Hacker News Reader

Comment by Huh1337 | Hacker News Reader

iIf the war keeps going for a decade or longer, is SpaceX supposed to provide free service forever?

I don't want to take Musk's side here, but I don't think your take is entirely justified too. They donated a lot of hardware and free service for more than half a year. That's a lot, and I don't think donating that much means they have to keep donating forever.

View on HN

More relevant than that, the constellation is already deployed and serving the rest of the planet's surface. What is the cost (not in terms of lost revenue, but in terms of actual operational cost) of supporting Ukraine?

I'm assuming the cost is marginal. What he's concerned about is of becoming a military target, something he should have considered before he decided to become a military telco service provider.

What do you mean, not in terms of lost revenue? That's the cost a business and its shareholders care about. If you wanted to care only about operational costs, you should've put up your own constellation (e.g. government-tax funded).

Don't become Russia while fighting it.

Is it reasonable to be able to extract any revenue from Ukraine during a war? If not, then there is no loss of revenue. There is also no increased operational costs - the constellation is up there already, and replacements need to be sent up from time to time, regardless of whether they fly over Ukraine or not and regardless of whether they keep their radios on while doing so. The operating cost of a satellite constellation cannot be split by country served and stopping service to one country does not change the overall cost.

They may stop sending dishes though, but, apart from that, not much would change.

It is not reasonable to be able to extract services and hardware for any/no cost from a private business just because they built something that could be used.

AFAIK that'd only be possible in a limited way if the US itself was at war.

Why should SpaceX have to provide services and hardware for operational costs only, while Lockheed Martin, BAE, Raytheon, etc can keep their profits?

If there was no expectation of profit, why did they send it in the first place?

That's what a donation is. Corporations usually do it for indirect "profit" - PR mostly. But that doesn't mean they have to donate forever and in unlimited quantity now, does it?

I also donated money to Ukraine, do I have to keep sending more money because of it? No, I don't, that's entirely up to me, and my operational costs are nobody's business.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com