• wewbull@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 days ago

    Not sure I’d be trusting Musk’s communication network at this point. Especially not in Ukraine.

      • treadful@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Even ignoring the track record of Starlink, he’s also buddy buddy with Putin.

        • Free_Opinions@feddit.uk
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          5 days ago

          Track record of what? Helping Ukraine rather than Russia? Even this article is about helping Ukraine, not Russia. Pretty much every Ukraine related action SpaceX has taken goes against this pro-Russia narrative yet the narrative sticks.

            • Free_Opinions@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              13
              ·
              edit-2
              5 days ago

              Maybe you should read the article you linked.

              To clarify on the Starlink issue: the Ukrainians THOUGHT coverage was enabled all the way to Crimea, but it was not. They asked Musk to enable it for their drone sub attack on the Russian fleet. Musk did not enable it, because he thought, probably correctly, that would cause a major war.

              Starlink is not enabled in Russia or the occupied territories because it would be against U.S. sanctions and enabling it there would be literally illegal.

              Musk has even said that had he been contacted by U.S. officials and told to enable it he would have but they didn’t.

                • essteeyou@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  However, as Musk objected immediately and Isaacson would clarify soon after, the claim that Musk had ordered Starlink coverage in Crimea “turned off” wasn’t entirely accurate. (Both CNN and The Washington Post subsequently corrected their reports.)

                  From the article you linked.

                  CNN and TWP both corrected what they wrote, but you know better?

                • Free_Opinions@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  11
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 days ago

                  Just read the article.

                  Your claim is that they disabled it. They didn’t. It was never enabled in the first place.

                  • treadful@lemmy.zip
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    5 days ago

                    I shared it. Of course I read it. It’s also the statement from their public relations department after the fact to try and quell the public backlash.

          • PlainSimpleGarak@lemmings.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            15
            ·
            5 days ago

            Because Musk bad. Or something.

            All kidding aside, if you’re looking for objective, emotionally mature conversation, this platform isn’t the place.

      • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Because at the start of the war in ukraine a journalist eventually reported that Musk turned off access to starlink to thwart an attack on the Sevestapole port.

        Except that didn’t happen, they were never on in Russian controlled territory, and the journalist retracted the statement.

        People are still hung up on that though.

        This was also when the US Department of Defense was not yet involved and SpaceX was doing this for free, out of pocket, with strict rules about not using starlink as a weapon, because it’s a civilian tool, and being used as a weapon would contravene US law and put starlink at risk of falling under ITAR or some other law which would be VERY bad for SpaceX.

        Shortly after that, the DoD went into contract with SpaceX and now they deal with all that and it’s no longer a risk to SpaceX so they can use it as a weapon now.

        Then, it was reported that Russia was getting dishes from 3rd parties (smuggling them in) and that again was proof that Musk was supporting Russia. Except it’s not an easy problem to solve, and even the DoD said it was complicated and would be an ongoing game of cat and mouse to prevent.

        Edit: I like how hours after I made this reply, someone above is again claiming Musk shut down Starlink to stop the attack, and in the article they link it even talks about what I wrote in this post saying that the claim was retracted. I can’t tell if that person didn’t read the article and took the first link he found… or doesn’t understand the difference between turning something that was on to the off state (action), and simply not turning something that was off, on. (inaction)

        Guess you forgot about the time he shut down Starlink to stop a Ukrainian assault? -> link to snopes article

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Exactly. People are mad that SpaceX didn’t go out of its way to help Ukraine, and they’re largely making up stuff about them somehow supporting Russia, when SpaceX just wants to provide civilian service

          If SpaceX gets involved in US military interests, that’s going to significantly impact their ability to provide their service outside the US.

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            You just know that once the direct to cell service is live, Russians are going to kill Ukrainian civilians, take their cell phones, and use starlink to send a message, and it’ll be yet more proof that SpaceX does Russia’s bidding!

              • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 days ago

                I figured it out…

                It’s trickle down war supplies.

                SpaceX can’t support Russia directly, so they give all sorts of support to Ukraine. Then, they know Russia will get a small portion of it somehow and that’s how Russia will win the war.

                All SpaceX has to do is keep giving more and more hardware to Ukraine and eventually Russia will be able to turn the tide and defeat them!

          • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            5 days ago

            What’s your point? Yes, he denied a request to turn it on.

            SpaceX made the decision prior it wouldn’t be available in Russian controlled territory. Also had he turned it on, that would be using Starlink as a weapon and break US laws (edit: and the terms of their contract with Ukraine), and jeopardize starlink being available world wide for civilian use.

            He did not actively turn if off to thwart an attack though. It was already off.

            • Free_Opinions@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              5 days ago

              I believe that it was off not because of SpaxeX’s decision but due to U.S. sanctions. Enabling it there would’ve literally been illegal.

              Musk has also added that had he been contacted by U.S. officials and told to turn it on he would have, but they didn’t.

              • NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                5 days ago

                Ya, its quite possible it was related to that.

                And you’re right, had the DoD contacted them and said were approving this, do it, they would have done it. They won’t fuck around with that. The DoD has control now and does whatever they want with dishes given to Ukraine.