How does the DOD find it acceptable that a corporation is actively profiting from providing infrastructure to the enemy.
Probably because they are not officially the enemy. Hopefully sanctions will be amended to fix this.
this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
461 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
59196 readers
2512 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
After explicitly denying the service to an ally.
In a shocking twist, it turns out the DOD is owned by the corporations.
3 defense contractors in a trenchcoat.
Nationalize SpaceX for national security.
Take over the NOC and see what's going on, and start charging people with insurrection. They can GPS restrict every damn dish if they want to, there's no excuse for this. They won't let me move my dish half a mile without shutting it down, why is there a question here?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
It is alarming that Russia may be obtaining and using your technology to coordinate attacks against Ukrainian troops in illegally occupied regions in Eastern and Southern Ukraine, potentially in violation of US sanctions and export controls," Raskin and Garcia wrote.
Rankin and Garcia say that "Ukrainian intelligence officials assert that Russian forces have obtained Starlink terminals illegally through third-party actors via neighboring countries."
However, according to Ukraine, the misuse of Starlink terminals is "systemic," raising additional questions about the efficacy of your company's safeguards and compliance with US sanctions and export controls.
A March 2023 notice issued by those three US government agencies said that companies' "compliance programs should include controls tailored to the risks the business faces, such as diversion by third-party intermediaries."
The letter asked what SpaceX has done "to eliminate existing or potential security vulnerabilities that actors, such as Russia, may exploit to illicitly acquire, trade or use Starlink terminals, including in Russian-occupied regions in Ukraine."
The lawmakers also asked for details on how SpaceX and its subsidiaries "work with the Departments of Justice, Commerce, and/or the Treasury to prevent illicit acquisition, trade, or use of satellite terminals, including in Russian-occupied territories in Ukraine."
The original article contains 801 words, the summary contains 197 words. Saved 75%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!