The Smoke Eater for Feb. 10, 2023
The fault in Elon's stars, Serbia's "porn MP," and dog democracy.
Good morning, this is The Smoke Eater for February 10, 2022, and Mars ain't the kind of place to raise a kid.
NOTE: The Smoker Eater is poorly edited and ad-free. It's supported by entirely super awesome readers. Please, be super awesome, support me on Ko-Fi, or subscribe to my Patreon!
ABOVE THE FOLD
SpaceX is kind of mad the Ukrainian military weaponized their Starlink internet access.
"It was never intended to be weaponized," Space X President Gwynne Shotwell said during the FAA's Commercial Space Transportation Conference in DC on Feb. 8 without going into any detail about the weaponization. “We know the military is using them for comms, and that’s OK. But our intent was never to have them use if for offensive purposes.”
"You offer a commercial product by connectivity to people,” Shotwell said, “which is helpful in conflict. But you also want to be careful of how they use it. They’re trying to fight for their country, so I understand it...it’s just not what was intended."
The Starlink Terms of Service say rather explicitly that the system is, "not designed or intended for use with or in offensive or defensive weaponry or other comparable end-users." And SpaceX owner Elon Musk did shitpost on Sept. 16, 2022 that his dodgy satellite internet was "meant for peaceful use only," later adding, "to help mend the fault in our stars." As far as SpaceX is concerned, it’s just business.
It’s not entirely clear what Starlink can or intends to do to stop the Ukrianian military form using the portable satellite internet system for its military operations, or why they’re raising the issue now as the Ukrainian military has made no secret about its use of drones over the last year.
TOS violations or not, the Ukrainians are pissed because they’ve been using a network to run cheap, off-the-shelf drones that have been critical to keeping eyes on invading Russian forces. As Foreign Policy’s Jack Detsch notes, drones are being used for scouting missions, kamikaze drives behind Russian lines, and artillery spoting. Mykhailo Podolyak, a senior adviser to Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelenskiy, said in a social media post that companies needed to decide if they are on side of freedom, or, “on the [Russian Federation]’s side and its [sic] ‘right’ to kill and seize territories.”
Samuel Bendett, an expert on Russian autonomous weapons for the think-tank, CNA, told Detsch, “If we gauge how important any given technology is to the Ukrainians based on how it’s discussed across the Russian Telegram ecosystem, then I would say it was rather important.”
Oleksiy Danilov, the secretary of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council, played down the damage and importance of Starlink, telling the Washington Post, “If you believe that we use only Starlink…this does not correspond to reality at all.”
BELOW THE FOLD
Robert Oppenheimer wasn't watching a bag of paper popcorn explode in his microwave in June of 1945 when he wondered what hell science had wrought, so whether Musk and SpaceX remain oblivious to humanity's uncanny ability weaponize just about anything is…debatable. But the evolution of Musk's opinions does offer insight into the company's motivations.
Shortly after Russia's invasion of Ukraine on Feb. 24, 2022, Musk quickly took credit for the delivery of his company's portable satellite internet systems to Ukraine.
Some techies doubted Musk's ability to fly hundreds of Starlink systems to the other side of the planet, into a war zone, in less than 96 hours, but Musk was too busy patting himself on the back with the rest of the world. And questions of whether negotiations for Starlink systems were underway prior to Feb. 24 fell away as Musk took a victory lap (on the internet).
Musk claimed SpaceX was footing the bill for Starlink in Ukraine, implying that it had donated 1,000+ Starlink units that were initially sent. But in April 2022 WaPo reported a significant number of Starlink systems were financed by USAID and other countries, like France and Poland, as well as handling the logistics of flying Starlink systems from Los Angeles to Poland, and then into Ukraine. Starlink was donating systems to Ukraine, they weren't exactly bending over backwards like the US (or French, or German, or Polish) tax payer.
For some reason, USAID edited their initial press release and removed language about the cost of the units. Some back of the envelope math on the sketchy figures available suggests SpaceX sells its base model terminals at a loss, and that the company is losing money with every device sold. But because SpaceX is cagey with its internal numbers, it’s also entirely possible Uncle Sam overpaid for Starlink terminals. It’s also possible Uncle Sam bought several months of data when it bought the terminals, translating into a bulk order discount. Neither scenario is really clear due to a general lack of information on the part of SpaceX, and by extension, USAID.
Musk began a spree of shitposts late last year that included a fair bit of Russian propaganda. Musk suddenly shitposted a poll that Ukraine should negotiate for peace by surrendering territory occupied by invading Russian forces, a regime talking point that was celebrated by Russian government officials. When the poll failed miserably, Musk blamed it on “bots.”
Musk quickly became a pariah in the press, and attempted to brush off his critics by suggesting they were all internet bots. But it was Andrij Melnyk, Ukraine's former Abassador to Germany, publicly telling Musk to "Fuck off" that seems to have hurt Musk's feelings.
And the timing of all this is…a bit weird.
The Financial Times had recently reported that in late September and early October, Starlink was suffering from widespread outages, something Musk eventually acknowledged. A few days later, CNN reported of Musk was demanding the Pentagon pay for Ukraine's government and military use of Starlink, which it estimated to cost around $380 million over 12 months.
While the timing was a bit suspicious, CNN notes Musk/Starlink's demand was sent in late September, before the story about hit the newswires, and prior to Musk being humiliated (on the internet…again). According to CNN, "about 85% of the 20,000 terminals in Ukraine were paid – or partially paid – for by countries like the US and Poland or other entities. Those entities also paid for about 30% of the internet connectivity, which SpaceX says costs $4,500 each month per unit for the most advanced service."
The story notes the Ukrainian military had asked Starlink in July for an additional 8,000 terminals, saying it had 4,000 deployed, but around 500 were being destroyed every month. Starlink says it forwarded the request to the Department of Defense. On Sept. 8, Starlink requested the Pentagon pick up the tab.
Musk would argue Ukraine's use of Starlink was far greater than the average consumer household. He said the goal of his hyped up broadband satellite internet service was not to see his company go bankrupt, and that the "operation [in Ukraine] has cost SpaceX $80 million and will exceed $100 million by the end of the year."
In response, the Pentagon said there other connectivity options out there, effectively calling Musk's bluff. The next day, on Oct. 15, Musk shitposted, "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." A few days later, on Oct. 17, Musk confirmed (on the internet…again) that he had walked back his demands.
However, a month later Starlink said it was almost doubling the price of its terminals in Ukraine. On Nov. 29, Starlink sent emails to its Ukrainian users saying terminals would go from the reduced price of $385 to a more standard $700, and that it was raising service fees from $60 to $75. It's unclear if these fee increases applied to Starlink's government or military contracts, but people running chairties that bought Starlink systems and then donated them to civilians and soldiers took to social media to announce they were totally screwed.
At the end of December, Bloomberg reported Starlink had reached a deal with the Ukrainian government for an additional 10,000 Starlink units. "There is no alternative to satellite connections," Mykhailo Fedorov, deputy prime minister and minister for digital transformation told Bloomberg. "All financial issues have been resolved," Fedorov said, though he noted Ukraine would need to find additional funding in the spring.
The history of Starlink has been…fuzzy. Units (finally) began rolling out in late 2021, and the service has been repeatedly dogged by bad press.
At launch it received rather mediocre reviews. Sometimes it was as fast as advertised, but like any satellite-based communication system, it's easily thwarted by trees. Users began documenting up/down speeds worse than dial-up due, which some attributed to network congestion — despite assurances Starlink could could handle the user load.
Some potential customers say they’re waiting 11 months for a Starlink terminal, which has lead to slow user growth. And things will likely get worse thanks to looming data caps.
Because Starlink works on a “constilation” of satellites orbiting the earth, the system only works when SpaceX can launch rockets with more satellites. And because God hates Florida, Starlink and SpaceX are dependent on the cooperation of Mother Nature (or The Force, or whatever).
BONUS: During an impromptu press gaggle at NASA’s Artemis launch last year, a veteran astronaut complimented SpaceX’s contribution’s to human spaceflight, noting today’s space program wouldn’t be possible without their highly skilled engineers. The astronaut stopped short of complimenting Musk, saying they’d rather not make a political statement; drawing laughter from the small crowd.
SpaceX currently owns and operates more satellites than any country or businesses, though Musk denies his satellites interfere with space travel, exploration, or astronomy.
The company has recently begun taking heat from advocates of rural broadband internet access after it won over $800 million from the then-Trump-controlled FCC to bring "high-quality broadband service to the hardest-to-reach rural Americans." Some of the areas SpaceX’s bid called to set up service along the Harlem River in The Bronx, and in the Newark and Miami international airports, areas internet advocates argue would be better served by high-speed fiber. Compounding the ire was the fact that their bid was submitted and accepted almost a year before the Starlink service launched, so real world testing prior to the service’s launch could only be speculative.
In December, the FCC partially approved SpaceX's expansion plans for 7,500 satellites, but noted "concerns about orbital debris and space safety" in denying its request for almost 30,000.
Though Musk has recently bemoaned government funding, saying the US should "delete" all federal subsidies, Musk's companies received almost $5 billion in government subsidies by 2015. SpaceX recently won a national security contract that will see the government using a non-commercial version of Starlink the company calls "Starshield." When it was announced, TechCrunch wrote Starlink suffered so many problems in Ukraine, "because the whole network was really never meant to be used in this fashion, and grafting a military/aid operation onto a consumer product has led to unforeseen consequences." The story notes the company’s announcement of Starshield was filled with buzzwords, and didn’t really have any proof of the capabilities it was claiming.
ONE MORE THING...
Fiona Hill, the whistleblower and former Russia advisor to the Trump administration, told Politico in October that Musk was, "transmitting a message for Putin," noting Musk’s comments at "The Weekend" festival in Aspen in late-September on water availability in Russian-occupied Crimea were weird because they were, "so specific:"
Musk offered a version of what was in his tweet — including the recognition of Crimea as Russian because it’s been mostly Russian since the 1780s — and the suggestion that the Ukrainian regions of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia should be up for negotiation, because there should be guaranteed water supplies to Crimea. He made this suggestion before Putin’s annexation of those two territories on September 30. It was a very specific reference. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia essentially control all the water supplies to Crimea. Crimea is a dry peninsula. It has aquifers, but it doesn’t have rivers. It’s dependent on water from the Dnipro River that flows through a canal from Kherson. It’s unlikely Elon Musk knows about this himself. The reference to water is so specific that this clearly is a message from Putin.
Now, there are several reasons why Musk’s intervention is interesting and significant. First of all, Putin does this frequently. He uses prominent people as intermediaries to feel out the general political environment, to basically test how people are going to react to ideas. Henry Kissinger, for example, has had interactions with Putin directly and relayed messages. Putin often uses various trusted intermediaries including all kinds of businesspeople. I had intermediaries sent to discuss things with me while I was in government.
This is a classic Putin play. It’s just fascinating, of course, that it’s Elon Musk in this instance, because obviously Elon Musk has a huge Twitter following. He’s got a longstanding reputation in Russia through Tesla, the SpaceX space programs and also through Starlink. He’s one of the most popular men in opinion polls in Russia. At the same time, he’s played a very important part in supporting Ukraine by providing Starlink internet systems to Ukraine, and kept telecommunications going in Ukraine, paid for in part by the U.S. government. Elon Musk has enormous leverage as well as incredible prominence. Putin plays the egos of big men, gives them a sense that they can play a role. But in reality, they’re just direct transmitters of messages from Vladimir Putin.Fiona Hill, 17, Oct. 2022.
BACK PAGES
Ukraine is now asking for F-16 fighter jets. The request is being publicly shot down, but the UK has announced that it will begin training Ukrainian fighter pilots on single and twin-seated upgraded MiG-29s being sent from Slovakia.
Brazil's new president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, got into a spat with German Chancelor Olaf Scholz last week when Lula began repeating Russian propaganda during a bilateral meeting of the two leaders. Lula said, "Brazil does not want to have any participation, even indirect." The meeting started with Scholz warmly greeting Lula, saying, "We're all delighted that Brazil is back on the global stage," adding, "You guys have been sorely missed," but when the topic of Ukraine came up Lula said, "I think the reason for the war between Russia and Ukraine also needs to be clearer. Is it because of NATO? Is it because of territorial claims? Is it because of entry into Europe? The world has little information about that." Scholz responded by pointing out Putin's imperialistic claim of ownership is flawed, sayng, "What kind of territorial conflicts would all be possible if everyone simply leafed through their history books, like the Russian president, and looked at where a border used to be? If you make that the yardstick, then we won't have peace in the world." Russia and Brazil have grown increasingly reliant on one another over the last few years, with Brazil importing more and more Russian fuels and fertilizers.
Former British Prime Minister Liz Truss penned a lengthy op-ed in the conservative Daily Telegraph to complain that her tenure was cut short because, "large parts of the media and the wider public sphere had become unfamiliar with key arguments about tax and economic policy." Truss claims her globally panned trickle-down fiscal policy suffered from a "rounding error," and blames it and her failure on the world's ignorance to her (and her Torry party's) brilliance. Setting aside the laundry list of contradictions in Truss 11,000 word screed, her attempts to save her political career ahead of the UK's 2024 elections do contain a half-truth: an internal investigation of the BBC found "too many [BBC] journalists lack understanding of basic economics or lack confidence reporting it," and that this, "brings a high risk to impartiality." Though the report stresses a lack of evidence to declare any implicit bias, it doesn't mention the the BBC has seen a consistent decrease in funding since 2010. The report has been seized by far-right politicos hoping to further defund the BBC, which is financed primarily through taxes (AKA: "licensing fees"). There's a fear that privatization of the BBC could incentivize the typically stuffy British news media to become more pompous and Americanized, where flashing lights, explosive graphics, click bait, talking heads masquerading as journalists and the Fox News "leg cam" force more competition in a industry that’s already begging its audience to pay for quality news.
Serbian member of parliament Zvonimir Stević resigned in disgrace after he was caught watching porn on his phone as Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić pleaded with MPs to normalize relations Kosovo and follow a path to EU membership. Stević was the chair of the Committee for Kosovo until the NSFW clip was picked up by Serbian news outlets. Serbian Foreign Minister Ivica Dačić called it a, "scandal and disaster," adding, "Wherever you appear, whatever you say, you will always be a porno MP."
OK, here's your cute critter video!
Follow Dominic on Twitter and Instagram.
The Smoke Eater is mobile friendly, ad-free and relies on your generous tips. It takes a lot of time and energy to put each issue together, so consider tipping me on Ko-Fi, the Cash App, Venmo or PayPal. You can also subscribe to my Patreon for special perks and bonuses!
Questions? Comments? Complaints? Shoot me an e-mail or send me a DM!