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

301–306 of 306 posts

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#301

Post by kennykartman »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #287
kennykartman wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Playing a bit the devil's advocate here, but > This is why all of those "national great firewalls" shouldn't exist in the first place This is a kind of colonialist thinking that is, IMO, a problem in the western society. There are indeed drawbacks in a lack of freedom, but assuming that a government should not be able to filter the content diffused to the population is wrong in principle. You don't get to choose what…

> colonialist thinking that is, IMO, a problem in the western society Iran has commanded empires for millennia. Longer than continental Europe. Iranians getting their hands on Starlink terminals is as “colonial” as revolutionary France helping the American colonists usurp the British.

Again, just for the sake of the discussion: Iran banned starlink, people are getting terminals (BTW, I'm happy they managed to). Starlink is still providing the service in the area although they are aware it's illegal and people can be behaded for owning a starlink terminal. But hey, Iran and USA are enemies. The fact that Iran is the only country where Starlink is active even if it's NOT approved is food for thought. There are other countries, where there are regimes that control communications, where Starlink is not active.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#302

Post by ozlikethewizard »

scottyah wrote: post #262
ozlikethewizard wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm unfortunately inclined to not look at their actions so favourably. They operate solely in jurisdictions where the US state supports open destabilization, and dont where the political ramifications would be too high for the US. Makes them little more than an extension of the US imperialist structure. And this makes sense for an organization thats so highly reliant on federal support, vs Apple and Google who only h…

> They operate solely in jurisdictions where the US state supports open destabilization Could you expand on that? Are you saying that the US state wants destabilization in every place that Starlink is accessible? Like the UK, Australia, and USA itself? Which group are you considering the "US state" for that?

I assumed the context of the conversation was given to be understood, my bad. In the context of Starlink operating in nations for the purpose of bypassing internet censorship, as is the context of the conversation, starlink only operates were the US sanctions it to (iran) to further its imperialist goals, and it does not operate where it would hurt the US politically (russia). So pretending that starlink is operating from some kind of moral high ground rather than just SpaceX and most of Musks companies are heavily reliant on federal support so are at their beck and call is weird idolising of a corporate entity.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#304

Post by smsm42 »

KellyCriterion wrote: post #295
smsm42 wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not yet, but soon. Possibly even this year.

Curious: Will this be implemented on DNS level?

DNS level is too easy to circumvent - you just set your server to 1.1.1.1 and 8.8.8.8, and it's enough just one of them refuses to kowtow to Ofcom. More likely it'd de on routing level. Which has obvious problems unless they build full-blown DPI firewall and implement VPN blocking (they may consult China for that) but to cut off the most lazy users it'd be effective.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#305

Post by oldandboring »

feb012025 wrote: post #281
oldandboring wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Respectfully, you're making things up and adding the words "I think the impression most people have". That's motivated reasoning. If you're actually interested in the geopolitics of this I suggest you just spend some time tonight reading about these relationships and their history.

To be fair, I'll admit there's somewhat of a double standard when it comes to silence in regard to US support for Saudi Arabia vs Israel. But realistically, for me, I don't think the answer is to offer full-throated support to Israel and to be quiet about issues Americans have with it. Especially if it risks spiraling into a broader conflict. I do think there are particular aspects about US support for Israel, outsid…

> I do think there are particular aspects about US support for Israel, outside of humanitarian concerns, that lead to people being more critical about US involvement in the conflict.

Well, yes. If someone doesn't like Jews (and many many many people do not), that is the only "particular aspect" they need. The one good thing about antisemitism is that it's been around for so long that it's pretty easy to spot, even when the bigots try to swap some of the terminology around.

Re: Iran is likely jamming Starlink

#306

Post by ece »

smsm42 wrote: post #304
KellyCriterion wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious: Will this be implemented on DNS level?

DNS level is too easy to circumvent - you just set your server to 1.1.1.1 and 8.8.8.8, and it's enough just one of them refuses to kowtow to Ofcom. More likely it'd de on routing level. Which has obvious problems unless they build full-blown DPI firewall and implement VPN blocking (they may consult China for that) but to cut off the most lazy users it'd be effective.

X will be in the same category as rt.
Post reply on HN