News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:SpaceX hits two milestones in plan for low-latency satell... by mastax on Wednesday February 14, 2018 @06:31PM (#16380588)
> Are SpaceX going to breach the great firewall?

I don't know much of anything about international law, but I don't think that would ever work. Countries have sovereignty over their airwaves. If they require a permit to broadcast you need a permit to broadcast, even if the signal is coming from space. Countries have sovereignty over business conducted in their territory. China can just say that SpaceX's internet service is illegal. How should SpaceX get their illegal money out of China? What to they do with the (still illegal) money once it is out of China? How does SpaceX get ground stations for an illegal internet service into China?

Maybe SpaceX decides to give away free internet in China as a humanitarian publicity stunt, and flaunt the Chinese Government. They could publish the design for the base station and hope that sophisticated dissidents manufacture them. Now China uses every diplomatic avenue available to try to stop this: the UN, the ITU, espionage, treaties, whatever. Is the US going to cover for SpaceX? Will the state department decide to burn all of their bridges to the largest country on earth for the benefit of a publicity stunt? If China shot down SpaceX satellites, would they be justified in the eyes of the international community?

Re:SpaceX hits two milestones in plan for low-latency satell... by walrus01 on Wednesday February 14, 2018 @08:18PM (#16381175)
SpaceX probably could try to do this, but would be faced with a few challenges. As a two way satellite engineer, just off the top of my head:

a) smuggling/importing the rooftop terminal equipment into china

b) if not smuggling, finding a way to use greymarket resources to manufacture the terminals in China

c) making it small enough and easy enough to hide that it can't be obviously spotted/removed from a roof. Google a bit about Iran's periodic and mostly unsuccessful forcible removals of Ku-band TVRO (Rx only) TV satellite dishes for an example. China has a lot more manpower and police-state type resources to deploy to hunt down antennas. If you are faced with the problem of requiring clear unobstructed line of sight to as much of the sky as possible, while also hiding it, you have a technical problem.

d) It is not hard for a police state like China to train relatively unskilled enforcers to use directional spectrum analyzers to hunt down unauthorized rooftop Tx, anywhere from 6 GHz to 80 GHz.

Re:SpaceX hits two milestones in plan for low-latency satell... by spuz on Thursday February 15, 2018 @08:44AM (#16383888)
Thanks, this is the kind of insight I was hoping for. You answered lots of questions I wouldn't think to ask.
Re:SpaceX hits two milestones in plan for low-latency satell... by oh_sigh on Wednesday February 14, 2018 @07:05PM (#16380805)
> Countries have sovereignty over their airwaves.

Is this true? Isn't, say, a San Diego FM station violating the sovereignty of Mexico then?

Re:SpaceX hits two milestones in plan for low-latency satell... by a_t48 on Wednesday February 14, 2018 @07:12PM (#16380844)
I would hazard a guess that there's treaties for this sort of thing.
Re:SpaceX hits two milestones in plan for low-latency satell... by walrus01 on Wednesday February 14, 2018 @07:51PM (#16381030)
The US has treaties with Canada and Mexico for this. Both for AM/FM radio and for things like FCC part 47 and part 101 licensed microwave links.