this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)

Technology

78584 readers
4637 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Here’s the meat and potatoes of the article.

In 2023, they decided that the best way to deal with the problem was to secretly bolt a Starlink terminal to the "O-5 level weatherdeck" of a US warship.

They called the resulting Wi-Fi network "STINKY"—and when officers on the ship heard rumors and began asking questions, the leader of the scheme brazenly lied about it. Then, when exposed, she went so far as to make up fake Starlink usage reports suggesting that the system had only been accessed while in port, where cybersecurity and espionage concerns were lower.

Rather unsurprisingly, the story ends badly, with a full-on Navy investigation and court-martial.

[–] Maeve@kbin.earth 1 points 1 year ago

Still, the ambassador had nothing on senior enlisted crew members of the littoral combat ship USS Manchester, who didn't like the Navy's restriction of onboard Internet access. In 2023, they decided that the best way to deal with the problem was to secretly bolt a Starlink terminal to the "O-5 level weatherdeck" of a US warship. They called the resulting Wi-Fi network "STINKY"—and when officers on the ship heard rumors and began asking questions, the leader of the scheme brazenly lied about it. Then, when exposed, she went so far as to make up fake Starlink usage reports suggesting that the system had only been accessed while in port, where cybersecurity and espionage concerns were lower. Rather unsurprisingly, the story ends badly, with a full-on Navy investigation and court-martial. Still, for half a year, life aboard the Manchester must have been one hell of a ride.

But wait! There's more!

[–] KonalaKoala@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think the next step is to call for a criminal investigation into Elon Musk for installing spyware on a US Warship, and get him charged with espionage for the Russians or Chinese.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

I mean I don't like the guy either but let's stick to reality shall we?

Literally the second paragraph in the article

Still, the ambassador had nothing on senior enlisted crew members of the littoral combat ship USS Manchester, who didn't like the Navy's restriction of onboard Internet access. In 2023, they decided that the best way to deal with the problem was to secretly bolt a Starlink terminal to the "O-5 level weatherdeck" of a US warship.

So this is one thing he is not responsible for.

[–] Wispy2891@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i was wondering why would you choose such a stupid WiFi access point name, then I read that it was Elon musk that decided that the default starlink AP name has to be that stupid so people would change it

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 1 year ago

My ISP gave me an access point called CSP218891F Which I'm rather worried about.