Ukraine's leading mobile operator Kyivstar has signed an agreement with Starlink to introduce direct-to-cell satellite connectivity in the country, Kyivstar's parent company VEON said on Monday (Dec 30). Direct-to-cell services are connected to satellites that can beam phone signals from space directly to
Track record of what? Helping Ukraine rather than Russia? Even this article is about helping Ukraine, not Russia. Pretty much every Ukraine related action SpaceX has taken goes against this pro-Russia narrative yet the narrative sticks.
To clarify on the Starlink issue: the Ukrainians THOUGHT coverage was enabled all the way to Crimea, but it was not. They asked Musk to enable it for their drone sub attack on the Russian fleet. Musk did not enable it, because he thought, probably correctly, that would cause a major war.
Starlink is not enabled in Russia or the occupied territories because it would be against U.S. sanctions and enabling it there would be literally illegal.
Musk has even said that had he been contacted by U.S. officials and told to enable it he would have but they didn’t.
However, as Musk objected immediately and Isaacson would clarify soon after, the claim that Musk had ordered Starlink coverage in Crimea “turned off” wasn’t entirely accurate. (Both CNN and The Washington Post subsequently corrected their reports.)
From the article you linked.
CNN and TWP both corrected what they wrote, but you know better?
After the fact? After what? After the thing you’re claiming didn’t happen?
Do you see what you’re doing here? You’re using an article whose sole purpose is to debunk the claim you’re trying to make. You’re emotionally invested in this - you don’t like Elon, so you want this to be true. When someone points out that it’s not true, with evidence, you start making things up to avoid acknowledging you were wrong. This is cognitive dissonance. The reason you have this false belief to begin with is because Walter Isaacson wrote about it in his book. Now the exact same person has admitted that this didn’t happen yet you still keep harping on about it. You’re literally spreading misonformation.
Because at the start of the war in ukraine a journalist eventually reported that Musk turned off access to starlink to thwart an attack on the Sevestapole port.
Except that didn’t happen, they were never on in Russian controlled territory, and the journalist retracted the statement.
People are still hung up on that though.
This was also when the US Department of Defense was not yet involved and SpaceX was doing this for free, out of pocket, with strict rules about not using starlink as a weapon, because it’s a civilian tool, and being used as a weapon would contravene US law and put starlink at risk of falling under ITAR or some other law which would be VERY bad for SpaceX.
Shortly after that, the DoD went into contract with SpaceX and now they deal with all that and it’s no longer a risk to SpaceX so they can use it as a weapon now.
Then, it was reported that Russia was getting dishes from 3rd parties (smuggling them in) and that again was proof that Musk was supporting Russia. Except it’s not an easy problem to solve, and even the DoD said it was complicated and would be an ongoing game of cat and mouse to prevent.
Edit: I like how hours after I made this reply, someone above is again claiming Musk shut down Starlink to stop the attack, and in the article they link it even talks about what I wrote in this post saying that the claim was retracted. I can’t tell if that person didn’t read the article and took the first link he found… or doesn’t understand the difference between turning something that was on to the off state (action), and simply not turning something that was off, on. (inaction)
Guess you forgot about the time he shut down Starlink to stop a Ukrainian assault? -> link to snopes article
Exactly. People are mad that SpaceX didn’t go out of its way to help Ukraine, and they’re largely making up stuff about them somehow supporting Russia, when SpaceX just wants to provide civilian service
If SpaceX gets involved in US military interests, that’s going to significantly impact their ability to provide their service outside the US.
You just know that once the direct to cell service is live, Russians are going to kill Ukrainian civilians, take their cell phones, and use starlink to send a message, and it’ll be yet more proof that SpaceX does Russia’s bidding!
SpaceX can’t support Russia directly, so they give all sorts of support to Ukraine. Then, they know Russia will get a small portion of it somehow and that’s how Russia will win the war.
All SpaceX has to do is keep giving more and more hardware to Ukraine and eventually Russia will be able to turn the tide and defeat them!
What’s your point? Yes, he denied a request to turn it on.
SpaceX made the decision prior it wouldn’t be available in Russian controlled territory. Also had he turned it on, that would be using Starlink as a weapon and break US laws (edit: and the terms of their contract with Ukraine), and jeopardize starlink being available world wide for civilian use.
He did not actively turn if off to thwart an attack though. It was already off.
And you’re right, had the DoD contacted them and said were approving this, do it, they would have done it. They won’t fuck around with that. The DoD has control now and does whatever they want with dishes given to Ukraine.
Why?
Even ignoring the track record of Starlink, he’s also buddy buddy with Putin.
Track record of what? Helping Ukraine rather than Russia? Even this article is about helping Ukraine, not Russia. Pretty much every Ukraine related action SpaceX has taken goes against this pro-Russia narrative yet the narrative sticks.
Guess you forgot about the time he shut down Starlink to stop a Ukrainian assault?
Maybe you should read the article you linked.
Starlink is not enabled in Russia or the occupied territories because it would be against U.S. sanctions and enabling it there would be literally illegal.
Musk has even said that had he been contacted by U.S. officials and told to enable it he would have but they didn’t.
That sure was their rationale after the fact, wasn’t it?
From the article you linked.
CNN and TWP both corrected what they wrote, but you know better?
Just read the article.
Your claim is that they disabled it. They didn’t. It was never enabled in the first place.
I shared it. Of course I read it. It’s also the statement from their public relations department after the fact to try and quell the public backlash.
After the fact? After what? After the thing you’re claiming didn’t happen?
Do you see what you’re doing here? You’re using an article whose sole purpose is to debunk the claim you’re trying to make. You’re emotionally invested in this - you don’t like Elon, so you want this to be true. When someone points out that it’s not true, with evidence, you start making things up to avoid acknowledging you were wrong. This is cognitive dissonance. The reason you have this false belief to begin with is because Walter Isaacson wrote about it in his book. Now the exact same person has admitted that this didn’t happen yet you still keep harping on about it. You’re literally spreading misonformation.
deleted by creator
Because Musk bad. Or something.
All kidding aside, if you’re looking for objective, emotionally mature conversation, this platform isn’t the place.
Because at the start of the war in ukraine a journalist eventually reported that Musk turned off access to starlink to thwart an attack on the Sevestapole port.
Except that didn’t happen, they were never on in Russian controlled territory, and the journalist retracted the statement.
People are still hung up on that though.
This was also when the US Department of Defense was not yet involved and SpaceX was doing this for free, out of pocket, with strict rules about not using starlink as a weapon, because it’s a civilian tool, and being used as a weapon would contravene US law and put starlink at risk of falling under ITAR or some other law which would be VERY bad for SpaceX.
Shortly after that, the DoD went into contract with SpaceX and now they deal with all that and it’s no longer a risk to SpaceX so they can use it as a weapon now.
Then, it was reported that Russia was getting dishes from 3rd parties (smuggling them in) and that again was proof that Musk was supporting Russia. Except it’s not an easy problem to solve, and even the DoD said it was complicated and would be an ongoing game of cat and mouse to prevent.
Edit: I like how hours after I made this reply, someone above is again claiming Musk shut down Starlink to stop the attack, and in the article they link it even talks about what I wrote in this post saying that the claim was retracted. I can’t tell if that person didn’t read the article and took the first link he found… or doesn’t understand the difference between turning something that was on to the off state (action), and simply not turning something that was off, on. (inaction)
Exactly. People are mad that SpaceX didn’t go out of its way to help Ukraine, and they’re largely making up stuff about them somehow supporting Russia, when SpaceX just wants to provide civilian service
If SpaceX gets involved in US military interests, that’s going to significantly impact their ability to provide their service outside the US.
You just know that once the direct to cell service is live, Russians are going to kill Ukrainian civilians, take their cell phones, and use starlink to send a message, and it’ll be yet more proof that SpaceX does Russia’s bidding!
Yup, SpaceX is always coming up with ways to get their service into Russian hands…
I figured it out…
It’s trickle down war supplies.
SpaceX can’t support Russia directly, so they give all sorts of support to Ukraine. Then, they know Russia will get a small portion of it somehow and that’s how Russia will win the war.
All SpaceX has to do is keep giving more and more hardware to Ukraine and eventually Russia will be able to turn the tide and defeat them!
Oh I was under this false impression. Thanks for the fact check
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/elon-musk-ukraine-russia-war-starlink-satellite-denied-major-act-of-war/
What’s your point? Yes, he denied a request to turn it on.
SpaceX made the decision prior it wouldn’t be available in Russian controlled territory. Also had he turned it on, that would be using Starlink as a weapon and break US laws (edit: and the terms of their contract with Ukraine), and jeopardize starlink being available world wide for civilian use.
He did not actively turn if off to thwart an attack though. It was already off.
I believe that it was off not because of SpaxeX’s decision but due to U.S. sanctions. Enabling it there would’ve literally been illegal.
Musk has also added that had he been contacted by U.S. officials and told to turn it on he would have, but they didn’t.
Ya, its quite possible it was related to that.
And you’re right, had the DoD contacted them and said were approving this, do it, they would have done it. They won’t fuck around with that. The DoD has control now and does whatever they want with dishes given to Ukraine.