Elon Musk's Starlink Expands Across White House Complex(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
Elon Musk's Starlink Expands Across White House Complex
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/17/us/politics/elon-musk-starlink-white-house.html
20 comments
I mean, I think the simplest explanation is that it's another kickback to Musk, tbh. Donald's Razor: "Never attribute to traitorous malice that which is adequately explained by corrupt malice."
Both of those things can be true at the same time.
They say it’s been donated. Does that make the simplest explanation more like:
This is a special line for Trump and Musk to feel secure from eavesdropping?
This is a special line for Trump and Musk to feel secure from eavesdropping?
More likely a special line for Musk and Thiel to keep an eye on Trump and anyone at the White House
That would justify the major objection coming from Secret Service, for sure. So we’re left wondering: how did Musk describe this to Trump? Was someone else in the room to offer an alternative, more patriotic view?
What possible use could this have for a place that has to have some of the best connectivity on the planet?
Easier to exfiltrate data without being noticed?
What possible use could Trump—who doesn't drive—have for a Tesla?
I'm trying to figure out why would someone need or want to install Starlink in a place that's certainly very well connected with fiber, and the only things I can think off is that it's either a commercial / justification for why they are changing the legislation to allow Starlink to receive tens of billions of government $ to provide internet in rural areas, or some (not so wild anymore) conspiracy theories.
Personal anecdote:
A relative of mine has his own business that covers all sorts of IT stuff.
He has a starlink running permanently as a backup because a couple of times a year his fiber experiences some downtime.
Terrestrial wireless would be faster, more reliable, and less expensive. Near the White House, it could link between multiple other government building and have no recurring expense. Starlink is worse, slower, and more expensive.
Starlink still seems like an odd choice, since having access to fiber implies 5g is available, too, and the latter costs half as much and is faster/lower-latency. Maybe it makes sense as a backup for the backup, though.
Sounds like good technology / business practice?
I run two independent (Technology + Provider wise) internet links for our house, as both my SO and myself are permanently working from home.
I run two independent (Technology + Provider wise) internet links for our house, as both my SO and myself are permanently working from home.
I think it’s good to have redundancy. It reminds me of President Jimmy Carter putting solar panels on the White House.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_at_the_White_House
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power_at_the_White_House
Am I supposed to believe that the white house doesn't already have two (or more, likely) independent fiber links?
[deleted]
[deleted]
Hi, I'm the guy who used to oversee the federal government's agency IT telecommunications contracts. This is extremely bad. There is absolutely no need for this. Not only is it a huge security exposure, but the simplest explanation for this is that it is meant to be a security exposure.