Comment by owenthejumper
5 days ago
In a normal world, this would be treason by an illegal immigrant to the US. In today's world it's a blip in news. Sad state of affairs :(
Europe will absolutely build alternatives. They'll bicker for some time, but in the end, they build. To Americans it looks like they don't but they do. Quality of life, life expectancy, and many factors have outpaced US in the last few years. The tech industry in the US is still important, but the importance will start waning soon.
I'm pro Ukraine but treason has a specific definition in the us Constitution, so until Congress declares Russia an "enemy" and not just an "adversary" it's not treason. Would be very strange to have ISS missions and rideshare agreements with an "enemy".
In the same way Ukraine isn't actually involved in a war with Russia, it is merely a "special military operation".
I guess they're not trying too hard to find proof that Russia is supplying Iran with intelligence and Shahed drones.
OK but that's not an act of war any more than supplying Ukraine with intelligence and drones is an act of war against Russia. Words mean things, especially and most of all in legal settings.
2 replies →
> I guess they're not trying too hard to find proof that Russia is supplying Iran with intelligence and Shahed drones.
You mean Iran supplying Russia with drones.
2 replies →
America isn't in a legally declared war with Iran either. Hasn't been in one since WW2. No treason convictions since then have occurred.
As far as I'm aware, the US hasn't declared war on Iran either.
The ally of a special military operation adversary surely cannot be my enemy. /s
Sure, letter of the law vs. spirit of the law.
That's just what he's brazen enough to do in public.
I'm convinced that if Elon were actually investigated, we'd see enough for him to hang, side by side with the rest of his cohort (POTUS included).
But absolutely, let's assert that the public knowledge that we currently possess isn't quite sufficient to prosecute Elon for treason as defined in the US Constitution, a famously immutable document, which, among other things, captures the nuances of hybrid warfare in perfect clarity.
This is a very reasonable rebuttal to the statement that. if things were normal, Elon would hang for treason.
Now if you think about it, it's almost as if Russia deliberately acts just below the threshold of what constitutes an act of war in any particular state to allow their assets to be, say, hanged for treason. Almost as if Russia's top general, Gerasimov, published a widely cited paper over a decade ago where blurring the line between war and peace was specifically outlined as the modern way of waging war[1], which Russia has successfully been applying since 2014 at the very least.
But let that not cloud our judgment.
Our 250 year old document has a specific definition which means, alas, that our hands (but not Elon's) are tied, and whatever he does is, plainly and simply, NOT treason.
[1] https://www.armyupress.army.mil/portals/7/military-review/ar...
It would be almost certainly lethal injection, not hanging
3 replies →
Not really. If the US suddenly declared Russia as an enemy it would not be good for the world. And not just because the ISS collab would end.
6 replies →
Musk could be tried under espionage acts, Logan act and foreign agents act. Trump presumably is immune thanks to Roberts.
If he's doing this at an urging of an enemy of the US, Putin, how could that not be treason?
He put American lives in direct risk in Kyiv, at the bidding of a foreign enemy, while having control of massive amount of crucial infrastructure.
I'm not sure how you can see that as anything except treason. Any plebe employee doing it would be up for treason, especially an employee that had been in direct contact with Putin or other foreign agents, like Musk has been.
"enemy"
Why are we sending enemy astronauts up to the ISS? Why do we trust an enemy country to safely take our astronauts up to the ISS?
Common use != legal use. We can regard it as treason without the law doing so, because we can regard Putin as an enemy of the US without the law doing so.
That said, I'm not saying what position the law supports. I never studied law, let alone American law.
1 reply →
The US economy, the side of it that serves the plebs, runs on trucking, which run on diesel. If you ask these same plebs, people who don't read Vanity Fair, who they think their nation's enemies are or what people or groups they feel threatened by, you might be severely disappointed who isn't near the top of the list.
The diesel shortage has been staved off, in part by temporarily forgiving use of forms of diesel that are normally illegal.
It's not a good time for America to have Zelensky's guys drone-bombing Russia's petroleum and diesel ports/terminals.
I overheard a colleague say the other day that if Zelensky's guys attack another petroleum/diesel port, that Trump should bomb Zelensky. From what I'm reading and hearing, the middle tier of the "line go up plz" crowd don't find that unreasonable.
At this point, this shit show architected by Victoria Noodleman, and implemented in part by players like Lindsey Graham and John McCain, is just a huge waste of resources.
The only thing that has come out of this is removing the bulk of the Ukrainian population from Ukraine. Twenty years from now, a completely different people will occupy that land.
2 replies →
> In a normal world, this would be treason by an illegal immigrant to the US.
As other comments have stated, this is not treason. However, a private individual/citizen should not have the ability to dictate national security policy:
* https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/its-time-to-take-starlink...
Would you say the same thing about Anthropic defining the terms of use of its technology to the military?
> Would you say the same thing about Anthropic defining the terms of use of its technology to the military?
No. With Anthropic (AIUI) the terms of use were agreed to beforehand. With Starlink things were changed suddenly on a whim.
If Starlink doesn't want to be involved with military operations, then put that in the ToS, and Ukraine cannot / will not use it for that.
But Starlink agreed to the use — especially with defence-only operations which were part of the agreement, and what was being done — and suddenly yanking capabilities basically means aiding the murder of civilians.
If Anthropic's business was as important to national security then it should be nationalized. As should SpaceX.
1 reply →
"This is not treason" is a false statement.
The true statement is: "This is not considered treason in the current legal framework of the US".
Which is exactly the point the OP is making: it is not normal.
What Russia is waging against the US is war according to their own doctrinal documents[1].
If we're stupid enough to accept this as peace while they make one gain after another, it's not a basis for saying that Elon's meddling isn't treason.
This should be a wake-up call.
The world has changed. War has changed. And Russia was brazen enough to publish the new rules.
I hope at least people here have the clarity of mind to read them and understand the implications, beyond "the Constitution uses a particular wording to define treason".
[1] https://www.armyupress.army.mil/portals/7/military-review/ar...
[dead]
We’re also fighting a war for another country and the president’s son in law is brokering deals with foreign nations for personal gain. I don’t think treason is being prosecuted anymore.
>Strictly speaking, according to the Constitution, we aren’t officially at war because only Congress has the power to declare war. https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty-research/policy-topics/i...
He's following Putin I think, it's a special military thingy.
It is for you and I, not for those in power.
There is already the European Eutelsat alternative to Starlink, with 600 satellites currently deployed (vs Starlink's 6000). They provide satellite internet, and video, both for consumer, business and military/government use.
Apparently Ukraine does use already use Eutelsat in addition to Starlink, but it's utility is limited due to number of satellites and bandwidth, as well as the current weight of terminals (presumably an issue for weapons-borne receivers).
Starlink has over 10000 satellites. The goal of Eutelsat is 1000 by 2030. Starlink launched 3000 satellites in 2025 alone. Whether one satellite from Eutelsat provide the same service as one from Starlink, I don't know but it would be relevant.
I wish Eutelsat success, but the scale of funding is completely different.
Getting hung up on numbers isn't really correct. Much more goes into it - altitudes, satellite capabilities, target customers, etc. Large numbers is one approach but it is not the only one.
1 reply →
Ukraine and even Europe don't need global coverage though. The Russian system that they're testing at the moment is geostationary satellites over Ukraine.
3 replies →
> In a normal world, this would be treason by an illegal immigrant to the US.
Not a lawyer, but wouldn't an illegal immigrant owe no allegiance to breach and therefore couldn't commit treason?
Not after naturalization
Naturalized immigrants are legal by definition
2 replies →
If they were illegal immigrants, isn't naturalization void?
3 replies →
Europe would have to not only build the satellites, but launch them, which rocket program do you think exists in Europe that could do that? The pace of Ariane launches could not accelerate quickly enough
Ariane can't, but then again neither could any non-SpaceX American launch provider.
What's the total funding needed to get a Falcon 9 equivalent, given it's demonstrably possible? Likely about the same as SpaceX actually spent in time and money?
Is it actually possible for Europeans to build a company capable of deploying capital as efficiently as SpaceX? Due to cultural and regulatory factors I suspect they would need 2-3 times as much funding to accomplish the same thing. Where would that capital come from? Private EU capital markets are still too thin. Are governments willing to step up?
3 replies →
Baffled by this framing and that of the article, where Europe is sitting on its hands not building a copy of starlink because it’s easier to just use Elon’s.
The reality is nobody had that vision and built the rocket company first to make it happen. Even after seeing the trick done it isn’t likely to be replicated by Europe or a European company within 30 years.
Iceye and Nokia are building a European replacement, going live in 2028. https://www.reuters.com/business/nokia-iceye-make-satellite-...
> They'll bicker for some time, but in the end, they build. To Americans it looks like they don't but they do
There's also the revised version of that poem that explains that while Casey was at the bat, his uncle Arnold was in the stands taking bets ...
It's not treason if it was a White House decision. https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/order-limit-starshield-...
That article is 9 days old.
It's currently relevant.
1 reply →
[dead]
Europe can send long range strike weapons already. Ukraine has been begging them on week 1.
Also could stop sending $250b to Russia.
Trump and Musk are both pointing the finger at each other over this. Maybe they were both for it before they found out how bad it would play with (potentially) Republican voters right before the midterms. Now they're both against it and it's the other guy's fault, as per usual with these two.
What matters is that the U.S. has a leader who is behaving as though he's a Russian agent and allows military assets like Starlink to be controlled by private citizens with zero oversight. If either of these guys can turn off an asset like Starlink on a completely undocumented whim, there's a problem.
It was the case maybe 50 years ago, but there are no systemic factors that support strong building/innovation/ entrepreneurial processes anymore. Maybe with some occasional exceptions.
Have you seen what crap cars even german manufacturers produce lately?
German car quality is a mark of how optimised manufacturers have got for building cars that work within 2 terms of 4 year finance plans.
You'd be foolish to think it correlates to any sense of innovation or entrepreneurialism.
OK, so why are German auto manufacturers no longer capable of building globally competitive products? They seem to have just given up and are now following a managed decline process with no plan for growth.
13 replies →
This is the case throughout the West, including the US. A generation ago the powers at be decided they would invest in China for this.
No. America has major, yet temporary problems that follow global trends mostly (i.e. ~ same shit happens everywhere).
But Europe uniquely eradicates systemic innovation process regardless of current downturn. By completely ignoring its needs and diving deeper and deeper into their weird mix of socialism and government/old money controlled monopolism.
[dead]
[flagged]
This propaganda does not work on HN
Especially under Trump (but even before) Europe has contributed more to Ukraine
The war is about Putin's desire for Russian Empire and has nothing to do with NATO, that's just what they say when they speak in English. Listen to what they say in Russian. Listen to the revisionist history.
Listen to Timothy Miller.
Are you saying that the Eastward expansion of NATO or inclusion of Ukraine into NATO were none of the issues when the current war broke out?
2 replies →
That is misinformation. Since Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014 (and again in 2022), Europe has paid far more to Russia for fossil fuels than they ever contributed to Ukraine. I think that both the USA and Europe should do more to support Ukraine but so far contributions from both parties have been the bare minimum to keep Ukraine from being defeated. Not enough to enable them to actually win.
Let's be clear what's really going on here. Russia has a GDP about the same as Italy. The EU and NATO countries could contribute far more to Ukraine but they choose not to. Instead it's business as usual. The welfare states continue uninterrupted and they haven't asked their citizens to sacrifice anything. They continue buying Russian fuel instead of asking people to put on a sweater.
3 replies →
[flagged]
This is false / misleading. Ukraine's use of Starshield runs on normal Starlink infrastructure and is administered by SpaceX. From the WSJ: https://archive.is/1pzLc
> What is Starshield?
> Starshield is SpaceX’s more secure satellite service for governments. It has two variants: a custom-built satellite network SpaceX launched for the Pentagon; and a lower-tier, military-grade service that connects to commercial Starlink satellites. The more basic service offers encryption features, and allows the equipment to travel at faster speeds than those on a commercial Starlink account.
> What service does Ukraine use?
> Ukraine is using the more basic Starshield service, which uses Starlink’s equipment. Ukraine’s weapons—attack drones, interceptors and uncrewed boats—need to travel at high speeds to intercept Russian Shahed-type drones, bomb the Russian army’s logistics and stall Russia’s invasion force. Many of those drone missions are now failing because of the speed limit imposed by SpaceX, according to the Ukrainian military.
There have been multiple reports that this was Musk's initiative.
https://www.wsj.com/world/ukraine-starlink-elon-musk-trump-d...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/10/16/musk-appro...
From anonymous source...
1 reply →
I don’t get your comment. It is either willfully ignorant, naive, or intentionally misleading. The comment has to be one of those three given the actual facts.
I believe they were repeating what Musk originally claimed. Of course believing anything that Musk says increasing seems naive.
It's neither. I don't agree with Musk's politics. But I do see where this explanation is plausible. When a US military grade service is made available to non-allied countries (Ukraine is not a part of NATO), there are always end user restrictions that the US Government will maintain control over. This is not something left to Musk. Someone from the department of state or department of defense (well, war at the moment) will control it. Those restrictions are subject to executive orders and changes in US law. This is why countries that don't align with the US (e.g. India) don't want to buy advanced US tech. It is better to have a sub-optimal system without end user restrictions instead of a cutting edge one with too many of them.
Trump calling Musk to not do it is just reality theater. Someone from the executive chain of command ordered this.
Remember the Iran fiasco has diesel prices being sky high. There's an election around the corner and Russian oil is needed to stabilize the prices. It is Ukraine's right to strike Russian oil assets, but if they're using US military tech, US interests will control how it is used.
FWIW, the WSJ is reporting that Trump called Musk to ask him to lift restrictions on "a military grade version of Starlink", which is rather incredible - an admission by the commander-in-chief that a civilian is controlling US military infrastructure.
https://www.wsj.com/world/trump-called-musk-and-asked-him-to...
Of course from Europe/Ukraine's POV, it doesn't make much difference whether it was Musk or Trump/US military that did it. What matters is that a former ally and NATO partner can not be trusted, and eliminating American technological and defense dependence is therefore critical for regional security.
Ukraine is not a part of NATO.
1 reply →
These days, the walls between billionaires, Fox hosts and the Military seem paper thin, if there are any.
The USA became a full-fledged oligarchy right around the time conservatives pushed "Citizens United" on us. We were already headed that way for a while, but it really sealed the deal.
I think you're missing something really simple: IF you can touch the hardware, you own it. It doesn't matter the hostname on the satellite, Elon is culpable.
That’s not how it works. It’s like saying Lockheed operates the F35 but it doesn’t. Starshield provides the tech. US military has operational control - and you will be committing a crime if you so do anything without permission.
5 replies →
also, if you contribute $100Ms to the president you can do just about anything
we are to accept that nepotism is what makes america great again
[flagged]
Another mindless comment grouping all Europeans into the same bucket. Europe has incredibly poor countries where developers are paid pitance (within Europe) and then developed countries paying high salaries (relative to the cost of living).
If you are a software engineer doing a relatively good job, it really doesn't matter which country you live in Europe - you will have a comfortable life. That said, of course if you take a Romanian sweng salary and try and live in Switzerland off that - you might live a little less comfortably. Similarly if you take a Swiss sweng salary and live in Romania - you will live extremely comfortably.
Are Chinese paying competitive wages that there is chip fabrication, car manufacturing, AI models and what not?
Its just that West has been a unified block and no other reason.
Put harsh sanctions on US products and services, few difficult years later there would be a copy of everything US but made in Europe.
But that's a stupid thing to do. West as unified block is the best outcome for everyone but fascist won't understand that.
Oh they understand it. They just can’t pass up the opportunity to make massive amounts of money and increase their power by fragmenting western society
You don’t even have your own website to post this rant on.
How much are you being paid to innovate these comments?
You seem to be implying that innovation never happens in Europe? Is that correct?
No one claimed that innovation never happens in Europe. But there are reasons why Europe lags the USA in the pace of innovation, and is falling even further behind. Low wages for technologists is one reason. Other reasons include immature capital markets, excessive regulation (on things that don't even protect consumers or the environment), punitive bankruptcy laws, weak tertiary education systems, and risk-averse cultures. Some of those things they could fix very quickly if they wanted to adopt a growth agenda and stop being poor.
4 replies →
Lol. You think that wages in the US are competitive?
It's more about mindset and they're doomed to fail.
[flagged]
By whom? The people with > $100M net worth in Congress and their friends?
At which point do we realise politicians are not on our side?
Even though I think the comment you replied to is wildly over-simplifying how things work:
> By whom? The people with > $100M net worth in Congress and their friends?
That is how taxes have historically worked, so why object this time?
> At which point do we realise politicians are not on our side?
That's the argument for democracy. I would like democracy to be better than it is, but fundamentally, this is what it's for: getting the politicians on our side.
There are 6 Senate members (out of 100) and 7 House members (out of 435) with net worth > $100 million.
2 replies →
[dead]
> By whom?
By the relatively small group of armed leftist activists ready to use violence until their goal would be achieved.
1 reply →
What a thoughtful take. So the humans with $99M get to keep their wealth? And the guy with $101M ends up with ~$500k. Makes a lot of sense.
This comment reminded me yet again to always wait for HN comments to settle down after several hours because the first sentence is immediately wrong in multiple ways as people have pointed out such that I'm not sure why one would bother to believe the rest, even though I do have thoughts on how exactly Europe would build, or not.
The article is wrong, Elon didn't make the decision to limit Starshield. The US government did.
As to Europe "outpacing the US", that is a major LOL. Europe is facing many serious challenges (see the civil unrest in France and the UK for instance), and is also economically far behind.
We'll see how things unfold with the tech industry... ;-)