41–50 of 297 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why doesn't Musk's Company just turn off the Starlink panels , you know operating in Russia, just like he did over Crimea?
Why would he? Is the US at war with Russia?
Starlink doesn't offer service in UAE, so this must refer to diverted use of Starlink Maritime. Starlink Maritime is offered through (among others) Dubai-based maritime supplier ELCOME.[0] The ToS for Starlink Maritime isn't available, but this partner brochure[1] says: "Starlink Maritime is available for use in waters around the globe. Coverage in Territorial Waters is contingent on government approval ." (italics i…
I guess even if that's possible, it would be feasible for Starlink to triangulate from their satellites to estimate terminal locations and spot which ones are lying?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why doesn't Musk's Company just turn off the Starlink panels , you know operating in Russia, just like he did over Crimea?
Why would he? Is the US at war with 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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why disable? They're useful to launch attacks on Russian troops by giving away their positions.
The point is that he's done this before in order to disadvantage Ukraine. He is quite clearly on the side of russia.
I wonder if that's true: Maybe he just wants to be a controversial contrarian and always tries to be on the "non-woke" and "non-mainstream" side.
Doesn't change much in this instance, but still.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why disable? They're useful to launch attacks on Russian troops by giving away their positions.
The point is that he's done this before in order to disadvantage Ukraine. He is quite clearly on the side of russia.
Starlink doesn't offer service in UAE, so this must refer to diverted use of Starlink Maritime. Starlink Maritime is offered through (among others) Dubai-based maritime supplier ELCOME.[0] The ToS for Starlink Maritime isn't available, but this partner brochure[1] says: "Starlink Maritime is available for use in waters around the globe. Coverage in Territorial Waters is contingent on government approval ." (italics i…
Forgive me if I'm thinking like a TV writer since I don't have the scientific knowledge, hence the question: can GPS signals not be spoofed, if you are in possession of the device you want to trick? I.e. Couldn't they have fake GPS signals right next to a Starlink terminal that's not strong enough to have a wide-reaching effect, but enough for the terminal to believe it's somewhere it isn't and report that false loca…
How is this legal? Can Starlink get in trouble from EU and the US?
If i manufacture a truck and sell it abroad, and eventually it ends up with a weapons mount in the Syrian desert, am i to blame?
> “The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor. If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation,” Musk wrote.
Musk himself has used the ostensible fear of becoming complicit as a justification to disable Starlink access for the Ukrainian military.
So yes, he's already taken the position that he would be to blame. You can't then turn it around and say he wouldn't be to blame for russian military success through the use of the same technology.