme 4y ago
  I have a reason to think such! The "obvious" target would be things like our nuclear resources, to try to create a win condition. But in most cases this would just be wasting weapons. Those facilities, as well as ones such as where our politicians will go hide while society dies for their decisions, are designed to withstand direct nuclear impacts. The goal of nuclear war, absent any chance for a realistic "win" conditions it to ensure that absolute destruction of the opposing country - beyond the ability to ever rebuild to a comparable relative strength. Our nuke targets from during the Cold War have been declassified [1], and it's likely that the Soviet Union's were similarly themed: population, industry, economic, medical. There's an extremely strong overlap between those areas and data centers. In any case this is also all slightly tangential. One of the first things that will happen during WW3 is the widescale mutual destruction of satellites in the sky, for both offensive and defensive measures. [1] - https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb538-Cold-War-Nuclear-Target-List-Declassified-First-Ever/ https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb538-Cold-War-Nuclear...
iso1631 4y ago
Certainly I have the equipment to be able to do IP between multiple locations - assuming that nuclear war wouldn't knock out GEO satelites and that not every vehicle and groundstation I have is destroyed. Not sure how useful that would be though. If a groundstation continues to work then even better, that bgan in your bag may well still work - assuming there's not too much radiation and dust in the atmosphere Again, still not sure what the point is. Hardlines between local command areas though - far more useful, and less likely to have been taken out.

bpodgursky 4y ago

If that exists, that user validation is all happening on the BE for Starlink, and while it may go down, there's no reason Starlink (assuming the actual engineering team survived in some fashion) wouldn't be able to cut it out of the loop or replace it. I also have no particular reason to think that Russia would use their very limited ICBM stockpile to target data centers rather than military facilities.

dividedbyzero 4y ago
To the best of my knowledge Russia retains hundreds of ICBMs and about a thousand warheads ready to fire at a moment's notice. Unless I've missed a crucial bit of news, I'd expect a majority of these to function as intended, as everything I read on that part of their military suggests they're operating a lot better than their army. In that case, an all-out nuclear war would mean hundreds of warheads raining down on the US with on average larger yields than the US ones to make up for less reliable targeting, and even optimistic projections for that and the effects of US retaliation assume three-digit million deaths right away and at least one growing season lost to nuclear winter. All infrastructure close to major population centers, military installations, ... would be gone, as would be anything susceptible to EMP from high-altitude detonations. I don't see Starlink software engineering and the infrastructure they require to remain operational in such a scenario.
somenameforme 4y ago
I have a reason to think such! The "obvious" target would be things like our nuclear resources, to try to create a win condition. But in most cases this would just be wasting weapons. Those facilities, as well as ones such as where our politicians will go hide while society dies for their decisions, are designed to withstand direct nuclear impacts. The goal of nuclear war, absent any chance for a realistic "win" conditions it to ensure that absolute destruction of the opposing country - beyond the ability to ever rebuild to a comparable relative strength. Our nuke targets from during the Cold War have been declassified [1], and it's likely that the Soviet Union's were similarly themed: population, industry, economic, medical. There's an extremely strong overlap between those areas and data centers. In any case this is also all slightly tangential. One of the first things that will happen during WW3 is the widescale mutual destruction of satellites in the sky, for both offensive and defensive measures. [1] - https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb538-Cold-War-Nuclear-Target-List-Declassified-First-Ever/ https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb538-Cold-War-Nuclear...

iso1631 4y ago

Certainly I have the equipment to be able to do IP between multiple locations - assuming that nuclear war wouldn't knock out GEO satelites and that not every vehicle and groundstation I have is destroyed. Not sure how useful that would be though. If a groundstation continues to work then even better, that bgan in your bag may well still work - assuming there's not too much radiation and dust in the atmosphere Again, still not sure what the point is. Hardlines between local command areas though - far more useful, and less likely to have been taken out.