MayeulC
4 hours ago
The timing is interesting, given that it comes days after Musk said Ukraine had gone "too far" striking Yandex data centers. Putting other considerations aside, these strikes could be interpreted as direct retaliation against strikes on Ukrainian data centers days before.
That said, depending on a single piece of tech is not a good idea (as evidenced by the Russians when they lost starlink access). Russians have resorted to long-range mesh radios, Ukrainians should probably integrate that as well (though it does increase BOM costs).
The other dependency is Chinese suppliers, who supply both sides but may prefer to favor Russia. It is a huge liability for Ukraine as it supplies 80% of the parts that perform 70% of battlefield duties, and could stop anytime (besides known design leaks to the adversary, etc). Russia is even relocating whole production lines to evade sanctions.
Ukraine has been fighting with one arm behind its back, this is the latest development in the series of seemingly-arbitrary limitations imposed on it.
amelius
4 hours ago
> That said, depending on a single piece of tech is not a good idea
Yes and putting a CEO of a tech company in command of strategic infrastructure is not a good idea either.
jacquesm
4 hours ago
A tech company CEO that has some ethics issues.
throw93839383u
4 hours ago
[flagged]
Lio
3 hours ago
That sounds like something completely made up by trolls.
It's like me saying I'm on the Pope's Super Secret Christmas List because some random on Reddit said so.
It's just amateur propaganda.
kortzeus
3 hours ago
The list is run by some random dudes and has no relation to government or military formations.
Muromec
2 hours ago
It's not exactly some random dudes, but calling it a kill list is a stretch too. More of a crowdsourced public collection or red notices.
rapsey
4 hours ago
The guy who built it should not be running it because it is too important?
jacquesm
4 hours ago
Indeed. The ability to build something does not come with an automatic right to continue to operate it during a war. That said, I would assume Musk did not reach this decision in a vacuum. What surprises me is that there has never been a leak from inside SpaceX about the circumstances of these decisions.
throw0101a
3 hours ago
> What surprises me is that there has never been a leak from inside SpaceX about the circumstances of these decisions.
What point is there in trying to get sources to leak things when decisions are made at the top on a whim, versus policy options being analyzed video position papers and reports.
It's the same as the current White House: there's no point in trying to cultivate sources as decisions come from one place, with no consensus seeking, often in the middle of the night, and can be changed a few hours later.
ThunderSizzle
4 hours ago
How would a county like Ukraine go about regulating a company like Starlink in this manner?
You can't nationalize another country's business, especially when their assets are floating in space disconnectes entirely from your country.
If they want to regulate it, they need to build it first. Ukraine has no ability to regulate Starlink. It's not theirs to regulate.
jacquesm
4 hours ago
Ukraine clearly can not regulate a company like Starlink.
But the United States has that level of control and Musk is either using it to benefit putin or he's using it to benefit trump. Both of these could be fixed and could be fixed in relatively short order if there was the will to do so.
The rest of your comment is just restating the obvious so I won't respond to that.
DivingForGold
an hour ago
EU could step in here to penalize or forbid Musk-Starlink if they block or restrict Starlink in Ukraine ...
the EU is a HUGE market that Musk will not want to piss off and loose ...
jacquesm
29 minutes ago
I'm all for it.
throw93839383u
4 hours ago
[flagged]
rapsey
4 hours ago
Musk has been pretty vocal. Past controversy was literally the government asking him to do something illegal. Starshield is starlink for the US military. I highly doubt this controversy is anything other than SpaceX doing what the US gov tells them.
Cthulhu_
2 hours ago
*the guy who is CEO of the company that built it - attributing what companies and their engineers and staff did to one person is unfair. People stopped blaming Bill Gates for everything Microsoft did, eventually.
And it's not uncommon, many public utilities may be operated by companies but they are bound by laws and regulations.
chpatrick
4 hours ago
This is like the CEO of Lockheed Martin deciding what can be bombed...
rapsey
4 hours ago
And where does it say this was SpaceX decision? Seems highly unlikely to me.
Starshield is litteraly a US gov project which this is about. Not the public network at all. The title is clickbait honestly.
exitb
4 hours ago
Is it uncommon for companies that produce dual use tech to have stronger oversight?
eqvinox
4 hours ago
This is about regulating it, not running it. When things need regulation, putting the creators in charge is almost never a good idea.
Muromec
4 hours ago
>The guy who built it should not be running it because it is too important?
What's so radical about this anyway?
user
2 hours ago
dgellow
4 hours ago
Obviously, yes. At some point that becomes infrastructure the rest of society relies upon, not just a personal project for someone as unhinged as musk
user
4 hours ago
Maakuth
4 hours ago
I don't understand how it's "too far" in any way, provided that Russia has since the start of the war struck against Ukrainian civilian infrastructure, including datacenters. The only way I can read this is as an example of heavily pro-Russian bias.
jacquesm
3 hours ago
"heavily pro-Russian bias"
That's a very friendly term. I would use aiding and abetting a common enemy instead. And make no mistake: russia never stopped being an enemy of the USA, they just switched their tactics. Trump is probably the best ROI of any investment ever.
lostmsu
3 hours ago
Right, because Starlink is provided to Russia and denied to Ukraine.
piva00
2 hours ago
Russia is the aggressor, isn't it?
Maakuth
3 hours ago
Calling things as they are earns heavy downvotes here. It does make me think not all of the bots were in those Yandex DCs.
jacquesm
3 hours ago
IDGAF. Things are what they are. The current US president might as well be a russian asset if he isn't in actual fact and his from-the-heart-saluting side-kick is spending his money all over the world to help get more fascists elected. It's pretty clear.
lostmsu
2 hours ago
Again, people like to say that, but the US weapons and humanitarian aid continue to flow to Ukraine.
jacquesm
2 hours ago
Except when they don't. The USAID presence in Ukraine has evaporated, weapons bought and paid for by the EU are sitting in the US waiting to be shipped held up by Trump.
eptcyka
4 hours ago
Long range mesh on planes? Otherwise, it's pretty difficult to setup base stations in your enemies territory.
MayeulC
an hour ago
Yes, putting mesh radios on drones. As a sibling commenter said, Russia already does that: they do not really have access to starlink anymore (they still use it on drones sometimes, but there is a registration scheme in Ukraine that really curbed their use).
Both sides have used drone-mounted signal repeaters for FPV drones. FPVs use cheap radios, and signal extending drones can be reusable and carry a more expensive and jamming-resistant radio.
Since it is rarely a single drone attacking, but more often an entire swarm (to saturate air defences), having a mesh radio between drones can be useful, reduce the requirement that every drone must be equipped for long range communication, and enhance the connectivity back home.
Of course, both sides are mostly supplied by the same Chinese factories when it comes to radios, so China also gets to develop their drone warfare know-how. I assume that Ukraine also uses mesh radios, but probably to a lower extent than Russia does, as they can rely on Starlink.
To address your last point, I would also assume that it is possible to air drop signal repeaters from the swarm, especially for one-way trips, they do not need to last more than a few hours. Range will be degraded on the ground though.
Obviously, I would assume that most strike drones are fully autonomous, but having a connection back home means it is easier to adjust plans (air defense location, for instance) and provide intelligence (if target was hit, etc).
I am also wondering if the recently discovered SDR APIs in Wi-Fi chipsets will be leveraged for warfare. If I had to bet, I'd say: yes, pretty soon. These are a good fit for mesh radio, jam-resistant frequency hopping and wideband transmissions.
luke5441
4 hours ago
The drones themselves build a mesh network during an attack. Russia does this as well.
I would also guess it is not that hard to setup a base station? With Operation Spiderweb they were able to start the drones from enemy territory...
jacquesm
4 hours ago
They used the regular cellular network for that.
throw93839383u
4 hours ago
Allegedly Ukraine was using UK and their extensive network of satelites to target russia. So starlink withdrawal is not a real problem.
GJim
4 hours ago
> The timing is interesting, given that it comes days after Musk said Ukraine had gone "too far
More like Zelensky, in stating the Trump-Russia diesel deal was a 'weak decision by strong partners', has pissed-off the Orange One with his famously thin skin.
America, your president is a liability to the free world.
darkwi11ow
4 hours ago
It is likely last weeks/months while orange man has unchecked power before new parliament turns him into a lame duck. So he is hurrying up to trade his final favors with his fascist friends all over the world.
GuestFAUniverse
4 hours ago
The Russian bot farms helped Trump and Musk to gain power.
Same fascism, same colors (blue, red, white). Only the logo is a little different, but not much.