The terminals are reaching Russian forces via a complex network of black market sellers. This is despite the fact that Starlink devices are banned in the country. WSJ followed some of these sellers as they smuggled the terminals into Russia and even made sure deliveries got to the front lines. Reporting also indicates that some of the terminals were originally purchased on eBay.

This black market for Starlink terminals allegedly stretches beyond occupied Ukraine and into Sudan. Many of these Sudanese dealers are reselling units to the Rapid Support Forces, a paramilitary group that’s been accused of committing atrocities like ethnically motivated killings, targeted abuse of human rights activists, sexual violence and the burning of entire communities. WSJ notes that hundreds of terminals have found their way to members of the Rapid Support Forces.

Back in February, Elon Musk addressed earlier reports that Starlink terminals were being used by Russian soldiers in the war against Ukraine. “To the best of our knowledge, no Starlinks have been sold directly or indirectly to Russia,” he wrote on X. The Kremlin also denied the reports, according to Reuters. Despite these proclamations, WSJ says that “thousands of the white pizza-box-sized devices” have landed with “some American adversaries and accused war criminals.”

After those February reports, House Democrats have demanded that Musk take action, according to Business Insider, noting that Russian military use of the tech is “potentially in violation of US sanctions and export controls.” Starlink actually has the ability to disable individual terminals and each item includes geofencing technology that is supposed to prevent use in unauthorized countries, though it’s unclear if black market sellers can get around these hurdles.

House Democrats have demanded that Musk take action. He took steps to limit Ukraine’s use of the technology on the grounds that the terminals were never intended for use in military conflicts. According to his biography, Musk also blocked Ukraine’s use of Starlink near Crimea early in the conflict, ending the country’s plans for an attack on Russia’s naval fleet. Mykhailo Podolyak, an advisor to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, wrote on X that “civilians, children are being killed” as a result of Musk’s decision. He further dinged the billionaire by writing “this is the price of a cocktail of ignorance and a big ego.”

However, Musk fired back and said that Starlink was never active in the area near Crimea, so there was nothing to disable. He also said that the policy in question was decided upon before Ukraine’s planned attack on the naval fleet. Ukraine did lose access to more than 1,300 Starlink terminals in the early days of the conflict due to a payment issue. SpaceX reportedly charged Ukraine $2,500 per month to keep each unit operational, which ballooned to $3.25 million per month. This pricing aligns with the company’s high cost premium plan. It’s worth noting that SpaceX has donated more than 3,600 terminals to Ukraine.

SpaceX has yet to comment on the WSJ report regarding the blackmarket proliferation of Starlink terminals. We’ll update this post when it does.

This article contains affiliate links; if you click such a link and make a purchase, we may earn a commission.

The post Starlink terminals are reportedly being used by Russian forces in Ukraine appeared first on Best News.

Excerpts from Walter Isaacson’s Elon Musk biography were published by CNN last week, bringing to light new details about the billionaire’s decision to provide Ukraine with Starlink access amid the country’s war with Russia. According to the apparently incorrect excerpt CNN originally reported on, Musk told SpaceX workers to shut down Starlink access close to the Crimea coast to prevent a Ukrainian attack on Russia’s naval fleet.

The explosive claim was contested from the start. Musk, who has reportedly been in contact with Russian officials including President Vladimir Putin, is said to have been worried that the attack would lead to Russia retaliating with nuclear weapons. Ukrainian leaders seemingly begged Musk to reactivate Starlink access but drones that were approaching Russian warships “lost connectivity and washed ashore harmlessly,” CNN cites Isaacson as stating.

Musk’s alleged actions have had significant consequences for Ukraine, according to Mykhailo Podolyak, an advisor to President Volodymyr Zelensky. Podolyak wrote on X (the platform formerly known as Twitter that Musk owns) that in preventing drones from attacking the Russian ships, Musk enabled them to fire missiles at Ukrainian cities. “As a result, civilians, children are being killed,” Podolyak claimed. “This is the price of a cocktail of ignorance and big ego.”

According to Musk, however, Starlink was not active in those areas and so SpaceX had nothing to disable. “There was an emergency request from government authorities to activate Starlink all the way to Sevastopol. The obvious intent being to sink most of the Russian fleet at anchor,” he wrote on X. “If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation.”

Isaacson has since spoken publicly on X, saying that his initial statements were made because he thought the policy to not allow Starlink to be used for an attack was decided the night of the event. Musk now says, according to Isaacson, that “the policy had been implemented earlier, but the Ukrainians did not know it.”

Musk responded to Isaacson on X, thanking the author for his clarification, and adding that neither he nor anyone at SpaceX has promised Starlink coverage over Crimea. He added that the company’s “terms of service clearly prohibit Starlink for offensive military action.” According to Musk, “the onus is meaningfully different if I refused to act upon a request from Ukraine vs. made a deliberate change to Starlink to thwart Ukraine.”

Regardless of whether Starlink was secretly switched off or just secretly not switched on, Musk’s decision to refuse access undoubtedly affected the Ukraine-Russia conflict in one way or another, and not for the first time. A report late last year indicated that around 1,300 Starlink terminals Ukraine was using temporarily went offline due to a dispute over payments for the internet service.

Update September 12 9:10AM ET: This story has been updated since publish to include Simon & Schuster’s decision to edit future copies of Isaacson’s biography, Isaacson’s statement on X and Musk’s response to that statement.

The post Elon Musk biography will be edited to correct claim about Starlink access in Ukraine-Russia conflict appeared first on Best News.

The Ukraine Starlink incident was revealed in an Elon Musk biography by Walter Isaacson, via a disputed excerpt stating that Musk deactivated Starlink access close to the Crimean coast to prevent a Ukrainian attack on the fleet.

However, Musk said that Starlink was not active in those areas because of US sanctions on Russia, so SpaceX had nothing to disable. In a recent podcast, he said would have extended Starlink to Crimea if President Biden had ordered him to do so — but he didn't receive any such order.

Rather, Musk said he denied Ukraine's request to activate Starlink all the way to Sevastopol. "If I had agreed to their request, then SpaceX would be explicitly complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation," Musk wrote on X. (The disputed excerpt will be changed in future copies of the book.)

Nevertheless, senators questioned why the decision was made by Musk, rather than government officials. "Neither Elon Musk, nor any private citizen, can have the last word when it comes to US national security," Reed said. At the time of Ukraine's request, SpaceX received no US payments for its Ukraine Starlink operations, but it now has Pentagon funding.

The probe was announced just ahead of Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's visit to the US and meeting with President Biden, set for next week. On top of Starlink, SpaceX is a major US contractor, launching spy satellites for the Defense Department .

The post The US Senate wants answers over Starlink's Ukrainian satellite internet denial appeared first on Best News.

"The Ukrainian localization of Cyberpunk 2077 contains several remarks that could offend some Russian players," the studio said in a (Google translated) statement. "These remarks were not written by CD Projekt Red employees and do not represent our views. We are working to fix them and replace them in the next update. We apologize for this situation and are taking steps to ensure it does not happen again."

As originally reported by Zone of Games (via a Rock Paper Shotgun report) some dialog makes reference to Ukrainian resistance slogans. Elsewhere, graffiti suggests Crimea is still part of Ukraine in the Cyberpunk 2077 universe, following Russia's 2014 invasion. Other messages refer to citizen missile detection, COVID initiatives under President Zelensky, derogatory terms for Russians and more.

The Ukrainian localization was reportedly handled by the Ukrainian company SBT Localization, which also worked on Baldur's Gate 3, Darkest Dungeon and other titles. The changes were noticed by Russian and Ukrainian players, with multiple complaints registered on Steam and CD Projekt Red forums.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine, deemed unlawful by a majority of nations, has had a deleterious effect on Ukraine's game industry. Developer GSC Game World was forced to halt work on Stalker 2: Heart of Chornobyl after the aggressions forced it to relocate staff to Prague in order to help employees and their families "survive" the conflict, it said. Earlier this year, Ukraine sent letters to Sony, Microsoft and Valve, urging them to block the title Atomic Heart from their gaming platforms over concerns about Russian connections.

The post CD Projekt Red apologizes for anti-Russia references in Cyberpunk 2077 update appeared first on Best News.