-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Elon and Ukraine
- Thread starter nativewolf
- Start date
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Glad Elon finally cleared the air for people still trying to push the idea it was "free" (which from his own tweets it made it seem that way).
This whole thing actually was reported on a long while back. USAID (a US government organization) actually paid for quite a few terminals and service in the early stages of the war:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...nk-terminals-ukraine-contrary-spacexs-claims/
Ah, unpaid service. That's an opportunity cost. I'm losing $15 an hour typing this post because I could be out driving Uber instead.
Musk hasn't said what Starlink in Ukraine is costing SpaceX. He also didn't recognize the many accounts that apparently pay a monthly fee.
Musk hasn't said what Starlink in Ukraine is costing SpaceX. He also didn't recognize the many accounts that apparently pay a monthly fee.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
uh...that only makes sense if they're NOT providing the service.
Which, you may not be aware, they ARE. Which costs money. (So does the % of the HW others haven't paid for, which is also non-zero)
You mean besides where he is quoted saying, literally in the post above yours:
Elon Musk said:
So yes, other than explicitly saying what it's costing SpaceX, he hasn't said what it's costing SpaceX- good point!
I'm losing a couple hundred a day because my Model Y is not a robotaxi
Ukraine is a poor country and would have very little Starlink service without the war. Unpaid service against a fixed costs not incurred as a result of the war does not belong in Musk's claimed "loss". These are almost certainly not Starlink accounts that would have been opened and paid without the war. The fact that these accounts are open and not paid proves the exceptional nature.
Plus on the revenue side he has likely gained many customers, especially in eastern Europe, who would not have signed up without the war.
On the flip side, in the early days, Starlink may have lost some months of revenue due to world wide terminal shortage.
As usual he is willing to lie if he feels under pressure and calculates a net advantage.
Ukraine is a poor country and would have very little Starlink service without the war. Unpaid service against a fixed costs not incurred as a result of the war does not belong in Musk's claimed "loss". These are almost certainly not Starlink accounts that would have been opened and paid without the war. The fact that these accounts are open and not paid proves the exceptional nature.
Plus on the revenue side he has likely gained many customers, especially in eastern Europe, who would not have signed up without the war.
On the flip side, in the early days, Starlink may have lost some months of revenue due to world wide terminal shortage.
As usual he is willing to lie if he feels under pressure and calculates a net advantage.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
It's not a lie. You are saying WHOLESALE costs, and Elon is referring to RETAIL COSTS.
All those dishes would have been sold to someone else if they were not given to Ukraine. There is a backlog for service around the globe for Starlink. That's lost revenue, both from the gear, and the service. It's not like SpaceX just cranked the dish production to 11 and sent spare dishes to Ukraine.
Technically, both you and Elon are right, as you are approaching things from a different perspective, but what he states is universally more accepted from things like accounting perspectives. It's revenue that SpaceX would be receiving, right now, if those dishes had been shipped to paying clients on the back-order list.
EDIT - i.e. "opportunity cost" is probably the best accounting term to cover this, but I'm not an accountant and I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. And I'm only on my first cup of coffee.
Buckminster
Well-Known Member
mars_or_bust
Member
Very constructive. While I see the comment they make and you make I do not see the value of it for discussion. So based on your judgement no matter what they are saying, what are in your mind the 3 most likely outcomes in the case of Ukraine? If one does not prepare for the scenarios and cannot even discuss then, how can one take action now to reduce the impact, is this something for our ever so bright policiticans to discuss and decide for us instead as in Russia?
Edit: To note, there is a very big difference with the discussion of likely outcomes, to discussing overarching suggestions on how to peace could/should be reached in this case.
Last edited:
Yep I am shocked at those that think they can force a peace settlement as if Ukraine has no say.
Sacks options remind me of a remark attributed to Henry Kissinger (not someone I usually quote). He is reported to have said that during the Cold War his staff usually responded to a problem with three options 1 total capitulation to the USSR, 2 nuclear war or 3 whatever option was proposed by the staff member. I am mortified that Elon cannot see the limitations in the options advanced by Sacks let alone the failure to realize that any agreement with Putin is meaningless.
EfficientWatts
Member
To me I think one issue with what they are saying is that it's missing some nuance and consideration of the long-term. For example, with stalemates what if its stalemate but with the pre-2014 borders? That would be a very different situation from stalemate with the current borders; a ceasefire under either of those scenarios as a result would have very different acceptance. There also doesn't seem to be consideration as to the long-term sustainability of the war (and if one wanted to be neutral, you could look at both sides to see how long they can keep it up); by this I mean if its stalemate for x time but in that time one side capitulates then for the other side it would have been worth it.
Finally there's the human factor. I guess sometimes one needs to be really logic-based at some point, but the way they're coming across feels like they have no empathy for the situation at hand. It's so much easier to remain "neutral" when one is typing in the comforts of their own home away from the bombs and missiles.
But this is twitter, where trying to cram complex geopolitical situations into 160-character tweets results in things like this.
edit: also what they propose to me is with the understanding of rational actors. i cannot see what they propose working in a vacuum; they have to consider the realities of the people involved
Last edited:
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Others already pointed it out, the options are clearly false choices and what Russia wants people to think are the only choices available. The idea that Russia will get what they want by threatening nukes should not even be entertained at all. The western powers need to make clear the consequences to Russia so that it is not even a consideration.
The option not given (and Russia doesn't want people to think is possible) is pushing Russia out of Ukraine and then reaching a stalemate afterwards.
mars_or_bust
Member
"Tech bros" would be a better in this meme. Nuance and uncertainty are absent when your gut tells you the solution. Putin is likely just responding tactically as the war changes. His KGB expert skill set includes encouraging useful idiots.
If you really want to understand more about Russia than what these tech bros do, have a look at this very interesting lecture by a Finnish intelligence officer. Assuming you are not fluent in Finnish 
you need to put on English subtitles:
you need to put on English subtitles:
Last edited:
I choose Danes speaking english:If you really want to understand more about Russia than what these tech bros do, have a look at this very interesting lecture by a Finnish intelligence officer. Assuming you are not fluent in Finnish
Tiger
Active Member
I think Karen has more insight than most (). We miss her insights here on TMC:
View attachment 866199
It isn’t helping that Elon has been reading more right of center news sources lately. Normally that would mean hawkish news about a war, but in our topsy turvy world, left wing press is generally supportive of helping Ukraine win the war, while the right wing press/bloggers are generally against helping Ukraine. Personally, I blame Russian bots for this state of affairs
And yes, Karen is correct in saying Elon is paranoid about a nuclear war. That’s almost the entire point of SpaceX, as a protection mechanism against such as possibility, so of course the guy would have internalized the risks.
