Elon Musk-controlled satellite internet provider Starlink has told Brazil’s telecom regulator Anatel it will not comply with a court order to block social media platform X in the country until its local accounts are unfrozen.

Anatel confirmed the information to Reuters on Monday after its head Carlos Baigorri told Globo TV it had received a note from Starlink, which has more than 200,000 customers in Brazil, and passed it onto Brazil’s top court.

Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes last week ordered all telecom providers in the country to shut down X, which is also owned by billionaire Musk, for lacking a legal representative in Brazil.

The move also led to the freezing of Starlink’s bank accounts in Brazil. Starlink is a unit of Musk-led rocket company SpaceX. The billionaire responded to the account block by calling Moraes a “dictator.”

    • @acosmichippo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      78
      edit-2
      17 days ago

      the problem is starlink is actually a good thing, providing decent internet access to places that can’t get it otherwise. I think the thing to target is the clear collusion going on between companies in ostensibly unrelated industries to pressure a government into reversing a penalty on one of them.

      • @MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        8417 days ago

        I think the thing to target is the clear collusion going on between companies in ostensibly unrelated industries to pressure a government into reversing a penalty on one of them.

        Specifically because they are controlled by the same asshat. This is the same exact type of shit he does with stock manipulation and why he was eventually forced to buy Twitter. All his wealth has been generated by cheating and exploitation. I hope Brazil drops the hammer.

        • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          517 days ago

          Compounding fines would be a nice touch. Then send in the lawyers to actually break the money free.

      • Todd Bonzalez
        link
        fedilink
        English
        5317 days ago

        Starlink is a ridiculous centralized solution to what should be solved by upgrading fiber networks.

        It’s a bandaid with limited usefulness after maybe a decade. Basically an exercise in generating space junk.

        • @Womble@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          4317 days ago

          In a lot of cases I would agree with you, but laying fiber optic cable through the Amazon in order to connect remote settlements is not feasible, starlink really does have a good use case there.

          • @halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2317 days ago

            And ocean communication.

            It’s amazingly clear none of these people have ever tried to use any of the existing Geostationary satellite data networks.

            They are slow as shit. Not just by modern standards, by any standards. HughesNet is one of the remaining satellite Internet providers.

            $50/mo gives you 50Mbps speeds, 100GB of “Priority Data”, whatever the fuck that is (probably your 50Mbps data, then it slows). And that price is only for a year, then it is $75/mo. They also love to tout a 30ms latency somehow, but that’s just a damned lie. Latency for a Geostationary satellite is around 500ms, or roughly the speed of light because that’s physics. So I have no idea where they think they’re getting 30ms, unless that’s only the additional latency they’re claiming AFTER it bounces off the satellite and reaches the ground to be routed to the internet on their end.

            • @A1kmm@lemmy.amxl.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              917 days ago

              Starlink is a constellation of low-earth orbit (LEO) satellites, not geostationary satellites. That means that the ground station (i.e. subscriber equipment) talks to one satellite as it comes into view, and over time that satellite moves across the sky, and they switch to another satellite. This means the latency is highly variable as the distance changes, but at its lowest is much lower than a geostationary satellite since it is far closer.

              • Redjard
                link
                fedilink
                English
                816 days ago

                I think they were talking about HughesNet the entire time. With the pricing, datacaps, and the latency lies. HughesNet does use geostationary satellites and has 600ms latency according to Wikipedia.

              • @chiliedogg@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                1517 days ago

                Because cruise ships are the only thing not on the mainland. Certainly no cargo ships, research vessels, island nations, or anything else.

                • @yetAnotherUser@discuss.tchncs.de
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  217 days ago

                  Ships should suffice with a 100 kB/s connection which already existed before Starlink. You don’t usually need to send tons of data.

                  Additionally, Starlink is currently only offered to a single island nation without submarine fibre-optic cable, the Easter Islands. Although they may get submarine fibre somewhere after 2026 anyways because that is when a new cable will be laid closeby.

              • @halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                417 days ago

                Those speeds would be under ideal conditions, like sitting on land on a clear day with no weather.

                It’s not about the raw speed honestly, but the machine latency and stability of the signal. Traditional GEO satellites need a pretty steady platform to maintain connection. The mobile capable dishes are usually less capable than fixed position ones because they need to be less directional to maintain a signal while moving. But in say rougher seas, the movement will be vastly different than a boat just sitting on a lake.

                Starlink can compensate for this better because it’s designed to utilize multiple lower satellites simultaneously in view and a more omni-directional dish, alongside a signal that only needs to go to LEO. The difference between LEO and GEO or its is absolutely massive. The Starlink satellite constellation operates between 1/30 and 1/105 the distance of traditional GEO satellites. This means a latency of 25-35ms since they are so much lower. Lower latency will mean lower packet loss from instability which means higher throughout.

                For a real world use case, look at the SpaceX landing ships. They originally used traditional GEO satellites for those video streams, and the motion and vibration from the rocket getting near caused total signal loss. Often signal loss for a white a while after the lending was over because the ship was still moving too much. After they switched to Starlink, I think I can remember maybe twice at the beginning where the signal cut for a second or so, and once they had a few launches to provide more consistent coverage and satellite redundancy, I can’t even remember the last time we lost a signal during a landing.

                Real time video streams are essentially the worst use case for traditional satellite communication, and the differences between the network types of night and day.

          • Todd Bonzalez
            link
            fedilink
            English
            316 days ago

            Upgrade what? There is no fiber cross crossing Brazil

            Congratulations on answering your own question. Now calm down.

      • @NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        49
        edit-2
        17 days ago

        Putting up tens of thousands of extra objects into orbit that we now have to track and worry about collisions with other satellites is not a good thing.

        • enkers
          link
          fedilink
          English
          22
          edit-2
          17 days ago

          Not to mention that their orbits degrades over time so they have to be continually replenished. That comes at a huge cost which is highly subsidized by US tax payers.

          • partial_accumen
            link
            fedilink
            English
            26
            edit-2
            17 days ago

            That comes at a huge cost which is highly subsidized by US tax payers.

            Hang on. Which subsidy are you saying Starlink is getting that is highly subsidized by US taxpayers? Starlink got rejected for the $900m broadband subsidy.

            Note for clarity: Musk is an asshat.

            • enkers
              link
              fedilink
              English
              19
              edit-2
              17 days ago

              That was indeed what I was thinking of. I didn’t realize it was rejected. My bad, and thanks for the letting me know!

              • partial_accumen
                link
                fedilink
                English
                216 days ago

                The rockets that launch those satellites were developed using tax dollars.

                Are you referring to the NASA contracts for Dragon cargo delivery flights to the ISS?

        • @De_Narm@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1617 days ago

          Also, each satelite that burns up upon re-entry isn’t just gone - it still introduces vaporized materials into the upper atmosphere.

          Iirc they are harming the ozone layer.

      • @Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1217 days ago

        Can it be a good thing while it’s controlled by someone so clearly looking to exploit it’s influence for personal gain?

      • @Bridger@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2017 days ago

        Starlink’s bank accounts are frozen. Musk loves money more than providing service. I doubt he’ll provide the service for free.

      • @Moonrise2473@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        417 days ago

        Need to ship receivers to customers and those could be seized at customs if they’re illegal radio equipment.

        Then, new customers would need a VPN to sign up, and old customers might have trouble renewing with local payment methods