5 ms·

Why doesn't Musk's Company just turn off the Starlink panels , you know operating in Russia, just like he did over Crimea?

potatototoo99 3y ago
Why would he? Is the US at war with Russia?
- dsr_ 3y ago
  Not yet.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  Because sanctions issued by the country he lives and does business in apply, and his most lucrative client is that country’s government.
- threeseed 3y ago
  US is currently imposing sanctions on Russia. And so if Musk were to be providing material support he could see Starlink placed on the export control list. Which if it happened would then open Musk up to severe criminal charges if he didn't take steps to prevent devices being used by Russia. So I suspect he might want to do the right thing ahead of time given the US government is a pretty important customer for SpaceX.
- oneshtein 3y ago
  Russia is at (undeclared) war with US and NATO. Russian propaganda currently says that they started the war to counter NATO expansion.
  - itsoktocry 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - sgift 3y ago
      Because NATO did not expand. Countries decided to join NATO. You may think this is the same with other words, but it isn't. In the first version there's only two actors in the world, who can make decisions: Russia and NATO (or rather USA, for they argue NATO is basically the USA with another name). In the second version countries are free to decide who they associate with. There wasn't some empty space that NATO moved into. The countries who were there said "hey, NATO. Russia has been attacking and oppressing us for a long time and we fear they will do it again. We'd like to join." To answer your second question: Exactly what Russias neighbors feared is the reason. Russia is unhappy they couldn't oppress their neighbors anymore since 1990 and they want to do it again. They cannot really do it to the countries that already joined NATO, so they did it to the country that was late to the party.
      - ImJamal 3y ago
        >Because NATO did not expand. Countries decided to join NATO. You may think this is the same with other words, but it isn't. In the first version That is sort of a weird argument. Do you believe that is the case for the US as well? The US did not expand into Indian areas those areas just decided to join the US..
      - khzw8yyy 3y ago
        Just to clarify: the "we" who would like to join is a government that was installed by the USA in a coup. What kind of "attacking and oppressing" happened before the coup?
        jnsaff2 3y ago
        So Finland and Sweden have governments "installed by USA in a coup"?
        khzw8yyy 3y ago
        That's just being obtuse to be obtuse. You and I both understand the difference between the choices that Finland or Sweden made and the "choices" that Ukraine or Iraq made.
  - d1sxeyes 3y ago
    Russia has always (somewhat fairly) been vocal that since the collapse of the Warsaw pact, Nato has no reason to exist other than to defend against a potential attack from Russia. Nato have always acted as though that's true, and have pursued expanding the alliance to countries bordering Russia, and established missile defence installations there. The closest we ever got to nuclear war was when Russia moved missiles to Cuba, so it doesn't take a geopolitical scientist to understand that the US is very uncomfortable about threats near its borders, but expects Russia to accept it the other way round. I'm not up to date with what the propaganda systems are belching out in Russia, but I believe the original reason was something about Nazis in Ukraine, and it would not surprise me if the narrative is shifting to be 'Nato is creeping up on us again'. Which is odd, because Russia already has borders with Nato countries, and controlling Ukraine actually brings them closer to where Nato already has a strong foothold. A lot of what's going on in Ukraine at the moment is linked to Sevastopol, I think. Russia absolutely cannot afford to lose Sevastopol. Not sure quite what happened that triggered the full scale invasion after the annexation of the Crimea, mind. Edit: added a quite important “not”
    - actionfromafar 3y ago
      Nothing changed. "Ukraine does not exist. It's not a state. Ukrainians do not exist."
    - justsomehnguy 3y ago
      > Which is odd, because Russia already has borders with Nato countries, and controlling Ukraine actually brings them closer to where Nato already has a strong foothold. A couple of minutes with a globe would answer many of those questions. Not the propaganda ones, of course.
      - d1sxeyes 3y ago
        No I just mean it’s a bit of an implausible explanation and requires Russian citizens to adopt doublethink. Not that they’re not used to it, just harder in the internet age.
nottorp 3y ago
> Why doesn't Musk's Company just turn off the Starlink panels , you know operating in Russia, just like he did over Crimea? I'm also sure they can distinguish between terminals used by ukrainians and russians on a front line that probably changes daily.
- threeseed 3y ago
  Starlinks are associated with a user account. So it should be trivial to determine who is Ukrainian and who is not Ukrainian.
  - inemesitaffia 3y ago
    How so when lots of them are paid for with foreign cards?
    - garblegarble 3y ago
      Lots will be paid for by the DoD, for the others: ask the AFU - the users could supply their account details up through the chain of command (or directly via GIS Arta). Actually, I'd hope this is already happening regularly anyway so they can cut off any terminals captured by the enemy
      - inemesitaffia 3y ago
        That effort must come via Ukraine. Accusations and antagonism will lead to a more abrupt solution. Service termination for currently unverifiable equipment
- CoastalCoder 3y ago
  Does StarLink NOC have the ability to listen in on conversations?
  - inemesitaffia 3y ago
    Yes and they know where you are
trickstra 3y ago
That's exactly what they have been doing since the start of the invasion, and that's how they explained the cut-off when Ukraine was using the Sea Babies for the first time. So either something changed, or the article's claims are bogus. Starlink definitely has the exact location and ID of every ground terminal and can easily refuse the connection.
- nottorp 3y ago
  Are you sure those weren't registered to the ukrainian army?
inemesitaffia 3y ago
This equipment operates where Ukrainians operate theirs

potatototoo99 3y ago

Why would he? Is the US at war with Russia?

dsr_ 3y ago
Not yet.
ceejayoz 3y ago
Because sanctions issued by the country he lives and does business in apply, and his most lucrative client is that country’s government.
threeseed 3y ago
US is currently imposing sanctions on Russia. And so if Musk were to be providing material support he could see Starlink placed on the export control list. Which if it happened would then open Musk up to severe criminal charges if he didn't take steps to prevent devices being used by Russia. So I suspect he might want to do the right thing ahead of time given the US government is a pretty important customer for SpaceX.
oneshtein 3y ago
Russia is at (undeclared) war with US and NATO. Russian propaganda currently says that they started the war to counter NATO expansion.
- itsoktocry 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - sgift 3y ago
    Because NATO did not expand. Countries decided to join NATO. You may think this is the same with other words, but it isn't. In the first version there's only two actors in the world, who can make decisions: Russia and NATO (or rather USA, for they argue NATO is basically the USA with another name). In the second version countries are free to decide who they associate with. There wasn't some empty space that NATO moved into. The countries who were there said "hey, NATO. Russia has been attacking and oppressing us for a long time and we fear they will do it again. We'd like to join." To answer your second question: Exactly what Russias neighbors feared is the reason. Russia is unhappy they couldn't oppress their neighbors anymore since 1990 and they want to do it again. They cannot really do it to the countries that already joined NATO, so they did it to the country that was late to the party.
    - ImJamal 3y ago
      >Because NATO did not expand. Countries decided to join NATO. You may think this is the same with other words, but it isn't. In the first version That is sort of a weird argument. Do you believe that is the case for the US as well? The US did not expand into Indian areas those areas just decided to join the US..
    - khzw8yyy 3y ago
      Just to clarify: the "we" who would like to join is a government that was installed by the USA in a coup. What kind of "attacking and oppressing" happened before the coup?
      - jnsaff2 3y ago
        So Finland and Sweden have governments "installed by USA in a coup"?
        khzw8yyy 3y ago
        That's just being obtuse to be obtuse. You and I both understand the difference between the choices that Finland or Sweden made and the "choices" that Ukraine or Iraq made.
- d1sxeyes 3y ago
  Russia has always (somewhat fairly) been vocal that since the collapse of the Warsaw pact, Nato has no reason to exist other than to defend against a potential attack from Russia. Nato have always acted as though that's true, and have pursued expanding the alliance to countries bordering Russia, and established missile defence installations there. The closest we ever got to nuclear war was when Russia moved missiles to Cuba, so it doesn't take a geopolitical scientist to understand that the US is very uncomfortable about threats near its borders, but expects Russia to accept it the other way round. I'm not up to date with what the propaganda systems are belching out in Russia, but I believe the original reason was something about Nazis in Ukraine, and it would not surprise me if the narrative is shifting to be 'Nato is creeping up on us again'. Which is odd, because Russia already has borders with Nato countries, and controlling Ukraine actually brings them closer to where Nato already has a strong foothold. A lot of what's going on in Ukraine at the moment is linked to Sevastopol, I think. Russia absolutely cannot afford to lose Sevastopol. Not sure quite what happened that triggered the full scale invasion after the annexation of the Crimea, mind. Edit: added a quite important “not”
  - actionfromafar 3y ago
    Nothing changed. "Ukraine does not exist. It's not a state. Ukrainians do not exist."
  - justsomehnguy 3y ago
    > Which is odd, because Russia already has borders with Nato countries, and controlling Ukraine actually brings them closer to where Nato already has a strong foothold. A couple of minutes with a globe would answer many of those questions. Not the propaganda ones, of course.
    - d1sxeyes 3y ago
      No I just mean it’s a bit of an implausible explanation and requires Russian citizens to adopt doublethink. Not that they’re not used to it, just harder in the internet age.

nottorp 3y ago

> Why doesn't Musk's Company just turn off the Starlink panels , you know operating in Russia, just like he did over Crimea? I'm also sure they can distinguish between terminals used by ukrainians and russians on a front line that probably changes daily.

threeseed 3y ago
Starlinks are associated with a user account. So it should be trivial to determine who is Ukrainian and who is not Ukrainian.
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  How so when lots of them are paid for with foreign cards?
  - garblegarble 3y ago
    Lots will be paid for by the DoD, for the others: ask the AFU - the users could supply their account details up through the chain of command (or directly via GIS Arta). Actually, I'd hope this is already happening regularly anyway so they can cut off any terminals captured by the enemy
    - inemesitaffia 3y ago
      That effort must come via Ukraine. Accusations and antagonism will lead to a more abrupt solution. Service termination for currently unverifiable equipment
CoastalCoder 3y ago
Does StarLink NOC have the ability to listen in on conversations?
- inemesitaffia 3y ago
  Yes and they know where you are

trickstra 3y ago

That's exactly what they have been doing since the start of the invasion, and that's how they explained the cut-off when Ukraine was using the Sea Babies for the first time. So either something changed, or the article's claims are bogus. Starlink definitely has the exact location and ID of every ground terminal and can easily refuse the connection.

nottorp 3y ago
Are you sure those weren't registered to the ukrainian army?

inemesitaffia 3y ago

This equipment operates where Ukrainians operate theirs