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.”

    • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      The ASM-135A was fired once, and destroyed one test satellite. That satellite was the first and only satellite that mankind has destroyed with a missile.

      How many of those missiles does Brazil have? How fast can they produce them?

      The first operational batch of 60 Starlink satellites were launched 5 years ago. They now have well over 6000 aloft. Starlink has a demonstrated ability to produce and launch well over 100 satellites a month. They are launched in batches of 20 to 60, using any space available in any of SpaceX’s launch platforms. After launch, they are deployed and scattered throughout the sky. Brazil would need 60 missiles to bring down just one launch worth of satellites.

      They are planning a constellation of 12,000 satellites with 5-year lifespans. That’s 200 satellites a month. Can Brazil produce ASM-135A missiles fast enough to actually put a dent in the Starlink constellation?

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I’m sorry do you want them to fire it more often?

        And no, a 2 second Google search would show you they successfully used an SM-3 from a Navy ship as well. It would also tell you that Russia, India, and China have done it too. At least one of which is willing to sell their missiles.

        And as pointed out earlier, the answer is yes. A country can produce missiles fast enough.

        • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Not even the US military has the capability of shooting down 200 satellites a month. You really have no idea what you are talking about.

          • Maggoty@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yup, the military with an operating budget ten times Starlink and an ability to put it’s own satellites up could do nothing…

            That makes total sense.

            You are truly ridiculous.

            • Rivalarrival@lemmy.today
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              2 months ago

              You don’t seem to understand that it costs more to shoot down a satellite than it costs to launch one. It costs a lot more… Like, A whole lot more.

              Yup, the military with an operating budget ten times Starlink and an ability to put it’s own satellites up could do nothing…

              10 times, eh? That’s the budget you’re willing to give your anti-satellite program? 10 times is not even “a lot” more, let alone “a whole lot”.

              Each Starlink satellite costs about $300,000 to build and launch. That allows you $30 million per missile.

              The ASM-135 program had a per-unit cost of $380 million (2024 dollars).

              A budget 10 times as large isn’t going to cut it. You’re going to need a budget 127 times as large just to keep up.

              Brazil spent $22 billion on its military last year. That would buy them 57 missiles. But, let’s assume they can get the cost down to just 10 times (they can’t) and say it costs $30 million to down a satellite. Their entire military budget gets them 733 missiles per year.

              Again, Starlink can launch 60 in one launch. They have demonstrated an ability to launch over 1200 per year over a 5-year period. They are currently licensed for a constellation that will require production and launch of 2400 per year to sustain, and their next phase will require 8000 satellites per year.

              Not even the US military has the capability of shooting down satellites at anything close to these rates.

              • Maggoty@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                Which makes sense until you remember how the USG budgets procurement programs. The “unit cost” includes all the R&D divided by the number of widgets bought. The actual cost to build is generally far lower. But you just keep going, don’t let reality stop you from licking those billionaire boots!

                I forgot to also mention, countries have access to debt financing based on their GDP. Pissing off even a medium sized one is not a big brain move.