this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
525 points (97.1% liked)

World News

32285 readers
535 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Lols@lemm.ee 168 points 1 year ago (1 children)

random people having this kind of influence on international conflicts because they have a lot of money is good and healthy and okay

[–] bigkahuna1986@lemmy.ml 82 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The free market will create another satellite network if musk's isn't right! /s

[–] anewbeginning@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago

If Musk doesn’t learn to play ball, the us government might well take control of the tech for the remainder of the war. Geopolitics is the game that is played with all the pieces.

[–] cyborganism@lemmy.ca 49 points 1 year ago (2 children)

“One of the advantages is the huge amount of innovation coming out of the private sector, which the government wants to leverage to stay ahead of China and others,” said Brian Weeden, the director of program planning at the Secure World Foundation, a think tank.

Well if the government had invested in its space and innovation programs they wouldn't have to rely on the private sector.

[–] knfrmity@lemmygrad.ml 7 points 1 year ago

The US government has certainly invested in private space programs. SpaceX is just one very expensive and prominent example.

[–] Blake@feddit.uk 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Honestly I’m kind of glad that they didn’t. Imagine if the US government had even more control and surveillance potential over the internet. I know they already basically have 100% but, I dunno, a network of low-Earth-orbit satellites constantly hovering overhead, covering every square centimetre of the earth, is a bit scary.

[–] IronCorgi@kbin.social 49 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't think the same network in the hands of an unstable billionaire is an improvement. Given the choice I'd rather the U.S. have control of the network.

[–] Blake@feddit.uk 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You make a good point… what a choice, huh?

[–] peopleproblems@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think this one is much easier to look at if I restate the choice:

"A single individual billionaire who has only his self interest in mind has control over the internet "

vs.

"An organization consisting of more than one person, who are voted to power, who must hold their own interests in mind as well as their doners at minimum"

Personally, even if it's a whole bunch of different billionaires fighting for power, the government ultimately has to answer to more than one person. That makes it an inherently better choice.

[–] bandario@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

Which government? Do you imagine that the vast network of live-feed surveillance satellites run by the various arms of the US intelligence services and military is under the slightest control of the elected government?

[–] orcrist@lemm.ee 49 points 1 year ago (2 children)

It's interesting to see how egotistical the man is. He's just shown militaries all around the world that he's willing to actively meddle in their battles. In other words, he is now a potentially powerful active combatant.

It's easy to imagine the US military making plans to take over his operations in case of national emergency, and it's also easy to imagine other countries coming up with black ops to deal with him in less friendly ways.

I'm sure he didn't think about that, but if he did he'd probably feel proud that now he's important, not realizing that it's not the kind of importance a normal person would really want.

[–] WhoRoger@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

This is behaviour that gets you killed. Musk may be rich, but not "weapons manufacturer" or "oil magnate" powerful.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Catoblepas@lemmy.blahaj.zone 35 points 1 year ago (5 children)

What a shit article. Is it a job requirement that anyone at WaPo writing about Musk turns everything into fawning praise? Almost none of the article is about the incident itself, the majority of it is just rehashing all the things Musk's companies have done while crediting him for it (lol) and completely burying that the book alleges he shut down the internet during the drone attack after being in contact with senior Russian officials.

[–] Blake@feddit.uk 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s pretty much an advert for his biography lol. It’s going to have a bunch of clickbaity stories which look as though they may be critical of Musk, but it turn out that he’s the good guy, after all.

[–] RaincoatsGeorge@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 year ago

Thankfully a biography won’t be necessary. The dipshit lived his entire life on social media and revealed to everyone just how much of an idiot he is. He really liked when people revered him like some kind of super human but now that’s all done. He can’t ever get it back so he’s resorting to courting Nazis and trolls. They’re the only ones left still tongue punching his rectum and he’s addicted to the feeling. Too bad. He’s only going to get more old, more fat, more pathetic. His money can buy him so much but he can’t buy public sentiment and the internet is merciless. It will never bend the knee to any one person. Even the richest man is powerless.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Rozz@lemmy.sdf.org 29 points 1 year ago

Wow he is so subtle. What a genius move that no one expected. /s

[–] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)

That's how you put yourself on the CIA and KGBs watch list

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm guessing that as a supervillain (as @bionicjoey@lemmy.ca pointed out), Musk expects the CIA and NSA to have nice thick dossiers on him. Since Musk has Putin on speed dial, the KGB probably shares their file and asks him for updates.

[–] dRLY@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

FSB not KGB

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bionicjoey@lemmy.ca 21 points 1 year ago

Literal supervillain behaviour

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


But the recounting of the incident is a reminder of how SpaceX — and its founder — amassed enormous power and leverage as its competitors proved incapable of keeping up with a dizzying pace of innovation.

“One of the advantages is the huge amount of innovation coming out of the private sector, which the government wants to leverage to stay ahead of China and others,” said Brian Weeden, the director of program planning at the Secure World Foundation, a think tank.

SpaceX started providing Starlink internet service to Ukraine after Russia’s invasion, creating a lifeline for the country when its communications systems had largely been knocked out.

“Despite being the launch provider with the most proven track record and the lowest prices in the industry, SpaceX was seemingly not considered by Amazon,” the suit alleges.

“SpaceX has been truly innovative in several key areas, launch and large constellation broadband internet — two things people have long dreamed of but have been tried and failed before,” Weeden said.

A good portion of that success stems from Musk himself, who works relentlessly and pushes his teams to as well, attempting to overcome seemingly insurmountable odds.


The original article contains 1,360 words, the summary contains 193 words. Saved 86%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Why is that piece devolving into a suck-fest for Musk? Or is the random firing of employees he is reportedly prone to now considered "pushing his team"?

[–] Subject6051@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

If you are hitting a paywall, remember to turn off scripts for this particular site on ublock origin

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] gascown@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago

Waiting for him to have an "accident"

[–] TheFlame@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Paywalled articles are such a bummer. I understand why they exist, but hoarding knowledge sucks.

[–] spaghettiwestern@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] nestEggParrot@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

What extension do you use ?

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] ptz@dubvee.org 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That is a very unflattering photo. lol

[–] ArtVandelay@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Elmo is a very unflattering person

[–] popemichael@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago

People have a lot of family over there. A lot of folks are really upset.

I wonder how much more before people have an extreme reaction to him personally.

[–] Rapidcreek@reddthat.com 3 points 1 year ago

All Musk has to do to answer this is to say outages occur in satellite networks all the time. But, I'll suppose he'll remain silent until someone charges him with something. Would be nice to have a witness on this stupid SOB

[–] freagle@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Starlink's dominant revenue stream is the US military. It's seen as a moderately strategic program by the US as they attempt to saturate specific orbits of strategic value with US assets to prevent China from using those orbits.

If Musk actually did this, then he did it with the knowledge and likely the direction of the US military. The alternative is that he didn't do this but the story is being planted as part of a propaganda campaign in which Musk is playing the role of right-wing mobilizer.

[–] redtea@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago

They're hand in glove, that's for sure. Any attempt to paint Musk or any other haute bourgeois as separate from the capitalist state is intended to confuse readers and hide the material relations in capitalism.

load more comments
view more: next ›