On October 14, 2026, SpaceX imposed an unannounced speed limit on military-grade Starshield terminals used by Ukrainian forces, automatically cutting internet connectivity for terminals moving faster than 100 mph (160 km/h) and disrupting several high-speed military drone operations.
If Ukraine had any sense they would try to be as little as possible dependent on the Trumps ilk and I think they have. Message was clear from the start.
What gives you the impression that they don’t try? That they don’t launch hundreds of satellites themselves?
What?
Your comment gives me the impression that you think Ukraine is too dependent on Starlink and not making an effort to change that. And my question is why you might think that.
Well you are reading it wrong
What alternative to Starlink could they use?
Since my earlier interpretation of this question was inaccurate - I’d like to try this again:
There are a number of satellite operators that currently do business around the world that offer worldwide coverage at similar data speeds. Many of these already offer services to governments.
Given that StarLink is preventing them from conducting missions, any and every company that they can use is an alternative at the moment. StarLink is no longer on the board for them.
Here’s a list!
So two Chinese companies that are pro-Russia and another American billionaire like Musk. The French company only has 600 satellites and it’s not clear that it could even work.
I don’t really want to get drawn into this, because no one was arguing about this until someone decided to advocate for SpaceX.
But fuck it - EutelSat is partnered with Airbus, one of the largest defense contractors on the fucking planet.
As far as number of satellites go, 600 is plenty. They can provide service worldwide with 600 satellites. The thing that is tripping you and the other commenter up relates to volume/saturation. They’re a smaller company. They have less volume. They don’t need more coverage.
Maybe that means it’s not as robust, but given the choice between a company that randomly pulls the plug on your ops without advanced notice and (maybe?) being slightly more susceptible to jamming, the choice is clear. I’ll take an imperfect solution over no solution any day.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but:
Don’t give nazi’s money.
Don’t entrust your (or your nations) safety to people and organizations that operate in bad faith and do not treat that safety responsibly.
Do what works to see your needs met, not what you wish worked.
There’s a whole Ukraiunian Ignea album to your name on that.
Oh, you already knew! You just wanted to argue.
I’ll save you the effort, bud: You’re the smartest in the room, and we bow before you! We quiver in awe before your superior genitals.
…. Anyway.
Ignore the purple bars - they mean nothing today. I can’t speak for coverage or bandwidth, but second place has 6% the number of satellites of Starlink as of April.
Good insight. I actually blew the entire graphic off as soon as I saw it. The person posed a question to bait people into responding. My response didn’t advocate for anything in particular, but they still responded as if it had.
It’s also just a pointless stance to argue - number of satellites is irrelevant when the ‘biggest’ option is slowing your traffic down so you cannot operate.
Starlink is off the board. Regardless of the pros and cons of other providers, Starlink is non-viable.
If the next best isn’t capable of allowing you to operate at any time, being able to operate some of the time is still better. But you can bet Ukraine is looking at the most viable alternative right now and seeing if they pass the threshold required to meet their needs.
My question was rhetorical, as most people realized, and was simply pointing out that there are no alternatives to Starling at this moment.
The graphic I posted was meant to show it to those who didn’t knew it but were interested in learning.
You failed to understand both comments, even the simple graphic, and became offensive for no reason. You’re the worst that lemmy has to offer. Noisy, toxic and pointless.
Pointing things out in the form of a question is an interesting way to communicate.
Definitely my mistake for not understanding that to be an assertion.
I guess I just thought that no one actually thinks StarLink is the only operating satellite company out there. Your response seemed vague and out of place.
When you responded with an irrelevant infographic about planned satellite network buildout, it really seemed like you were engaging in disingenuous attempts to argue about nothing, so I cut it short.
But since we’re here — let me try again. I’m going to comment again on your original question. I sincerely hope you respond.