Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Iran is likely jamming Starlink

timesofisrael.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 306 posts

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#171

Post by Rover222 »

tekla wrote: post #168
Rover222 wrote: post #161

Why are none of the people I saw posting non-stop about Palestine saying anything about Iranian freedom? Would honestly love to hear a genuine response from anyone who is against the movement in Iran. Or even conflicted about it.

I hope the movement succeeds. I've been curious myself about why the activist class seems weirdly quiet on this issue. On a quick scan of media feeds I've seen a couple of things that stand out (I do not confirm or deny how true these claims are) 1) Current Iran is a enemy of the USA and thus activists can't support the destruction of the current regime. Iran is able to create nukes so can put pressure on the USA in…

I think the left-leaning activist people in the Americas are so against any position that could align with a Trump position, that they can’t think beyond those lines. If Trump supports the revolution it must be bad.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#172

Post by Rover222 »

Rover222 wrote: post #171
tekla wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope the movement succeeds. I've been curious myself about why the activist class seems weirdly quiet on this issue. On a quick scan of media feeds I've seen a couple of things that stand out (I do not confirm or deny how true these claims are) 1) Current Iran is a enemy of the USA and thus activists can't support the destruction of the current regime. Iran is able to create nukes so can put pressure on the USA in…

I think the left-leaning activist people in the Americas are so against any position that could align with a Trump position, that they can’t think beyond those lines. If Trump supports the revolution it must be bad.

Or because the Iranian Islamic regime supports Hamas? And they somehow align with that side. I don’t know.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#173

Post by breppp »

Noaidi wrote: post #122
Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Gps is free to use. Running your own gnss service requires an atomic clock and possibly separate transmission hardware, which is possible, but adds cost, volume, and weight. Thanks you provide some great insights on why starlink didnt use gps but still if starlink wants to focus itself as the uncensorable internet in places like protests etc. I feel like they can probably do this after this recent incident I just c…

[flagged]

why stop there? maybe khamenei is a CIA asset made to create a caricature of an evil external enemy?

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#174

Post by 15155 »

ovi256 wrote: post #121
Majromax wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like Starlink uses GPS to localize the receiver, rather than for any active step in the communication link. Since most receivers are static, I wonder if an effective workaround to this is for the receiver to just remember its last GPS fix for longer, or worst-case allow a manual location specification in lieu of a GPS fix.

A user provided location cannot be trusted for geofencing purposes. A GNSS (GPS or other) is needed sooner or later. This is a legal requirement for sanction and regulation enforcement (US, if not others).

The satellites know where they are TX beamforming to a fine-enough degree of specificity for geofencing.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#175

Post by baggy_trough »

tekla wrote: post #168
Rover222 wrote: post #161

Why are none of the people I saw posting non-stop about Palestine saying anything about Iranian freedom? Would honestly love to hear a genuine response from anyone who is against the movement in Iran. Or even conflicted about it.

I hope the movement succeeds. I've been curious myself about why the activist class seems weirdly quiet on this issue. On a quick scan of media feeds I've seen a couple of things that stand out (I do not confirm or deny how true these claims are) 1) Current Iran is a enemy of the USA and thus activists can't support the destruction of the current regime. Iran is able to create nukes so can put pressure on the USA in…

The core of far left activism is being anti-Western. Therefore, they can't say anything bad about even the most despicable anti-Western governments.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#176

Post by danny_codes »

Rover222 wrote: post #161

Why are none of the people I saw posting non-stop about Palestine saying anything about Iranian freedom? Would honestly love to hear a genuine response from anyone who is against the movement in Iran. Or even conflicted about it.

I offer two possibilities:

1. Iran has frequent large protests that consistently get crushed. So while I assume the vast majority of Americans oppose the Iranian government, it’s hard to get worked up for the 5th, 6th time.

2. The US doesn’t support the Iranian government. We already sanction them. What additional support can US citizens lobby for? In the case of Israel, decreased US support would have a tangible effect. Unclear how increased US support for Iranian protestors would matter.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#177

Post by [deleted] »

tatjam wrote: post #105
sciurus wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GPS satellites aren't receiving anything. The GPS satellites transmit signals, and the starlink terminals (and other users of GPS) receive those signals.

Wellll you could technically jam their uplink channels, but doing so may get the US in your doorstep quite quickly

[deleted]

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#178

Post by epistasis »

ThePowerOfFuet wrote: post #170
epistasis wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think I've ever read an article using the term "US regime," as that usually refers to an undemocratic or authoritarian government. You might want to clean up your information diet if you're reading lots of articles over the years with that term... Yes it is a value judgement, but Iran's government is nothing if not oppressive and authoritarian. Until recently the US had taken pride in being nothing like a reg…

>I don't think I've ever read an article using the term "US regime," as that usually refers to an undemocratic or authoritarian government. Pretty fuckin' big rock you've been living under for the last couple years.

Am I under a rock because I haven't seen the articles, or because the government has become undemocratic and authoritarian?

Since you say "last couple years" I'm guessing you mean the articles, it's only in the past year that the government has become undemocratic and authoritarian through the destruction of its constitution, the abdication of checks and balances by Congress and the Supreme Court, and an authoritarian running unchecked and saying that the only thing controlling him is his own morality.

Or perhaps I'm being too pedantic, but if you're going to accuse me of living under a rock hell yes I'm going to be pedantic.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#179

Post by Rover222 »

baggy_trough wrote: post #175
tekla wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope the movement succeeds. I've been curious myself about why the activist class seems weirdly quiet on this issue. On a quick scan of media feeds I've seen a couple of things that stand out (I do not confirm or deny how true these claims are) 1) Current Iran is a enemy of the USA and thus activists can't support the destruction of the current regime. Iran is able to create nukes so can put pressure on the USA in…

The core of far left activism is being anti-Western. Therefore, they can't say anything bad about even the most despicable anti-Western governments.

That is what it seems like

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#180

Post by redwall_hp »

hartator wrote: post #48

I candidly thought it wasn’t possible to block Starlink. I guess with motivated actors anything is possible.

Any satellite signal is going to be relatively weak compared to what you can produce on the ground. Inverse square law, and power limitations of a mobile transmitter.

It's fairly trivial to set up a transmitter that saturates a slice of spectrum at an amount of power that is ridiculous compared to a satellite signal. There are still AM radio stations operating that go as high as 50kW. The satellite transmitters aren't going to exceed maybe a hundred Watts, at a great distance, and that falls off at 1/(distance)^2.

Post reply on HN