Russia Denies OneWeb Permission to Provide Satellite Internet
Despite launching its broadband satellites on Russian Soyuz rockets, OneWeb has been unable to obtain permission to provide its services in that country, the BBC reports.
OneWeb, whose headquarters are in the UK, was seeking to use a certain band of radio frequencies in Russia.
However, the State Commission for Radio Frequencies has denied it permission to do so.
OneWeb has been trying to get approval for its Russian operations since 2017….
In 2017, Russia’s communications authority Roskomnadzor blocked OneWeb from offering services in the country.
21 responses to “Russia Denies OneWeb Permission to Provide Satellite Internet”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Of course not, freedom and socialism never mix well.
Tom, you shouldn’t mix those terms indiscriminately in a country with public toilets. 🙂
I think you mean “freedom and corrupt dictatorships”, or something along those lines.
Economies of corrupt dictatorships are always a form of socialism. Historically denying economic freedoms almost always leads to denying political freedoms.
It’s not socialism they are moving to. Rather it’s textbook fascism. Google “Foundations of Geopolitics: The Geopolitical Future of Russia.” The Wikipedia entry isn’t bad.
Fascism is a form of socialism, it’s socialism with a strong nationalist element versus the international focus of traditional socialism and communism. Just review the writings of Benito Mussolini who developed the model, and Spain which followed it into the 1970’s. Why do you think that Russia is falling into it so easily? It’s because the only real difference from the communism they were used to is the nationalist element.
Yeah, that’s why all those white supremacists bring Nazi flags to their rallies. They’re socialists.
No, it’s because they’re racists and anti-semites. Which the Nazis also were, but the Italian Fascists and Spanish Falangists were not, at least in a doctrinal sense, any more than were the International Socialists and Communists. The socialist aspect of Nazism is not what attracts most U.S. white supremacists, though I did see an interview with the leader of some Klan faction or other some years ago in which he stated he was certainly not a capitalist as capitalism was, in his view, an invention of the Joooooz. Racists, I have found, don’t tend to concern themselves much with economic theory or even political philosophy. Go figure.
Funny thing, the idea of Nordic supremacy has strong roots in the United States during the Progressive Era, promoted by a book Madison Grant published during WWI.
http://eugenicsarchive.ca/d…
In the United States it led to the rebirth of the KKK, helped along by President Wilson, a friend of his, showing the movie “Birth of a Nation” at the White House. In Germany a political activist in prison read a translation and was inspired by it.
“After becoming Führer, Hitler wrote to Grant; thanking him for his momentous work, stating that the book was “his Bible” (Black, 2003, 259).”
It is really interesting seeing the real web of history. But I suspect if Doug finds us going off topic he will be displeased again.
Yes they are if they are true Nazi. As noted the term Nazi is short for National Socialists…
https://www.dictionary.com/…
“a member of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party, which controlled Germany from 1933 to 1945 under Adolf Hitler and advocated totalitarian government, territorial expansion, anti-Semitism, and Aryan supremacy, all these leading directly to World War II and the Holocaust.”
This is why I can’t understand why folks are down on North Korea, calling it a brutal dictatorship that has enslaved its people. In reality, it’s the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.
Because it is actually a democracy. The good citizens vote every few years for their representatives and their fearless leader even allows them to vote for more then one party. Like many you confuse voting and democracy with freedom. The problem with democracies is that it’s easy for a Dictator to turn them, with the simplistic model of popular majorities, into Dictatorships. Just excite the masses and then eliminate the competition from future elections on the grounds they are corrupt. It’s a long used model.
It’s why the Founding Fathers made the U.S. a Republic, with firewalls like the Electoral College, and appointed versus elected Senators, to prevent such “majority” rule by the passion of the masses.
Pity that the election of Senators was taken out of the hands of state legislatures by “Progressives” and tossed into the general election. And we would be well served if folks again voted for Electors who were not members of a party or pledged to a candidate. But at least we still have the three branches that are jealous of each other’s power working in our favor. And 50 states with their sovereign rights.
It’s why the Founding Fathers made the U.S. a Republic
North Korea is a republic as well. It’s right there in the name, just like your right wing, authoritarian socialists.
So, do you think that those white supremacists with the flags are Bernie supporters, not Trumpers? Is that your thesis? No, wait, he’s Jewish. Elizabeth Warren then. They are Warren brown shirts. That guy in El Paso today, it’s all about the Green New Deal with him.
I am sure Doug will delete this since it’s off topic, and he will consider it anti-Democrat, but I guess you didn’t get the memo… They have returned to their Democrat roots. 🙂
https://www.newsweek.com/tu…
Former KKK Leader David Duke Endorses Tulsi Gabbard 2020 Presidential Campaign, Says She’ll Put American Interests Over Israel By
Benjamin Fearnow
On 2/5/19 at 10:45 AM EST
“Duke, who was head of the Ku Klux Klan in the 1970s, posted a set of
tweets endorsing Gabbard’s 2020 presidential run and changed the
background of his Twitter account Monday, which boasts more than 50,000 followers. A “Tulsi Gabbard for President” banner features the banner tagline, “Finally a candidate who will actually put America First rather than Israel First!”
Tulsi Gabbard is a strange one. She’s not going anywhere though, currently polling at 1%.
We’re being civil. And the story is a largely political one. Mind you, if this were NASASpaceFlight.com we would already have been perma banned.
Yes, it is quite a field, with some real outliers, and they seem bent on trying to see who could be more outrageous in the debates so they trend on social media. But sadly I have yet to hear anything of substance beyond the hashtags.
It is sad how many blogs that claim to be “news outlets” fail the first test of good journalism, which is allowing and encouraging civil discourse. That is likely one of the reasons the nation is so polarized.
You are bringing up an important point here. A nation, agency, party, or program can call itself anything it likes and create the trappings thereof to match while actually being something else entirely. Thus the Republican/Democrat,, Liberal/Conservative, Socialist/Dictator, and other divides that shift and change with the times and prejudices. The Classic Liberal would be a Conservative today and any of the names can be used for freedom or brutal oppression. It s necessary to step back and observe the actions and results instead of the superficial veneers.
It applies to spaceflight when looking at various launch and spacecraft systems. The quality of the implemented idea can only be as good as the execution. The kludge that became SLS should have been about a 3-4 year development in the low single digit billions. Stock 4 segment boosters and standard tank modified for the changed load path. RS68 modified to handle thermal environment from SRB and flying well before Shuttle retirement. Instead, WTF.
It is much like the people that go to church to hear the Word of God. What percentage of them take notes during the sermon as if there will be a test that matters?.
My gut reaction is that they’re just holding out for bribes, but maybe they really don’t want every Russian subscribing to uncensored Internet. That’s a privilege reserved for the rich.
I read somewhere the the Russian government is looking to split off the Internet in Russia from the rest of the world entirely.
Yes, it is something that many dictatorships are seeking to do since they are unable to tolerate free minds and free information.
Incidentally the reason Article VI allows nations to regulate the activities of their own corporations in space is because Russian wanted the right to censor what communication satellites broadcast even outside of their borders. The U. S. refused to even consider it.
They already had a deal that gave them 49% of the profits generated by OneWeb service in Russia. I think that was as high as OneWeb was going to go.
Supposedly, the reason the OneWeb constellation does not incorporate any satellite cross-links – and, therefore, no inter-node routing – is that such a capability would put the whole constellation outside the reach of The Great Firewall of China and whatever the Russian equivalent is. Which it would. One wonders if the Chinese will follow suit. That would leave OneWeb with a network that is badly crippled in comparison to its main future competitors, all at the behest of two potential large customers, one of which has now done a Lucy-with-the-football to Greg Wyler’s Charlie Brown and the other of which might well follow suit. The only bright spot, I suppose, is that the Russian subsidiary outfit OneWeb set up that would have given 49% of its Russian operation’s profits to the Russians is now a dead letter.