By the way how will we "feel" when the Chinese or some Russian billionaire launches their own "Starlink" which will also be operating over the US? From what I have read there are several such systems in the pipeline in China.
It's irrelevant whether a private corporation software update or the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand causes a world war to break out, it must be avoided.
I don't really see the problem with having a foreign Starlink operating over your country. It just provides communication, doesn't it?
What if a chinese Starlink provides services in Afghanistan and the Taliban use it while the Americans attempt to control the country?
Would you be ok with it?
In this case it is extremely dangerous to err on the side of caution, or Putin will be able to apply salami tactics and get whatever he wants.
Unfortunately that is not true anymore [1]. Otherwise I 100% agree with the sentiment of your post.
[1] https://liveuamap.com/en/2022/21-april-pentagon-says-new-800...
You fail to spot the real enemy though: it's not a WWIII between Russia, China and USA/UK. It's a war between a little oligarchy and the rest of the humanity. War between USA/UK +submissive allies and Russia is just a war between two oligarch cohort, war for Taiwan and south Pacific in general (perhaps Solomon and Chagos Islands (see Diego Garcia) just toward the Philippines will probably follow again for more practical purposes like the China desperate need for food vs the USA/UK desperate struggle to keep dominance of the seas. Those wars though are not much WW wars, they are just some big&powerful confronts to remain in power/increase it. The real global war is the classic élites vs the people. Time since first nazi-fascism series against socialism is enough to restart a new nazi-fascist era and that's precisely what happen now.
The notion that SpaceX is basically using a Full CI/CD pipeline on a massive satellite constellation is kind of amazing. Meanwhile most large government software requires months of contract negotiation before anyone is even hired to fix the problem.
Do you want the government to hire contractors without contracts?
Worth a read.
You're presenting a false dichotomy, or lacking in imagination.
edit: i'm being a bit dramatic but it's pretty bad. no one will make a decision because a culture of CYA means whoever dared raised their hand is the one on the cross if things go wrong.
- Government can't offer competitive pay due to politics.
- Government contracts big projects to 3rd parties who pay competitively, but lack the transparency that government is required to have.
In a way it would seem to be that government contractor organizations are acting as an abstraction, and are in essence a way of government allocating funds without needing to provide the transparency and accountability of doing things in house.
In essence, if you follow this line --> contractors are basically government. (i.e. Working for SpaceX is basically working for government without the page/scale political challenges of getting stuff done, SpaceX is more or less funded by Gov)
Perhaps things are working how they should.
> The government, on the other hand, has a “significant timeline to make those types of corrections” as it muddles through analyses of what happened, decides how to fix it and gets a contract in place for the fix.
> “We need to be able to have that agility,” Tremper said.
> The government, on the other hand, has a “significant timeline to make those types of corrections” as it muddles through analyses of what happened, decides how to fix it and gets a contract in place for the fix.
Or did you not even read it, but decided to come comment on what you presumed it said?
a vector of attack waiting to be exploited. A news article could read
and the enemy, "slung a line of code and bricked it"
If instead the entire chain were done in hardware, then making these kinds of changes would be rather difficult.
At the same time, if more things are software more things become targets, so you need to care much more about the actual security of these kinds of update systems.
CD is for delivering everything this way, which is not always necessary from business perspective.
If you don’t do CD, it will either be more expensive because you have to maintain two processes or there is a good chance it will fail when you need it most because the critical delivery path wasn’t well exercised.
I call BS that it was SpaceX that kept the country online.
Eh? Destroying upwards of 50% of residential buildings (apartment blocks) apparently counts as hitting military targets?
But I agree on the role of Space X.
Look at a live twitter geolocation heatmap and it becomes pretty clear which areas are 'offline'.
Good idea but not exactly.
- In Ukraine (similar to other ex-USSR countries) govt laws require from phone companies, to provide service "at least 8 hours after power off". To be exact, this is requirement of all phone licenses, land and cell.
So in real life, on most cell towers accumulators withstand much more - I have worked in telecoms, 24h of work without power is normal for them.
For smartphone power, in Ukraine most people have powerbanks, so also could tweet for 24h and more.
But when without power for few days or more, sure business activity fall and less people will be active on internet.
Also huge factor in this war, huge number of refugees. Even considering not all people flee abroad, but about 12 millions (from approx 40 millions) moved from east/north/south regions to west regions.
https://onemilliontweetmap.com/?center=48.1367666796927,33.4...
I found the site above. Is there a better map?
So usually made trick - EW find when sync should be, and emit short high energy impulses, so snr become too low to receive sync part, and transmission effectively blocked.
Spacex implemented new encoding, where sync is in random place in time-frequency, so now EW could emit, and this will lead to speed degradation, but not to full blocking.
It even more impressive that SpaceX was able to update it that quickly as well as a huge selling point for the military markets they are targeting so I can't quite understand why Musk has to make such a false statement.
[1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1507505633259630599
Edited text below this line
"Some Starlink terminals near conflict areas were being jammed for several hours at a time. Our latest software update bypasses the jamming."
It's good that Spacex did send the equipment, but it is still more of advertisement as far as I can see, rather than something keeps the connectivity of Ukraine to the internet. (I'm happy to see reports that show otherwise).
[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/Starlink/comments/txh896/starlink_w...
https://twitter.com/FedorovMykhailo/status/15164744873818972...
> Is Starlink that important? It wouldn't be possible to restore 10 km of cable connection between villages in Chernigiv region after serious battles so quick. Normally it takes few months. Another case: provider Baryshivka-Net resumed the network for 5 villages by using only 1 .The only "explanation" this article offers is a link to a meandering video that doesn't answer any of these questions.
After "establishing" the premise, the article immediately launches into demands for more resources:
"We need to be able to have that agility"
"We need to be able to change"
"The U.S. needs to think a lot more innovatively"
"This includes incorporating artificial intelligence and machine learning into next-generation systems to be able to respond faster"
Over time articles like this one make people accumulate an extensive set of assumptions that basically aren't supported by anything except endless repetition.
Doesn't seem like your distinction is commonly used.
https://www.baesystems.com/en-us/definition/what-is-electrom...
https://www.theinfographicsshow.com/musk-starship-starlink-c...
> "Jamming attacks are common threats to wireless communications and happen when a hostile device creates radio signals that disrupt communications by decreasing the Signal-to-Inference-plus-Noise ratio (SINR)."
> "Possible ways that a software update can help bypass a jamming attack is if the jamming device is targeting a particular frequency. The software can implement FHSS or DSSS, Frequency Hopping / Spreading Sequences of frequencies for anti-jamming purposes. However, FHSS or DSSS, frequency distribution type of protection against jamming is flawed. It is ‘limited by a common assumption that the jammer can jam only part of the communication channels or has a limited transmit power.'"
That article points to this report, which discusses all kinds of novel ways to defeat such attacks, like using counter-jamming as a means of delivering bits between sender and receiver, bit synchronization schemes, and others:
What really need in modern environment, high availability, so it is not problem when one server rebooting, while others could continue deliver service.