We don't live in a "1 soldier = 1 soldier" world, haven't for several millennia actually. There are weapons that multiply lethality by different amounts on both sides, so it's more of a question of who gets the better gadgets and manages to use them in better strategies.
But for Russia to stop being a threat it's sufficient to just lose this war finally
What would be the definition of "losing" in this case? Countries tend use all the weapons at their disposal in order not to "lose", in the case of Russia that would include its nuclear arsenal.
Sounds like a better outcome for everyone would be for Russia to get a civil war, and just "forget" about Ukraine.
Programmer wants to solve a problem, writes some functions, can call them from main()
Programmer is also Sysadmin, can't be bothered compiling stuff for every simple thing, so adds a CLI parser to call the different functions from main()
End user wants a GUI... but Sysadmin already has all they want on the CLI, so maybe someone puts up some GUI when they're bored, or it really, really, really makes sense... or end user is SOL
If you mean to "scoop them up" as a means of attack... there are thousands of them already, they're all over the globe, with plans to go up to 40k. They do have engines, and while not particularly powerful (hall effect ion thrusters), they could try to counter the attack by trying to deorbit, along with the attacking satellite. My guess is it would be too slow and ineffective.
The best physical attack would be to cause a collision cascade at their orbital height... or set off a nuke in orbit and EMP them by the hundreds, but that would also EMP a bunch of other satellites, mess up the Van Allen belts, hit anything in a wide area on the ground, and breach several international treaties.
Not sure if it was in an article or on TV, but at some point there was a map showing Starlink coverage over Ukraine, and how it faded towards the borders in order to go down to zero in the conflict areas. Obviously the moment Ukrainian forces started to push, they went into the blackout areas and were SOL.
Regarding the DoD agreement... I'm not sure where I've read it, but apparently he asked the DoD to foot the bill for Starlink around the end of 2022... and then when the agreement was drafted and they were about to pay for it, he decided that "nah", he'd follow providing the service for free. I highly suspect that was a weasel way to negotiate better terms and/or amount, knowing that the DoD needed a contract to hold him accountable, and that they were actually willing to pay.
You're not wrong in not trusting the guy, nobody should; according to his recent biography, he seems to take everything as a big game with the main objective of making more money.
You can check the list of sanctions imposed on Ukraine/Russia, which regions, types of activity and subjects, along with the exceptions and licenses at:
You may notice that US citizens have been forbidden from providing telecommunications services, including via satellite, in the conflict areas since early 2022, requiring a special license to operate.
Starlink didn't have such license, and only got a DoD agreement in mid 2023.
In late 2022, Musk would've had to break that policy in order to allow the drones to be controlled into the conflict zone.
As for him saying so... I don't think he's the type to paint himself as subservient to the government, even if he is; more like the megalomaniac type claiming to have stopped WW3 barehanded, even if he literally did nothing.
The number of debris avoidance maneuvers is growing faster than the number of satellites. Even without an attack, it's anyone's guess when the amount of debris will overcome their ability to avoid it.
In the case of an attack, they'd quickly run out of avoidance ability (onboard fuel) and either have to use the remaining fuel to de-orbit, or become part of the cascade of collisions.
Yup, they're already having problems without even getting attacked. Shooting "down" (they wouldn't fall down) some of the satellites, could easily create enough debris to start a cascading collision effect and turn the whole orbit into a minefield.
It's even worse, because they are in orbits creating a crisscross grid, meaning debris from one satellite would cross the paths of dozens of others in a short period of time.
Also, disabling a dozen or a thousand satellites, wouldn't create a "hole" in the network over any single place, since every single satellite goes over the whole globe, replacing any disabled one.
Someone trying to attack Starlink, would either have to trigger a cascading effect, or get no effect at all.
Precisely. For the one time the guy follows the rules... like there haven't been a thousand other things he's been doing that deserve criticism... this one is a really weird smear campaign to pick.
And a full year after the fact, at that. Where were all these people in 2022 when all this happened?
Facts come from history, most are recorded for everyone to check, particularly these ones are public. You may even find the exact dates for each one.
The "shit happens" is Ukraine botching a military operation because they asked a private US citizen to break US law. You may have confused "action" with "inaction as ordered".
The US imposed sanctions on private businesses from offering services to Russia
Starlink blocked all service over Russia and Russian assets
Ukraine asked Musk to extend the service over Russian assets
Musk followed US's rules
Shit happened
Suddenly, the US DoD scrambled to get a contract for Starlink... wonder why?
As much as I dislike Musk —and I wouldn't be surprised if he used this to negotiate a better contract—, this one was a total fuckup by the US DoD, and in part by Ukraine for not pressuring the DoD into signing a contract much sooner.
My point is you start by using whichever OS you trust most: there is Windows, Mac OS, Chrome OS, Android, a bunch of Linux distros, BSD... your choice.
If you don't trust any OS... sorry, you're SOL. Plug the thing off and smash it with a hammer, then dump into salt water to be safe.
You want open source you must execute random stuff
There are large OpenSource projects with security audits and security testing. There are random open and closed source projects with zero oversight by anyone.
Execute the former, not the latter.
people cannot be at their 100% at all time.
Executable signing, anti-malware systems, and people running tests to rubber-stamp stuff exist (like distro repos, or app stores). Use those.
Companies still get hacked with ransomwares and data extractors.
In most cases by hacking people, not software. Follow the above rules, don't trust that your CEO's nephew needs remote access to your PC... tell your coworkers not to trust that either... ... yeah, well, that's impossible, it takes only one to ransomware everyone... but you can keep yourself safe 🤷
Replacing the browser is optional, goes with the same trust issues as the OS.
He did not disable anything, he refused a foreign (Ukrainian) request to enable it, that was contrary to his country's (US) stance at that moment: sanctions forbidding him to provide any service over Russia or Russian assets.
Found the bot with a script.