The problem with Musk is that the guy keeps talking. There are a few companies in the US that make way more money from government contracts in the defence/space sector. Look at the
Space Launch System (SLS) (it makes SpaceX's Starship look cheap in comparison) or at the help car manufactures got after the market crash in 2007-10 (how much they received, their repayments, and compare it to Tesla). They all make money quietly and no one knows who their CEOs are because they're not talking sh*t on Twitter.
He wants to talk, put "ideas out there", milk stuff for good PR? Then he should take the heat. He gets mad when someone tweets something bad at him and says he's going to stop providing service to Ukraine? Yeah, it's bad, it should be pointed out. With this said, we should ask ourselves why do we care so much about his opinion and suggestions. I mean, who the hell is Elon Musk? I don't get it. Reminds me of the cult following around the Kardashians.
My first reaction to his idea to appease Russia was to ask if we're going to give land to every dictator that threatens to use their nukes. Then I read that he also made some comments about Taiwan and was asking if it's wi$e for someone working with the US government to say things that go against their policy (I'd be surprised if they're not turning the screws on him as we speak). I don't agree with him, find it very low to make comments in exchange for benefits in countries where his companies operate, but in practice nothing changes. No one will change their policies because Musk wants to appease Putin or make Xi Jinping happy.
Regarding the outages, it was suggested by "Ukrainian officials" (see this FT article:
original,
without paywall) that it was intentional. To quote the article, « One of them said: “If it’s jamming this cannot be changed so quickly.” »
It may be true, I don't have any inside information, but I have questions.
- This is happening more in some areas than others, often near the front lines. "One person overseeing dozens of Starlink devices along the frontline said those that were offline in some newly liberated locations".
- The article mentions the south (Kherson) as one of the areas more affected. Apparently that's where Russia has some of their best forces (eg:
VDV) and was using more advanced equipment (eg: many of the videos of shut down Ka-52 attack helicopters are from this region).
- The comment from the "ukranian official" about not being possible to fight jamming this fast goes against the "american official" that
praised them for being fast.
- If this is caused by "SpaceX-imposed geographical restrictions" why do some devices still work? Why are there failures in areas where Musk doesn't think they should be just given away to Russia?
- If there are geo restrictions, could they be there so Russia doesn't get access to the service too? Ukraine made some big advances in the Kherson area... how fast can they unlock new service "cells" and are they receiving real time info about advances from Ukrainian forces?
Jamming is certainly going on because Russia knows this is important for Ukraine (
they hacked their main comms provider - Viasat - when the full invasion started). Maybe SpaceX also stopped service to the equipment they donated, but left everything else running? Could explain this paragraph:
"A US official said they were aware of the Starlink issue but that there was more nuance to it. Western officials said Russian jamming could explain some of the outages."
How did we get here? Going back to February:
- Ukraine had almost no comms during the first weeks of the war (Starlink was important for them because of this).
- SpaceX starts building bases around (maybe even inside) Ukraine, donates some terminals, etc, with the blessing of the US government.
- More people start donating/paying for Starlink themselves. Musk keeps benefiting from the good PR because they're using Starlink.
- SpaceX continues to work around jamming, adding capacity, replacing lost equipment, etc. This costs money and adds to the price of the service.
- Ukraine asks for more terminals.
- Musk looks at everyone "helping Ukraine" while receiving sh*t tons of money and says that the US government should "
fund the Starlink service" because it's costing him money. They're dealing with someone with deep pockets and quote them more than $60 per terminal.
- The Pentagon doesn't pick up the tab in September, Musk goes on Twitter and says they can't keep providing the service for free.
- His "peace plan" + reaction to it + publicly saying they can't keep providing the service for free blows up in his face.
- The
tweet from Musk about keeping the service running says a lot about his thinking: "The hell with it … even though Starlink is still losing money &
other companies are getting billions of taxpayer $, we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free"
Musk is trying to make money with the war, which is bad (we really need to stop glorifying these guys...), but he's only one of the many doing it. Do you think arms manufacturers that gave free weapons didn't tell them that they couldn't keep giving stuff away for free? The difference is that they're not dumb enough to say that on Twitter.
With all the money being spent, $4500 is a drop in the ocean when dozens of $1 million HIMARS rockets are launched every day. They can charge 20 million a month for internet services... that's the equivalent of 4 HIMARS launches. Can you see how ridiculous all this is when you look at the total cost of the war?
That video from thunderf00t "triggers" me for a few reasons. Yes, Musk doesn't care about you and it's not a nice guy, but the wrong information and one sided views are aimed at his core following of Musk hatters.
Do you know why it's a 14 minute video even though it could be 5 minutes long? Because YouTube only lets you add "mid roll" ads
every 8 minutes or so. And indeed, while trying to watch the video without an adblocker, YouTube shows me 2 ads at the start, another 2 around minute 7, and another 2 near the end. What we have here is a YouTuber «drama profiteering» while complaining about «Musk's war profiteering"».
I stop following content creators for less (eg: clickbait titles), so you can see why this guy is way, way past my "red line" of what's acceptable.