• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • přihlásit
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
  • přihlásit
    přihlásit se
    registrace
    ztracené heslo?
    TOXICMANElon Musk
    OTAVA
    OTAVA --- ---
    jak dostane Elon SpaceX to SPX 500 bez toho aby ho tam vzali

    The $3.5T Bailout: Elon's Plan To Merge Tesla And SpaceX
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxlPYNAERL4
    KOUDY
    KOUDY --- ---
    To je dalsi rozpor kterej moc nechapu, protoze Fedorov mluvi o tom ze starlink speed byl restored, ale starlink byl uz v lednu zpomalenej prave z toho duvodu aby rusky drony nefungovaly nad ukrajinou..Byla to soucast toho whitelistu nekdy z ledna. Jediny co ma mit neomezenou rychlost jsou starshield ucty.


    Na Ukrajině vypadá rozdíl mezi oběma službami prakticky. Civilní terminály Starlink mají od přelomu ledna a února rychlostní limit zhruba 70 až 90 km/h, který SpaceX zavedla na žádost ukrajinského ministerstva obrany, aby Rusové nemohli Starlink používat na svých dronech. Terminály ukrajinské armády se zapisují na bílý seznam přes systém DELTA. Vojenské účty, kterým Ukrajinci říkají „vojenský balík Starshield“, byly z limitu vyňaty.

    Kosťantyn Ljukov z Nadace Serhije Prytuly to pro server Militarnyj popsal tak, že vojenské uživatele rozlišují „zvláštní účty, na kterých bylo toto omezení zrušeno“, a jde o běžné terminály Starlink s účtem Starshield. Rozdíl mezi Starlinkem a Starshieldem v ukrajinském podání určuje smlouva, která stanoví, jak rychle a kde terminál smí fungovat. Právě tuhle smlouvu 14. října “někdo” změnil.

    U Starlinku přitom nejde o nějakou velkou novinku. Obchodní podmínky této sítě od přelomu let 2022 a 2023 uvádějí, že služba „není navržena ani určena pro použití k útočným a či obranným vojenským nástrojům“. Pravidla přijatelného užití od letošní zimy navíc zakazují dálkové řízení dronů a jakoukoli vojenskou činnost, „ledaže by to bylo smluvně povoleno společností SpaceX“.

    Pokud Rubio tvrdí, že Ukrajinci používali Starlink pro své drony, připisuje jim použití, které komerční podmínky zakazují, a dovolit ho může jen zvláštní smlouva, kterou je v případě ukrajinské armády vládní kontrakt na Starshield.
    SMI
    SMI --- ---
    TADEAS: ok...ten zdroj fakt neni duveryhodny, ackoli to dava velice dobry smysl, takze 'spoofing' bych bral s velkou rezervou


    DOKIS:schvalne jsem si nechal vyjet jeho tweety, kde zminuje starshield a jen v jedinem naznacuje, ze ho maji:

    There is a US government arm of SpaceX called Starshield, which has a different set of satellites than Starlink, which is for civilian use.

    The company that makes the suicide drones incorrectly used the civilian system, instead of the Starshield.


    zatimco rubio 18.10. explicitne rekl, ze pentagon shield ukrajine neposkytuje:

    Rubio: Ukraine Currently Lacks Access to Starshield
    https://www.kyivpost.com/post/87400



    TADEAS: sikorski podle groka explicitne shield nikdy nezminil - První reportáže (včetně té, na kterou reagoval Sikorski) mluvily obecně o omezení Starlinku.

    Později to upřesnil Serhij Beskrestnov (známý jako „Flash“), poradce prezidenta Zelenského pro obranné technologie. Na Telegramu uvedl, že omezení rychlosti (přibližně 160 km/h / 100 mph) se týká konkrétně vojenského balíčku Starshield, nikoli běžného civilního Starlinku:

    Potvrzuji, že dnes v noci společnost SpaceX zavedla omezení rychlosti provozu terminálů Starlink během jízdy.

    V současné době se omezení týká „vojenského balíčku“ služeb StarShield a je nastaveno na rychlost 100 mil za hodinu.

    Naše obranné síly nebyly o tomto omezení předem informovány, což vedlo ke zmaření řady misí.

    Je zřejmé, že tento krok nemůže být náhodou a souvisí s aktuální politickou situací.

    Translated with DeepL

    https://t.me/s/serhii_flash (October 15 )
    PER2
    PER2 --- ---
    TADEAS: sorry ale cetls nekde konzistentnejsi vyklad toho, jak ukraina napadla rusko nez v rusky propagande?


    Oleg Kutkov

    Starlink, Starshield, GPS, and the Claims About “Hacking”: A Technical Explanation

    A post accusing Ukraine of “hacking” #Starlink is spreading rapidly on this platform.
    The technical claims in that post are incorrect. They seem based on a collection of rumors circulating on Telegram, including information from Russian channels.
    Unfortunately, this post and others like it are receiving an enormous number of likes and reposts.

    That's why I believe it's important to address these claims with clear technical explanations rather than allow misleading information to spread unchecked.
    This is a fairly detailed post, but I think the distinction matters.

    Some of the technical information below comes from my own research and detailed analysis of Starlink terminal firmware, particularly its GPS, PNT, and velocity-processing systems.

    #⃣ 1. What are Starlink and Starshield?

    People still frequently confuse the two.

    Starlink is SpaceX's commercial satellite internet service, designed for consumers, businesses, and other commercial users.

    Starlink supports operation in motion, but the permitted speed depends on the service plan, equipment, and geographic region.
    Under commonly available commercial plans, the maximum authorized operating speed is 160 km/h (100 mph).
    In Ukraine, Starlink terminals are subject to a specific speed restriction: they cannot operate at speeds above approximately 75–80 km/h.
    This Ukraine-specific restriction was introduced less than a year ago, in coordination with Ukrainian authorities, to prevent Starlink terminals from being used on drones.

    Starshield is SpaceX's government-focused product and service family, based on Starlink technology and developed for national security applications.
    It includes secure communications, Earth observation, and hosted payload capabilities.

    Some Starshield systems involve dedicated government spacecraft and infrastructure. However, Starshield communications services can also use the underlying Starlink satellite network.

    This distinction is important: Starshield does not necessarily mean a completely separate physical satellite constellation or entirely different user terminal hardware.

    SpaceX develops and operates the underlying Starlink infrastructure. The U.S. government procures Starshield capabilities through contracts, with ownership and operational control depending on the particular system and arrangement.

    The division of authority between SpaceX and the U.S. government has become especially relevant following the October 2026 incident.

    Unlike ordinary commercial Starlink service, Starshield configurations used for military operations in Ukraine have supported substantially higher operating speeds.

    #⃣ 2. Is Starshield available in Ukraine?

    Yes. Starshield is operational in Ukraine and is extensively used by the Ukrainian military.

    Starshield service has been used in Ukraine since approximately mid-2023. Subsequent U.S. government contracts and public reporting also confirm its availability.
    The United States has procured Starshield services specifically to support Ukrainian military operations.
    An October 2026 U.S. Senate letter explicitly confirms that Ukraine receives Starshield services procured by the U.S. government.

    Therefore, the idea that Ukraine is somehow obtaining Starshield capabilities by secretly modifying commercial terminals fundamentally misunderstands how these services are provided.

    How does the Ukrainian military use these services?

    The Ukrainian military uses both commercial Starlink and Starshield.

    Commercial Starlink is widely used because of its availability, relatively low cost, and excellent performance. For stationary installations and many other applications, commercial service is entirely sufficient.

    Starshield is used for specialized military applications, including drones and other platforms requiring reliable connectivity at higher operating speeds.

    These are capabilities provided through the Starshield service itself, not necessarily through unauthorized modifications to commercial Starlink hardware.

    Using Starshield for its intended and authorized military applications is not inherently a violation of its service terms.

    #⃣ 3. Regarding the October 2026 incident

    Beginning on October 13–14, Ukrainian military units encountered unexpected speed restrictions affecting Starshield connectivity.

    Terminals that had previously operated at substantially higher speeds began losing connectivity at approximately 160 km/h, with some reports describing interruptions at even lower speeds.

    These restrictions disrupted military operations, particularly those involving high-speed unmanned systems.
    The consequences were serious. Ukrainian officials reported that the restrictions interfered with drone operations, including efforts to intercept russian attack drones.

    The decision-making process remains disputed. Neither SpaceX nor the U.S. government initially accepted responsibility for imposing the restrictions. Subsequent reporting and statements from U.S. lawmakers raised questions about who authorized the changes and which organization had the ability to implement them.

    As of October 24, Ukraine's Ministry of Defense has officially reported that Starlink/Starshield connectivity is once again stable at speeds exceeding 400 km/h.

    #⃣ 4. Does Starshield require separate hardware?

    Not necessarily.

    This is one of the most important points in the entire discussion.

    Starshield is a government-focused service and technology family. In the case of satellite communications provided to Ukraine, existing Starlink terminal hardware can be provisioned to use Starshield service.
    In December 2024, Bloomberg reported that a Pentagon contract would provide Starshield access to an additional 2,500 Starlink terminals already deployed in Ukraine, on top of 500 terminals previously covered.
    The contracts therefore provided service for a total of 3,000 terminals.

    In practice, compatible commercial Starlink hardware can be reassigned to Starshield service through the appropriate authorization and provisioning process.
    This requires approval. It is not something that a customer can simply enable through the ordinary Starlink application.

    Are there specialized Starshield terminals?

    Yes.
    For example, there is a specialized variant of the Starlink Mini known internally as `mini1_rugged`.
    Based on my hardware research, this model uses an improved GNSS receiver, the Teseo V, instead of the receiver found in the regular Mini.

    However, despite having repaired and examined numerous terminals and maintaining contact with people working with this equipment, I have not encountered evidence of this specific variant being supplied to Ukraine.

    The Starshield terminals I have encountered or received information about in Ukraine are based on regular Starlink hardware.

    Some terminals arrive already configured for Starshield service. Others can be provisioned for it through the appropriate channels.

    The key point is simple:
    A regular Starlink terminal operating under an authorized Starshield service configuration is still a Starshield terminal from the service perspective. It does not need to be physically modified or “hacked” to obtain that service.

    #⃣ 5. Why does a Starlink/Starshield terminal require GPS?

    Three years ago, I published an article explaining why GPS is important for Starlink terminals and how to improve GPS reception on the hardware available at that time: olegkutkov.me/2023/11/07/con…

    Some of the technical details in that article are now outdated, but the fundamental principles remain relevant.

    A Starlink terminal requires sufficiently accurate position and timing information for network synchronization, beamforming, and other aspects of normal operation.

    Location information can also be used for geographic service authorization.

    Invalid or spoofed GPS data may interfere with these processes. Depending on the magnitude of the error and the firmware's ability to detect it, the terminal may lose connectivity or become unable to operate normally.

    Modern firmware also includes mechanisms to detect suspicious or inconsistent GPS information.

    When GPS data is considered unreliable, the terminal may attempt to use an alternative source of positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) information derived from Starlink's own satellite constellation.

    However, this fallback mechanism is not guaranteed to work reliably under every operating condition.

    This distinction helps explain why some hardware modifications focus on improving GPS reception or supplying more reliable positioning data, rather than bypassing Starlink's network authorization mechanisms.

    #⃣ 6. What is Starlink PNT?

    Starlink PNT is a positioning, navigation, and timing capability that derives information from signals transmitted by Starlink satellites.

    By combining satellite measurements with known orbital information, a terminal can estimate its position and movement independently of a conventional GPS receiver.

    Starlink firmware contains the necessary functionality to process these measurements and use them as an alternative positioning source.
    Initially, this functionality was more of an experimental feature. It was interesting from an engineering perspective, but its accuracy and reliability were limited.

    Over time, it has improved significantly.
    Modern implementations can provide useful positioning information, including when a terminal is moving.

    There are still measurement errors, uncertainties, and limitations, but Starlink-derived PNT can serve as an alternative when GPS is unavailable or unreliable.

    Nevertheless, conventional GNSS remains an important and generally preferred source of positioning and timing information in current terminal designs. For now.

    Can the terminal operate without GPS?
    Under certain conditions, yes.
    Starlink firmware provides a gRPC request called `dish_inhibit_gps`, which controls whether GPS is used as a position source.
    When GPS use is inhibited, the firmware can attempt to rely on alternative positioning information.

    A similar situation occurs when GPS data becomes unavailable because of hardware or communication problems.

    However, disabling GPS does not guarantee that the alternative positioning solution will be sufficiently accurate or available.
    It also does not automatically change the terminal's service permissions.

    #⃣ 7. How does a Starlink terminal determine its moving speed?

    The GPS receiver is a primary source of position and velocity information.
    Proprietary NMEA messages, including `TMPV`, carry information the terminal's motion-processing logic uses.

    The firmware does not necessarily trust these measurements without additional validation.

    The firmware can filter GPS-derived velocity and compare it with information from other available sources, including Starlink-derived positioning.

    The terminal also contains an inertial measurement unit (IMU), whose acceleration measurements can help evaluate movement and detect inconsistencies.

    The firmware applies thresholds and consistency checks to these measurements.
    These mechanisms run internally and aren't exposed as user-configurable settings.

    If GPS measurements differ significantly from the expected values or fail validation, the firmware can reject them.

    However, GPS validation and service-speed enforcement are two different things.

    Rejecting GPS data does not automatically mean that the terminal has exceeded the permitted operating speed.
    The terminal's service configuration determines whether operation at a particular speed is authorized.

    When the relevant speed policy is violated, the terminal may report a condition such as: `MOVING_TOO_FAST_FOR_POLICY`

    This distinction is essential when evaluating claims about GPS modification.

    Simply changing GPS-reported velocity does not automatically change the terminal's authorized operating speed or eliminate the firmware's internal validation mechanisms.

    As explained earlier, appropriately provisioned Starshield service supports high-speed operation without the same restrictions imposed on ordinary commercial configurations.

    Therefore, no additional “hacking” is required to obtain high-speed capability when that capability is already authorized as part of the service.

    Reliable GNSS reception remains desirable, however.
    This is one reason specialized terminal designs may incorporate improved receivers, such as the Teseo V used in the `mini1_rugged` variant.
    It also explains the existence of solutions intended to improve GPS reception or provide a more reliable PNT input.

    **Improving positioning reliability is not the same thing as bypassing service authorization.**

    #⃣ 8. How does Starlink geofencing work?

    There are two important factors: geographic service authorization and physical RF coverage.

    Understanding the difference is essential.

    Geographic service authorization

    Starlink uses geographic information to determine where service is available and whether a particular terminal is authorized to operate.

    The system uses logical geographic regions rather than relying exclusively on the physical boundaries of satellite beams.

    H3 is one geographic indexing system relevant to this discussion. It divides the Earth's surface into hierarchical hexagonal cells that represent geographic locations and regions.

    Geographic indexing provides a convenient way to manage coverage and service policies, but an H3 cell should not be confused with a physical satellite beam.

    Network authorization can depend on several factors, including geographic location, service configuration, terminal identity, and applicable restrictions.

    A terminal may be physically capable of receiving a satellite signal while still being denied access to the service.

    This is an important distinction when discussing restricted territories, including russia.

    Receiving a Starlink signal does not necessarily mean the terminal is authorized to connect to the network.

    Physical RF coverage

    Satellite beams cannot perfectly follow national borders or the boundaries of geographic indexing cells.

    An RF beam has a physical footprint determined by the satellite antenna, beam steering, operating conditions, and geometry.
    Its boundaries are not perfectly sharp.
    Consequently, a beam may illuminate areas on both sides of a national border even though the service is authorized on only one side.
    This is a normal characteristic of satellite communications, not evidence that geographic service restrictions have been disabled.

    The role of GPS in geofencing

    The terminal's reported location provides another source of information for determining whether it is operating in an authorized region.

    The network can use terminal positioning information, together with its own authorization rules, to determine whether service should be permitted.

    When operation is prohibited, the terminal may receive an appropriate disablement code from the network.

    These mechanisms should be understood as parts of a broader service authorization system, rather than as a single GPS check controlling everything.

    Can geofencing be bypassed by supplying modified GPS coordinates?

    This question requires some nuance.
    Changing the location reported by a GPS receiver may influence positioning-dependent decisions, but it does not automatically override network authorization.
    Starlink also has other information available to evaluate terminal operation, and its firmware includes mechanisms for detecting inconsistent positioning data.

    Large discrepancies can disrupt normal positioning and beamforming calculations, trigger validation failures, or cause the terminal to lose connectivity.

    Most importantly, changing GPS coordinates does not by itself grant a terminal permission to use a service or geographic region for which it is not authorized.

    #⃣ 9. So what exactly is being called a “Starlink hack”?

    This is where much of the confusion comes from.

    The modifications being discussed online are primarily related to improving GPS reception or providing the terminal with reliable positioning and timing information.

    These are technical solutions intended to improve connectivity and stability, particularly when the terminal is moving or operating in an environment with GPS interference.

    They do not automatically bypass Starlink's speed restrictions, geographic limitations, or network authorization mechanisms.

    As explained earlier, regular Starlink hardware can also operate under an officially authorized Starshield service configuration, which supports high-speed military applications.

    Neither improving GPS reliability nor using an authorized Starshield service constitutes hacking Starlink.

    It's important to understand these differences before making accusations based on photographs, rumors, or incomplete technical information.

    #⃣ Conclusion

    Starlink and Starshield use closely related technologies, but they are different services with different capabilities and restrictions.

    Regular Starlink hardware can operate under an officially authorized Starshield service configuration. No special hardware modifications are required.
    Improving GPS reception or providing reliable positioning data does not mean bypassing Starlink's network restrictions.

    Using Starshield for authorized military operations is not hacking. Neither is improving a terminal's GPS reliability.

    My goal is simply to explain how these systems work and clear up the confusion surrounding them.
    Technical accusations should be based on evidence, not rumors.
    KOUDY
    KOUDY --- ---
    Podle me si to polovina lidi plete. Kazdopadne posledni info je o tom ze ukrajina vyuzivala starlink k utokum (k cemuz ma slouzit starshield a ne starlink) a proto ho SpaceX omezila i vzhledem k akcionarum a tomu ze je na burze...protoze je to soukroma sluzba a pouzivat ji k utokum je v rozporu s podminkama...Kdo a jestli vubec omezil starshield se zatim nevi.
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    🇷🇺 Yuri Podolyaka on X: "𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗬 𝗛𝗔𝗣𝗣𝗘𝗡𝗘𝗗 𝗧𝗢 𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗥𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗞 𝗜𝗡 𝗨𝗞𝗥𝗔𝗜𝗡𝗘 Ukraine has always used only civilian Starlink services: the basic plan ($100), the commercial in-motion plan ($400), and the prio...
    https://x.com/YuriPodolyaka/status/2114333340853530991

    𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗬 𝗛𝗔𝗣𝗣𝗘𝗡𝗘𝗗 𝗧𝗢 𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗥𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗞 𝗜𝗡 𝗨𝗞𝗥𝗔𝗜𝗡𝗘

    Ukraine has always used only civilian Starlink services: the basic plan ($100), the commercial in-motion plan ($400), and the priority command-post plan ($2,000–4,000). Aviation plans cost up to $1K, $20K, or $100K+, but they are unavailable in Ukraine.

    Under heavy demand, the network became overloaded. SpaceX had to keep prices high for the military to build excess ground-station capacity around Ukraine and minimise signal latency. These are the very sites with antenna domes that recently began to be set on fire in attacks allegedly ordered through the dark web.

    The main problem Ukrainian forces faced at the front was Russian electronic warfare (EW). GPS signal jamming caused civilian Starlink chips to freeze, while spoofed location data could trigger terminal lockouts.

    The solution was a GPS hack board. Engineers soldered it inside the terminal to manually set the desired coordinates. These boards also made it possible to bypass Musk’s geographic restrictions.

    For a long time, Starlink did not work in the grey zone under Russian control. But entering the coordinates of a neighbouring Ukrainian region restored the connection. Russian forces also exploited this loophole until Starlink introduced exclusive whitelists for the Ukrainian Armed Forces (UAF) only.

    By 2025, Musk began tightening restrictions and reducing speed limits for commercial plans. But Ukrainian military engineers discovered a loophole: technically, the satellite-terminal communication session was not rigidly tied to GPS. The protection existed only within the terminal module itself.

    If the terminal was made to believe through the hack board that it was stationary, it would send its own radio request to the satellite and receive the necessary session data. There are now around 10,000 satellites, and the signal could be picked up even with a separation of more than 150 km. The drone could fly over Russian territory while Starlink’s servers believed it was stationary.

    This was a major Ukrainian secret. Before being sent to the front, the casings of new Starlink terminals were routinely opened to install GPS hacks and sturdy, waterproof connectors. This allowed drones to fly at high speeds while using an ordinary subscription.

    In early 2026, Musk reduced the commercial plan’s speed limit to 160 km/h worldwide. That is slower than many basic UAVs can fly with a tailwind. But because GPS hack boards were so widely used in Ukraine, nobody noticed. The terminals reported that they were supposedly stationary.

    IN LATE 2026, SPACEX RESPONDED HARSHLY. A server-side check was introduced: if a terminal’s GPS indicated that it was stationary but it switched between satellites too quickly—revealing an actual speed above 160 km/h—the server would immediately terminate the connection.

    The GPS hack stopped working. Ukrainian forces began experiencing problems with long-range UAVs. Flights now have to be planned carefully to avoid exceeding the 160 km/h limit. Funding for aviation plans is not always available, and SpaceX does not sell them for what it considers offensive uses.

    Against this backdrop, Zelensky is trying to obtain unrestricted access to Starshield—the US military version of Starlink—to enable flights over Russia. But Trump, Musk and the Pentagon are refusing him. Ukraine has portrayed the restrictions as a political blockade while omitting the fact that the Starlink speed limit has reportedly been in place for almost a year.

    A behind-the-scenes back-and-forth is now underway: Musk says he has not changed anything in recent days, while Rubio states that Starshield is unavailable to Ukraine. The result: Starlink is gradually being restricted to vehicle-based and stationary use. The workaround no longer works.

    Whether the speed check has been disabled or access to specialised aviation plans has been granted remains unclear. The outage affected a narrow segment of drones...
    KOUDY
    KOUDY --- ---
    Nove vyjadreni.

    Andrej Fiskovec
    @andrewofpolesia
    ·
    10h
    Buď teda Ukrajinci dokázali nějak hacknout systémy SpaceX a používat civilní antény Starlink za pohybu, nebo je Musk lže.

    Takže:

    1. Rusové od loňského roku načerno nakupovali Starlinky všude možně po světě, ty pak nasazovali na Ukrajině.

    2. Problém začal řešit tehdejší ministr obrany Fedorov a jeho tým. Řešením byly bílé seznamy (whitelists), kdy pouze oficiálně registrované terminály mohly být zprovozněny nad území Ukrajiny (kontrolované Ukrajinu nebo okupované Ruskem).

    3. Povolené civilní terminály fungují pouze ve stacionárním režimu nebo za velmi nízké rychlosti pohybu (do 90 km/h).

    4. Registrovat terminály museli jak vojáci (přes Delta nebo Armija+), firmy a státní zaměstnanci přes portál Dia, civilisté a podnikatelé přes CNAP. Registrovalo se KIT číslo, UTID a číslo účtu.

    5. Registrace byla spuštěna 5. února 2026.

    A teď to podstatné (a zopakuji to znovu)

    Ukrajinští vojáci pro terminály, které se využívají na mobilní cíle ve vysoké rychlosti (typické middle strike drony při zrychlení z rampy nebo třeba drony interceptory), používají službu Starshield.

    To je služba, o které Musk říká, že ji kontroluje americká vláda (a všimněte si, že už nepíše, že ji vlastní). Jde o využití stejné konstelace satelitů Starlink, ale s lepším šifrováním, přístupy a tak dále.

    Zde je důležité, že za tuto službu neplatí americká vláda, ale vláda německá skrze FMS (Foreign Military Sales, což je proces, přes který Amerika prodává své zbraně, například Patrioty). Ta platí tuto službu do půlky května příštího roku.

    Co se omezila, je služba Starshield, tj. terminální na mobilních cílech. Nejde tu teď momentálně o stacionární Starlink, který funguje právě na principech těch bílých seznamů. Proto se Němci ozvali. Proto se Ukrajinci ozvali. Proto si Musk, Rubio, Trump a další přehazují zodpovědnost a matou společnost.

    Důvodem není jen to, že v rámci americké společnosti nechtějí ztratit zbytky kreditu, ale taky to, že se vysílá vzkaz spojencům, kterým říkají, že pokud na postu amerického prezidenta bude člověk, který chce lízat ruskou/čínskou/severokorejskou či jakoukoli jinou podrážku, může mechanismus FMS s odůvodněním "národního zájmu" podělat.

    A tenhle signál je mnohem horší, protože se Evropané (a vlastně kdokoli, kdo se u Američanů rozhodne nakupovat přes FMS, nebo jiný mechanismus, přes který není možné domáhat se právní ochrany u soudu/arbitráže) budou naprosto legitimně ptát, co všechno v sobě obsahuje kill switch a jak moc jsme schopní nahrazovat americké know how tím svým?

    Proto Musk bulí, když Evropané mluví o předělovaní frekvencí pouze pro evropské společnosti. Proto američtí technologičtí giganti jsou nervózní. A proto budou mít problém i americké zbrojovky, které mají díky válce v Evropě žně (nákupy z Evropy jsou největší za desítky let a po 20 letech jsme největšími odběrateli amerických zbraní).

    Trump si neuvědomuje, jak velký geopolitický průšvih za sebou zanechá, pro nějakou zdánlivou výhodu, kterou mu momentálně Putin nabízí. Ať už to 300 000 tun nafty, stavba infrastruktury ruskými společnosti pro Aljašku, nebo nějaké shady kontakty, který má Witkoff a Kushner s Dmitrijevem.

    KOUDY
    KOUDY --- ---
    Vláda USA si zároveň vyhrazuje právo celou dohodu nebo její část „zrušit či pozastavit“, pokud to za mimořádných okolností vyžaduje národní zájem Spojených států. Ukrajina ani Německo se SpaceX žádnou smlouvu nemají. Mají ji s americkou vládou, která za plnění odpovídá, ať páku fyzicky stiskne kdokoli.

    Co americká vláda vůči SpaceX smí, popisují zadávací podmínky programu PLEO, přes který Pentagon kupuje služby z nízké oběžné dráhy včetně ukrajinské objednávky z roku 2024.

    Vládní správci podle nich mohou zapínat a vypínat jednotlivé uživatele, žádat dodavatele o pozastavení služby a dokoupit přednostní provoz před všemi ostatními uživateli i aktivaci pro případ války. Oblasti pokrytí ale podle týchž podmínek určuje dodavatel a platí jeho standardní obchodní podmínky. Vláda tak má nad svými účty dost silné páky, samotnou síť ale řídí SpaceX. Představitelé Pentagonu to přitom před Kongresem opakovaně připouštěli.

    Tehdejší náměstek ministra obrany John Plumb v roce 2023 řekl, že přístup ke komerčním službám se v krizi se řeší „smlouvu po smlouvě“. Náčelník vesmírných sil Chance Saltzman o rok později na otázku, co když firma nedodá, odpověděl, že by ji Pentagon nutil k dodržení smlouvy jako v každém jiném právním rámci. Předseda podvýboru Jon Tester mu na to připomněl, že než se spor dostane k soudu, bude pozdě.

    Pro ukrajinské drony je tak lhostejné, jestli rychlost změnila SpaceX z vlastní vůle, nebo na pokyn. Agentura Reuters s odkazem na dva americké a jednoho západního představitele napsala, že vedení Pentagonu dostalo zprávu, že služba Starshield pro ukrajinskou armádu musí být zpomalena, a pokyn přišel z Bílého domu.
    KOUDY
    KOUDY --- ---
    Na Ukrajině vypadá rozdíl mezi oběma službami prakticky. Civilní terminály Starlink mají od přelomu ledna a února rychlostní limit zhruba 70 až 90 km/h, který SpaceX zavedla na žádost ukrajinského ministerstva obrany, aby Rusové nemohli Starlink používat na svých dronech. Terminály ukrajinské armády se zapisují na bílý seznam přes systém DELTA. Vojenské účty, kterým Ukrajinci říkají „vojenský balík Starshield“, byly z limitu vyňaty.

    Kosťantyn Ljukov z Nadace Serhije Prytuly to pro server Militarnyj popsal tak, že vojenské uživatele rozlišují „zvláštní účty, na kterých bylo toto omezení zrušeno“, a jde o běžné terminály Starlink s účtem Starshield. Rozdíl mezi Starlinkem a Starshieldem v ukrajinském podání určuje smlouva, která stanoví, jak rychle a kde terminál smí fungovat. Právě tuhle smlouvu 14. října “někdo” změnil.

    U Starlinku přitom nejde o nějakou velkou novinku. Obchodní podmínky této sítě od přelomu let 2022 a 2023 uvádějí, že služba „není navržena ani určena pro použití k útočným a či obranným vojenským nástrojům“. Pravidla přijatelného užití od letošní zimy navíc zakazují dálkové řízení dronů a jakoukoli vojenskou činnost, „ledaže by to bylo smluvně povoleno společností SpaceX“.

    Pokud Rubio tvrdí, že Ukrajinci používali Starlink pro své drony, připisuje jim použití, které komerční podmínky zakazují, a dovolit ho může jen zvláštní smlouva, kterou je v případě ukrajinské armády vládní kontrakt na Starshield.
    FLUO
    FLUO --- ---
    Tak dnes se pridal i Rubio s naznacovanim, ze to byl Musk. Mimo jine rika, jak jsem psal tady, ze to je sluzba, kterou si kupuji od SpaceX, ne neco, co jim poskytuje Pentagon. A podobne se vyjadril i Hegseth. Ja nevim, jsou Rubio a Hegseth anonymni zdroje?

    "There are terms of service that ultimately need to be complied to, and that’s where Starlink has the option to make those decisions," Hegseth said."

    US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said on Wednesday that decisions regarding Ukraine’s access to Starlink were up to SpaceX and Elon Musk, not the White House, comments that suggested Musk may have restricted Kyiv’s access to the service.
    ...
    "I’m not aware that we knew about this decision beforehand. But that’s irrelevant," Rubio told reporters during a trip to India.

    "The bottom line is that that is governed by a private commercial contract as to how their stuff can be used and what speeds they’ll allow it to be used at." Musk and SpaceX did not respond to Reuters requests for comment.

    https://www.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/starlink-access-in-ukraine-a-decision-for-musk-not-white-house-rubio-says-4961821?
    KOUDY
    KOUDY --- ---
    Jestli to fakt udelal tak je to debil. V tech postech se ale jasne rika ze WSJ rika neco jineho a Reuters taky a vsichni se opiraj o nejake anonymni zdroje pricemz Musk sam rika ze nic nevypnul protoze to dela stat..zelensky rika ze to vypnul stat...je mozny ze to stat naridil spacex apod...Takze clovek si samozrejme z ruznych medii ktera se opiraji o nicim nepodlozene zdroje muze vybrat to co mu vyhovuje a to vzit za svoji pravdu a nebo si muze pockat jestli budou nejake dukazy o tom kdo to vypnul nebo kdo to naridil vypnout ci omezit a do te doby nedelat unahlene zavery jako 90% dusevnich mrzaku z tohohle klubu.
    DOKIS
    DOKIS --- ---
    KOUDY: Neni to zle, ale porad pali penize celkem hrozivym tempem. Plus samotne SpaceX varuje, ze to je z velke casti kombinace jednorazovych priznivych okolnosti a Q4 bude horsi, dost mozna budou zase ve ztrate. Takze good for them, cisla jsou lepsi, nez se cekalo, ale stale maji sakra hodne co zlepsovat, aby to bylo udrzitelne.
    PETER_PAN
    PETER_PAN --- ---
    Why SpaceX is the best place to work for scientists - Eric Betzig on Tesla Roadster
    https://m.youtube.com/shorts/3w4Jp3w8unQ?ra=m
    PEJR
    PEJR --- ---
    KOUDY: Podle tebe udela za pristich 18 let spacex 50x?
    KOUDY
    KOUDY --- ---
    BRETA: To jestli mu to zerem je jina vec. To ze miliardari davaj detem akcie svejch firem nebo za ne platej skolny nebo jim davaj nejaky prachy (treba manzele Dellovi)..ci za nej platej nejaky student loans (ten typek co vlastni Snapchat s Mirandou Kerr) mi prijde fajn. Tesla/spaceX se urcite mergnou v jednu spolecnost ktera bud muze bejt za 20 let uplne v pici a deti nebudou mit nic, nebo uz se bude osidlovat mesic a budou tam zakladny atp a ta akcie muze mit hodnotu treba patnactinasobku..plus samozrejme slozeny uroceni z jinejch investic apod. Amerika tim zas jen ukazuje vyhody kapitalismu.

    Vem si ze by ceskej stat kazdemu narozenemu diteti zalozil na jeho rodne cislo ucet kam by mu dal deset tisic korun ktere by se automaticky investovaly treba do SP500 a po osmnacti letech by s tema penezma mohlo to dite nakladat a melo nejakych 120-150k.

    BRETA: Mas vic druhu uctu. Na nektery z nich nemuzou rodice sahat. Na nektery jo..alespon v USA. Nevim jak v CR. Jestli tu existuje ucet kam das diteti prachy a rodice na ne nemuzou sahnout.
    JANOS
    JANOS --- ---
    ADAMIRA: Jj, to slibovali uz pred 5 lety ze SpaceX variant bude jen dvoumistny misto 4.
    BRETA
    BRETA --- ---
    Elon Musk chce rozdat akcie 73 milionům dětí. Dárek má hodnotu přes 200 miliard korun | e15.cz
    https://www.e15.cz/zahranicni/elon-musk-chce-rozdat-akcie-73-milionum-deti-darek-ma-hodnotu-pres-200-miliard-korun-1436657

    Americký miliardář Elon Musk chce příští rok darovat každému dítěti ve Spojených státech jednu akcii své kosmické společnosti SpaceX. Oznámil to ve svém příspěvku na sociální síti X. Podrobnosti k plánu ale neuvedl. Ve Spojených státech žije podle údajů statistického úřadu z roku 2024 zhruba 73 milionů lidí mladších 18 let, napsala agentura AFP.
    KOUDY
    KOUDY --- ---
    Spis jde o to ze Musk a Zelensky rikaj jednu vec a Trump a Hegseth rikaj druhou vec..Takze spravne bys mel napsat "verim vic zelenskemu a muskovi nez trumpovi a hegsethovi"..protoze elon je stejne jako zelensky konzistentni v tom co tvrdi. I tady psal DECIDED by the US Military...to znamena ze oni o necem rozhodnou a muzou pak rict SpaceX at to omezi.

    MARASAN
    MARASAN --- ---
    TRANCEWARP: “And technically, SpaceX did it.” - jakoze SpaceX nachystal pro administrativu web s ovladanim, tak proto SpaceX za to muze? A to s tim, ze noze zabijeji lidi, to uz si slysel?
    Kliknutím sem můžete změnit nastavení reklam