you can get an ePLB (emergency personal locator beacon) which has no subscription since it is an international coalition for rescue. don't need to pay garmin or whatever for that b.s. and it uses special satellites to locate you so it's very reliable. This is what ships and planes use to signal distress as well.
Man, wtf. If Starlink is shut down in areas Russia already controls (it largely is), then what is the problem???
Starlink doesn't have fine control over what they can turn off, the world is separated into "cells". Starlink can't broadly turn off Starlink for ONLY Russians on the battle lines, it would affect Ukrainians too
Look, I don't know if you're being intentionally obtuse here, but not all areas are black and white. There is ambiguity in the world, particularly in battlefields. This feels a bit like a bad faith argument
to be fair, software engineers are a lot more design heavy than implementation. software developers are the "implementers" where software engineers generally focus on the bigger picture as well
I have no clue how you're coming to that conclusion. Starlink blanket blocked access from Crimea. Regardless of whether that was right or wrong, this doesn't prove that Starlink knows where Russian and Ukrainian troops, can track the battle line, and precisely turn off access based on that geographic area
I feel like you are fundamentally misunderstanding me. Battle lines are not static or cut and dry. Neither militaries KNOW exactly where the enemy is. It isn't that simple
No. What I'm saying is that due to the fast-shifting geographic nature of a battlefront, and the lack of organization in where the user terminals have come from:
(A) Starlink would have a hard time keeping up with a precise map (and would be prone to errors, and would need exact operational data)
(B) Ukraine doesn't completely KNOW what terminals are theirs
So a geographic location block would be a hindrance for Ukrainian troops when trying to advance, and potentially dangerous when Russians advance into Ukrainian territory. Boundaries would constantly need to be redrawn, requiring exact knowledge of what is happening. Which for obvious reasons should not be shared
Starlink terminals in Ukraine didn't come from one source. some have been donated by orgs in the US and other countries, some the government, some SpaceX themselves. Ukraine almost certainly doesn't have full knowledge of all the Starlink terminals it possesses. This isn't an ideal environment
On an active battlefront these territories aren't strictly defined or are changing quickly. With that methodology if Ukrainian advanced too quickly into what was previously Russian territory, bam - Starlink stops working. That seems undesirable
that doesn't seem to support your assertion. blocking terminals in a specific geographic location (crimea) doesn't explain how to tell apart two sides using terminals in the same geographic area
I don't think that's where the problem I'm raising is. Think about an active confrontation area where both sides have Starlink. How do you tell which to turn off in this case? Ideally Ukraine would be using starshield and then Starlink can be turned off entirely
I'd love to better understand your position. it seems like you think that Starlink is aware of who is using a terminal. how can Starlink differentiate between a Ukrainian and Russian user in the same general area? should Starlink randomly turn off user terminals it suspects? what if it accidentally turns off a Ukrainian one? billing is obv not a good indicator
I want to understand your thoughts a little more clearly on this
This is crazy talk. Anybody can smuggle some terminals into their country. That doesn't mean they're being "helped". The US government would come down on SpaceX with unprecedented force if they violated sanctions like that
cole @ cole @lemdro.id Posts 5Comments 362Joined 2 yr. ago
it IS useful for when your car gets stuck on a trail road and you need to call a tow truck or something