How much of SpaceX's technology contains components sourced from abroad, and/or China? My bet is that it's enough to kill any national interest in defense applications.
Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
101–110 of 162 posts
Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
#102Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
#103trusting a dude who is compromised by interests in China up to his eyeballs to do anything involving national security seems unwise
He is 1/10th as compromised as Tim Apple, and the DoD uses iPhones.
DoD iPhones can only be used for “For official use only” information—that is, unclassified data.
Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
#104It sounds like they’re trying to sell two things: 1. Hosted payloads, where DoD entities pay to have something (telescope, Sigint equipment, whatever) strapped on to a starlink satellite with comms all figured out for them. Probably a good deal if your stuff fits on that big flat satellite. SpaceX starlink launches do sway the launch market significantly enough (offering a launch at half othe price or less, beholden…
If anything, the war in Ukraine has demonstrated how useful something like starlink can be. It makes sense that the DoD would gladly pay up to create a dedicated, hardened network for its own utility with specialized tweaks...
Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes I remember the study showing the total amount of ad spending by Prigozhin was But yes, I'm sure Russia did enough to sway the election... All of the social media campaigns attributed to Russian agencies weren't even backing one party. They hit both sides. All they cared about was generating social conflict.
I am glad we can both agree that Russia did in fact interfere in the election.
Then by your standard everybody interfered too. This is a nonsensical stance. Degree matters, particularly when the degree was beyond miniscule relative to the handwringing and accusations and response.
It’s been obvious for years that the narrative around “Russian interference” was an absolute ploy and a con. It’s a little silly to be still pushing it in 2022 don’t you think?
Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
#106The DoD seems well on its way towards having two more such networks (augmenting the one it already has in existence), without the involvement of SpaceX at all: https://spacenews.com/u-s-to-ramp-up-spending-on-classified-.... Maybe this program was spun up in an attempt to grab those sweet government dollars in 2025.
Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you elaborate for those of us who don’t typically follow space news? Has Space-X had some trouble recently?
I can’t tell if you’re being cute and trying to carve out some exemption here when it’s clear what I’m talking about I think but let’s operate on good faith. The owner with an 80% voting control of the company has had some very serious issues in judgement lately not limited to the Twitter fiasco but has also made a number of public moves that were very friendly towards what the US has called their biggest national se…
>I can’t tell if you’re being cute and trying to carve out some exemption here when it’s clear what I’m talking about I think but let’s operate on good faith.
Translation: "I think you're committing wrongthink to be asking such a question, but I'll magnanimously say 'let's operate on good faith'".
>The owner with an 80% voting control of the company has had some very serious issues in judgement lately not limited to the Twitter fiasco
Ah yes, the world's wealthiest man has invested 20% of his net wealth in something that may or may not work out. Proof that he is a danger to national security!!!1!!11!!!!!
PS - Two questions to ponder:
Q: Wasn't Twitter supposed to have collapsed and died like a month ago? A: Yes.
Q: Isn't Twitter functioning apparently quite well during the current mega world event known as the FIFA World Cup? A: Yes.
>but has also made a number of public moves that were very friendly towards what the US has called their biggest national security threat repeatedly for the past half decade or longer.
Oh, good grief. Musk said that Ukraine might have to give up land to end the war with Russia. A) A negotiated settlement is how 90% of wars in world history have ended, and B) such a settlement has always been the most likely scenario for ending the current war. Maybe it'll be a formal recognition of Russian sovereignty over Crimea, maybe it'll also include parts of eastern Ukraine.
Now, maybe Ukraine's recent successes on the ground will let it regain control over all of its territory, maybe even Crimea. I hope that happens, but (again, even with the recent pushback of Russian lines) that still remains a relatively unlikely outcome.
>This isn’t some mindless Elon bashing post, I’m presenting this as an actual honest to god problem for natsec.
There is nothing wrong, from a legal or moral perspective, in Musk publicly stating what he said. He is an American and the US is not actually a combatant in the war. Musk is free to say anything he wants, and those who immediately claim that anything short of demanding "Ukrainian forces roll into Moscow and Zelensky personally swings the axe that cuts off Putin's head" = Russian sympathizer/"problem with natsec" just make themselves look stupid.
Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am glad we can both agree that Russia did in fact interfere in the election.
Then by your standard everybody interfered too. This is a nonsensical stance. Degree matters, particularly when the degree was beyond miniscule relative to the handwringing and accusations and response. It’s been obvious for years that the narrative around “Russian interference” was an absolute ploy and a con. It’s a little silly to be still pushing it in 2022 don’t you think?
> It’s a little silly to be still pushing it in 2022 don’t you think?
When you live in a bubble like subreddits and Twitter communities then this sort of reality distortion is encouraged and rewarded.
They never seem to have a response when someone outside their circles calls them out though. They just go quiet or redirect.
Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
#109It sounds like they’re trying to sell two things: 1. Hosted payloads, where DoD entities pay to have something (telescope, Sigint equipment, whatever) strapped on to a starlink satellite with comms all figured out for them. Probably a good deal if your stuff fits on that big flat satellite. SpaceX starlink launches do sway the launch market significantly enough (offering a launch at half othe price or less, beholden…
Makes you wonder, given the sensitivity of this, how the government feels about having Elon at the helm of it given some of his business ties.
They don't care, Gwynne Shotwell runs the company.
But I do foresee a future in which the SEC bars Musk from holding any executive position for any number of things he has done.
Re: Starshield: Secured satellite network for government entities
#110It sounds like they’re trying to sell two things: 1. Hosted payloads, where DoD entities pay to have something (telescope, Sigint equipment, whatever) strapped on to a starlink satellite with comms all figured out for them. Probably a good deal if your stuff fits on that big flat satellite. SpaceX starlink launches do sway the launch market significantly enough (offering a launch at half othe price or less, beholden…
To get more revenue from limited capacity, it helps to go after customers who can pay more.
(Also, demand from governments is likely somewhat geographically different than demand from consumers.)