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

Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

france24.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 187 posts

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#71

Post by [deleted] »

zarzavat wrote: post #50
Retric wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the cost of it being really obvious where you are. However the bigger draw is probably high bandwidth two way communication globally. No need for an obvious route as you can use GPS to get near US waters before turning it on, while still being in control of location of delivery or even meet up with it on the open ocean.

Not as obvious as a Starlink transmitter though! Sending the position only requires a few bits, let's say 48. A position update requires even less, depending on how far it could have travelled since the last known position. At such low data rates you could hide the transmission quite effectively.

[deleted]

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#72

Post by [deleted] »

zarzavat wrote: post #50
Retric wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the cost of it being really obvious where you are. However the bigger draw is probably high bandwidth two way communication globally. No need for an obvious route as you can use GPS to get near US waters before turning it on, while still being in control of location of delivery or even meet up with it on the open ocean.

Not as obvious as a Starlink transmitter though! Sending the position only requires a few bits, let's say 48. A position update requires even less, depending on how far it could have travelled since the last known position. At such low data rates you could hide the transmission quite effectively.

[deleted]

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#73

Post by DragonStrength »

numpad0 wrote: post #44
stickfigure wrote: post #10

Just legalize it already. This is stupid.

Or fix up the Latin America. Just stop pretending US has no control over internal politics of foreign countries.

We don't do that precisely because that's how you end up with this situation. We wonder how history repeats itself, but we can't be bothered to know history from over 40 years ago.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#74

Post by Synaesthesia »

mdhb wrote: post #59
numpad0 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or fix up the Latin America. Just stop pretending US has no control over internal politics of foreign countries.

That’s a really smart idea, I don’t know why nobody thought of this or tried for multiple decades before.

The US is a big part of the problems of Latin America. They participate in the drug trade, big time.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#75

Post by Synaesthesia »

gambiting wrote: post #23
stickfigure wrote: post #10

Just legalize it already. This is stupid.

Cocaine, I could maybe see the argument. But the article also said there was another submarine seized with 4.5BN worth of meth aboard. And I really hope you aren't suggesting legalising meth. I could see the argument that if other amphetamines were legal no one would use meth, but.....I don't think that's necessarily true. All the illegal meth would have to do to keep existing is to be cheaper than legal speed.

Addicts need help, if we want to reduce drug use we can do it through education and support. That's how tobacco use has dropped in western countries, not by banning it and using violence.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#76

Post by Retric »

zarzavat wrote: post #50
Retric wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the cost of it being really obvious where you are. However the bigger draw is probably high bandwidth two way communication globally. No need for an obvious route as you can use GPS to get near US waters before turning it on, while still being in control of location of delivery or even meet up with it on the open ocean.

Not as obvious as a Starlink transmitter though! Sending the position only requires a few bits, let's say 48. A position update requires even less, depending on how far it could have travelled since the last known position. At such low data rates you could hide the transmission quite effectively.

As a once off it’s not going to be investigated, start making regular trips and people are going to start looking for such signals. Short bursts strong enough to detected many hundreds of miles away inherently need to be fairly strong making them standout from the background noise for close receivers. You can similarly triangulate based on signal strength given some ocean ships or even cheap buoys.

Starlink needs to be detectable by satellites, but you can almost completely block the signal going in other directions.

SpaceX might already be sharing it’s data with coastguards though.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#77

Post by scns »

nandomrumber wrote: post #70
blincoln wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adderall is an amphetamine, but it is not methamphetamine. It would be closer to accurate to compare it to Dexedrine than meth.

Isn't Dexedrine just slow release dextroamphetamine? There isn't really a whole lot of difference between amphetamine and methamphetamine. Meth is, weight for weight, stronger due to the methyl- group enabling the molecule to pass through cell membranes / the blood-brain barrier easier, and at the effect-equivalent dose most people wouldn't notice any difference.

Adderall is a mixture of 75% Dextroamphetamine and 25% Levoamphetamine.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#78

Post by vidarh »

vineyardmike wrote: post #47
crackrook wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know we have data that shows just how harmful the war on drugs has been, but I'm curious if we have data showing that legalization in a modern society, with global supply chains and marketing campaigns, does not result in a bunch of people who previously wouldn't have done drugs - for fear of legal consequences, or just because they're hard to obtain - suddenly doing drugs. I'm genuinely interested to know, this is…

> To be honest, if I could get a dime bag at the corner store, I'm not certain that I would be able to resist the temptation to do so for the first time When people discuss "legalizing drugs" in the context of ending the war on drugs, they don't necessarily mean it should be sold at corner stores. Generally the exception to this is Cannabis which has its own legalization movement, but not hard drugs. > I feel decrimi…

Decriminalising without legalising manufacturing and distribution is a pretty shitty compromise, because it leaves lack of control of the safety of the drugs, and the violence and other criminality through the entire chain.

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#79

Post by immibis »

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #54
thakoppno wrote: post #48

I wonder if the alleged perpetrators are reading this thread? Are there any comments that would help with the next revision? I think both conjectures are likely true.

I am wondering why they used the link so much that it was able to be used against them. Submersible loses benefits if it requires an external service. Launch. Submerge. Drunkenly move in the direction of the destination. If N days since last check-in and/or uncertainty in location, ping mothership. Repeat. Only lean on communication channel for final handoff stage.

> Launch. Submerge. Drunkenly

I thought they were smuggling cocaine, not acid.

(this is like the second time this week someone has spelled out LSD on HN and it's been relevant)

Re: Colombia seizes first unmanned narco-submarine with Starlink antenna

#80

Post by threemux »

tczMUFlmoNk wrote: post #2

Fascinating. Does the Starlink antenna work well underwater? Or was this sub surfacing to communicate?

It's not a submarine and I wish news outlets would stop saying "narco sub". It's a surface vessel designed to have only a very small part above water. Building an actual submarine capable of submerged travel for lengthy periods is quite difficult.
Post reply on HN