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

Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

interpret.csis.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 263 posts

Re: Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

#181

Post by dev1ycan »

WalterBright wrote: post #151
dev1ycan wrote: post #114

We are already in some sense past the threshold of sats required for a potential civlizational collapse that would be caused by the loss of access to space. There are way too many sattelites, starlink militarizing means it's a viable target now for enemy nations, any one of them taking out a couple sats and causing debris would cause a chain reaction that would effectively turn space into a dump, let's not even menti…

> any one of them taking out a couple sats and causing debris would cause a chain reaction that would effectively turn space into a dump You may not realize how big space is relative to the size of a few sats.

https://conference.sdo.esoc.esa.int/proceedings/sdc9/paper/3...

You may want to read an actual study about it. And this doesn't even consider the possibility that militarization of starlink satellites may cause them to get taken out, which will trigger the KS the same way.

Re: Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

#182

Post by brcmthrowaway »

jasonwatkinspdx wrote: post #160
brcmthrowaway wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does radio transmission with fast moving targets work (including LTE on phone), doesnt the doppler effect shift the frequencies of all radio waves?

Yup, it shifts but it's a minor shift and easily handled in the receiver. Receivers already need a little ability to tune the carrier frequency to account for ordinary variations in the circuits. From memory GPS's doppler shift is on the scale of a single digit khz, so Starlink's probably double that. A few khz of shift is no big deal for ghz carriers.

How does the receiver know how to shift?!

Re: Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

#183

Post by rasz »

stinkbeetle wrote: post #170
tw04 wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

No that Russia collusion conspiracy theory rubbish has been debunked.

Yes. For example trump proved it wrong two days ago by /checks notes removing all russian oil sanctions https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/12/us/politics/trump-russia-...

Re: Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

#184

Post by noosphr »

PeterHolzwarth wrote: post #173
GorbachevyChase wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, I think US demographic trends are a lot worse than whatever is going on with China.

Oh my goodness, this is deeply untrue. China is facing a massive population implosion. A lot of their global strategy can be understood through that lens: they are racing to accumulate power, standing, and wealth before the implosion starts to kick in.

Everyone is seeing a population implosion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_world#/med... we are already past peak child.

Re: Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

#185

Post by cwillu »

stinkbeetle wrote: post #171
cwillu wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you were a kid, did you stop listening when your parents said “Santa”, or did you keep listening in order to glean useful information from their propoganda, even knowing that Santa isn't real?

Were you under the impression the Chinese Communist Party has been telling you sweet lies only because they find joy in seeing your childlike naivety and wonder?

The general principle of extracting useful information from the scenario “(party a) tells lies because (ulterior motive b)” transcends the particular values of party a and motive b

Re: Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

#187

Post by tmnvix »

rasz wrote: post #183
stinkbeetle wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No that Russia collusion conspiracy theory rubbish has been debunked.

Yes. For example trump proved it wrong two days ago by /checks notes removing all russian oil sanctions https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/12/us/politics/trump-russia-...

That decision was out of self interest. The US will do whatever it can to try to stop Iran succeeding in their strategy to raise the price of oil.

So no. Not proved wrong in my opinion.

Re: Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

#188

Post by generuso »

infinitewars wrote: post #186

Musk started SpaceX with Michael D. Griffin, the guy who invented large constellations of military satellites to win a nuclear war. And then he funded Starlink. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_D._Griffin

Starlink project began after Musk and Greg Wyler parted their ways. Wyler approached SpaceX in 2014 with a proposal to build OneWeb (then called WorldVu), and initially they worked on the project together. But then they started to accuse each other of doing various underhanded things, and split. After that, Musk decided that he could do a similar and even better system without Wyler, and that's how Starlink was born in 2015.

Re: Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

#189

Post by notepad0x90 »

nradov wrote: post #98
notepad0x90 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is similar to G8, and like I said, they're been building one, I didn't say they're completed the building. But current events are helping with that effort.

Nah, they're not building anything. China and India will never agree on substantive issues. South Africa is a failed state and Russia may be headed in the direction. BRICS is a total joke.

> China and India will never agree on substantive issues.

And the US and Russia do? (G8)

South Afica is the largest economy in Africa, 13% of the continent's GDP. Your views on its political state doesn't change that. And honestly, as an American, I can't say my country is doing better than SA. Sure they have more crime, but at least they don't have a military force dedicated to ethnic-cleansing migrants . Lol, sad times.

Re: Starlink militarization and its impact on global strategic stability (2023)

#190

Post by dboreham »

GorbachevyChase wrote: post #111
throwaway5752 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conspiracy theories aren't very productive. But the one thing that continues to bother me is how there is no great explanation for why TSLA is still worth much. It's a shrinking car company that is failing to execute at FSD and says it's going to make humanoid robots instead of cars. There is no good reason TSLA should be valued any more than 10% of its current valuation, and even that would be rich. There is a fine…

There are many such mysteries, right? How does Oracle make money when every product of theirs sucks and is worse than free alternatives? How is it that Google and Meta seem to have more revenue from “advertising“ than everyone spends on advertising? Where are the product sales that can be traced to this massive amount of spending? I don’t think you could even articulate a plausible business plan around what Google cl…

Most insightful HN comment in recent memory.
Post reply on HN