Elon Musk ‘ordered Starlink shutdown' during Ukraine counterattack
The order led to a communications blackout while Ukrainian forces attempted to retake Kherson, a port city in southern Ukraine, in September 2022. The blackout ultimately caused the attack to fail.
Staff at the American tech firm deactivated at least 100 Starlink terminals after they received the instructions, according to Reuters, which spoke to three people familiar with the instruction.
While Ukraine was eventually able to reclaim Kherson, the decision was reported to have shocked Starlink employees and damaged Ukrainian trust in the technology. It enabled Musk to take 'the outcome of a war into his own hands', one of the three people said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Elon Musk uses emoji to hint at whether he thinks Trump will pardon Ghislaine Maxwell
Elon Musk is elevating claims online President Donald Trump may be preparing to pardon Ghislaine Maxwell, the associate of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein serving a 20-year federal sentence for conspiring to sexually abuse minors. The X-owning billionaire responded to a post on social media speculating about the political reaction to a potential pardon with a bullseye emoji. The original post, shared on X, claimed without evidence Maxwell will name a 'bunch of Democrats' and 'billionaires' as alleged Epstein clients, reaffirm the president's claims he did 'nothing wrong' during his documented friendship with Epstein, earning praise and a pardon along the way from Trump and MAGA for 'taking down the pedophiles' and 'telling the truth.' Since his bitter public split this summer with the White House, Musk has continued to allege, without providing proof, that Trump's presence in the so-called Epstein files is the reason the administration hasn't done more to honor its pledge to release information about the sex offender, who died in prison in 2019 while awaiting a sex trafficking trial. Speaking to reporters Monday, the president remained noncommittal about a pardon for Maxwell. 'Well, I'm allowed to give her a pardon, but nobody's approached me with it. Nobody's asked me about it,' he said. 'It's in the news – that aspect of it – but right now, it would be inappropriate to talk about it.' Maxwell's lawyers have been pushing to overturn her sentence at the Supreme Court, as well as appealing to Trump directly to intervene. 'We are appealing not only to the Supreme Court but to the president himself to recognize how profoundly unjust it is to scapegoat Ghislaine Maxwell for Epstein's crimes, especially when the government promised she would not be prosecuted,' Maxwell's attorney David Oscar Markus said in a statement on Monday about her appeal, which claims a previous non-prosecution agreement against Epstein should have also covered Maxwell. Markus has said he hopes that in regards to a potential pardon for Maxwell, Trump 'exercises that power in the right and just way." Maxwell, a former British socialite, has come to occupy a central role in the Epstein scandal plaguing the White House. In addition to her appeal at the Supreme Court, which the Justice Department opposes, Maxwell has been subpoenaed to testify before Congress and has sat for lengthy two-day meetings with the Deputy Attorney General. Her lawyer says Maxwell answered questions about 'about 100 different people ' with potential ties to the Epstein ring. Trump, who had a multi-year friendship with Epstein, has denied any wrongdoing. The president said he turned down a trip to Epstein's island abuses and said any mentions of his name in the so-called Epstein files could be the result of a Democratic ' hoax.' The president has also denied the validity of an explicit 2003 letter the Wall Street Journal reported Trump sent to Epstein for his 50th birthday, suing the publication and its corporate parents for defamation.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Grok's behavior isn't surprising – but we needn't settle for Musk's vision of the future
Elon Musk's chatbot Grok went on a hateful tirade earlier this month. The AI-powered account praised Hitler and posted a series of antisemitic comments over X, the digital platform also owned by Musk. The company's CEO, Linda Yaccarino, resigned the next day – though it's unclear whether her exit was directly related to the bot's rant. Posting on X, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) said Grok's behavior was 'irresponsible, dangerous and antisemitic'. xAI and the Grok account on X apologized for the incident, but days later released two chatbot 'companions', including an NSFW anime avatar available to children and a red panda character built to issue crude insults. Musk, meanwhile, chalked Grok's behavior up to it being 'too eager to please' and to responding to user-generated prompts. He said that the issue had been fixed. US politicians and platform advertisers said little, unlike past responses to similar incidents on X. Their silence and Musk's downplaying of the event speak louder than if we had heard significant public denunciations of the chatbot's actions from the powers that be. The relative quiet at the top is illustrative of two things. First, Grok's behavior is not surprising. At this point, it's predictable. Second, little about Grok, X, or xAI is likely to change in the short term. Grok sharing hateful content is Grok working precisely as it was designed to. Before the inflammatory chatbot was 'born' and launched on X in late 2023, Musk spoke about the need for AI alternatives to ChatGPT, which he deemed too politically correct. He has consistently referred to his anti-woke AI as 'TruthGPT'. Grok was deliberately built to be provocative – and 'to tell it like it is'. Grok is a fitting representation of the current culture of X and, more broadly, of social media and those at its reins. In the years since Musk purchased the internet platform, originally named Twitter, many have pointed out that it has devolved into a space rife with 'racism, misogyny, and lies'. It's also full of spam and scams. Shortly after the platform changed names and hands, most of the people behind content moderation and platform trust and safety were unceremoniously fired. Extremists and conspiracy theorists who had been deplatformed from Twitter were reinstated on X. In late 2024, the social media organization's first transparency report in years revealed serious problems with this new laissez-faire approach, including unsettling new instances of child exploitation. According to Musk, Grok was built to seek and reveal truths beyond the supposedly sanitized content seen on competing generative AI systems or prior social media platforms. But Grok what actually does is tell the 'truth' of the current hands-off, malignant, version of X, and of other social media platforms and tech leadership. Since Musk's acquisition of X – and the deregulation of content that followed – other platforms have followed suit. These shifts follow an executive order and other moves from the Trump administration aimed at curtailing 'censorship' through digital content moderation and, seemingly, the collaborative study of social media propaganda. Meanwhile, social media and AI companies are getting more cozy with Washington: xAI just signed a $200m contract with the Pentagon to provide 'Grok for government'. In past research, I've found that billionaires' and global political leaders' claims about striking down digital media censorship and preserving free speech online are often suspect at best. At worst, and closer to what I've encountered in my analyses, such claims are self-serving for those in power. These figures not only own a significant stake in the digital information environment; they have also purposefully and steadily cultivated the online space to be favorable to their goals and ideas. They seek to artificially control what trends, or what people see as popular behavior, and to make such statements or actions acceptable. But an online world where hate, spam and scams run rampant is only one version of what the internet and digital media technology can be. The opposite, as Musk and others in Silicon Valley and Washington have rightfully pointed out, is an overtly censored online space. China's internet and social media platforms, for instance, have been tightly controlled by the government since the outset. We do not have to accept either extreme. Empirical research and lessons from recent history show us that we can indeed have healthier, more connective, communication tools. We can have social media platforms that are sensibly and systematically moderated from both the top down and bottom up. But to have such spaces we must demand better, more thoughtful, content moderation and tool design from technologists and policymakers. We must also break big tech's stranglehold on innovation in the social media space. Too much power online is consolidated in the hands of too few companies and individuals. We need new digital platforms that genuinely center human rights, pluralism and democratic discourse, and better policies that allow for such an experience. Samuel Woolley is the author Manufacturing Consensus: Understanding Propaganda in the Era of Automation and Anonymity and co-author of Bots. He is a professor at the University of Pittsburgh
Telegraph
3 hours ago
- Telegraph
Vladimir Putin has finally run out of time
President Donald Trump has issued a new ultimatum to Russia. After expressing doubts about Vladimir Putin's willingness to achieve a ceasefire in Ukraine, Trump announced that he would cut his 50-day time deadline to just 10 to 12 days. If Russia does not pivot towards peace, punitive secondary tariffs and sanctions could take effect. A bold move, but is Putin likely to accede to Trump's demands? Russia's most recent conduct suggests no. On Saturday, it declared that it had occupied two villages in the central Ukrainian region of Dnipropetrovsk. Hours before Trump's statement, Russia launched a drone and missile barrage against Ukraine that forced Poland to scramble fighter jets over its airspace. Russian official rhetoric has been equally bellicose. In response to Trump's statement, former president Dmitry Medvedev warned that the US was taking a step towards war with Russia. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has declared that 'Russia is fighting alone against the entire West'. No new peace negotiations with Ukraine have been scheduled and the most recent talks in Istanbul lasted less than an hour. But Putin's determination to call Trump's bluff is a dangerous miscalculation. He appears to have predicted that Trump would withdraw military support for Ukraine upon taking office and hand Russia a blank cheque for further aggression, but these assumptions were mistaken. Trump has now earmarked Russia as the sole obstruction to peace in Ukraine and is devising a robust deterrence policy. Much like his predecessor Joe Biden, Trump has supported the provision of American military equipment to Ukraine. The key distinction is that these arms will be purchased by America's Nato allies. Due to reforms to its debt brake spending cap, Germany is slated to purchase billions of dollars of US-made weapons for Ukraine. Norway has doubled its aid pledge to Ukraine and has promised a Patriot air defence system to Kyiv. Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte says that Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Britain, the Netherlands and Canada are also willing to purchase US-made weapons for Ukraine. Trump has paired this policy with fervent support for Europe's own rearmament. During his press conference at last month's Nato summit in The Hague, Trump hailed the alliance's decision to increase its defence spending target to 5 per cent of GDP as a 'big win' for Western civilisation. Trump's new trade deal with the European Union (EU) commits the bloc to buying billions of dollars in new military equipment. Once again, Russian aggression aimed at thwarting Nato has unintentionally resulted in the alliance's strengthening. Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea triggered a sustained military build-up on Nato's eastern flank and the 2022 invasion of Ukraine encouraged neutral Finland and Sweden to join the alliance. Trump's rhetoric and actions are taking this trend to new heights. The intensification of US economic pressure on Russia would also have severe adverse consequences for Putin's war machine. While the EU has taken action against Russia's shadow oil tanker fleet and Chinese banks that enable the war effort, these sanctions have lagged Russia's efforts to get around them. If the US imposes sweeping secondary tariffs on all customers of Russia's energy industry and closes sectoral sanction loopholes, the macroeconomic shock is likely to be potent. Even though the Russian central bank recently slashed interest rates from 20 to 18 per cent, it warned that 'pro-inflationary risks prevail over disinflationary ones in the mid-term time horizon'. While Russia's unemployment rate is officially reported to stand at a record-low 2.4 per cent, conscription-induced labour market shortages abound, and wage growth continues to lag trends from 2024. These indicators suggest that an economic downturn in Russia is imminent. At the June 2025 St Petersburg Economic Forum, Russian Minister of Economic Development Maxim Reshetnikov warned that 'we're basically already on the brink of falling into a recession'. New tariffs and sanctions increase the likelihood of Reshetnikov's doomsday predictions coming true and are likely to sharpen discord between Russia's main organs of economic policy decision-making. Trump has lost patience with Russia's stalling tactics and obstructionism. The consequences of this change of heart could ensure Putin regrets playing Trump.
