• @ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1369 months ago

    On one hand, fuck Musk. On the other hand, internet from space that can’t be blocked by governments is a net positive in my book.

    • @Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1959 months ago

      Don’t forget that Musk is also the one who intentionally blocked paid service from Ukraine during a critical moment in the early days of Russia’s current genocide, because Musk sucks up to Putin. Dude needs to answer for his actions.

      • @ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        39 months ago

        That is the catch. Ideally they wouldn’t automatically cooperate with the dictators on the ground, but that hasn’t been the case.

    • @phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      749 months ago

      How about internet that can be blocked at the whims of a billionaire? At least government is supposed to answer to the people.

      • @ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -129 months ago

        Dictatorships don’t answer to the people. It’s absolutely a problem that billionaires are controlling the flow of information, but it’s much worse for a dictator to do it.

        • @dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          69 months ago

          Oh honey, do you really ignore that a huge chunk of dictatorships do it for the money and most are already billionaires? Why exactly do you think Musk supports the orange cheeto?

          • @ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -59 months ago

            Because the orange Cheeto wants to cut his taxes so he gets more money. Dictators want power, not money. That’s why they are famous for blowing it on such exorbitant things. It’s just a means to an end. To billionaires the money is the end.

            • @dustyData@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              69 months ago

              That’s an extremely naïve view of the world. If Musk could sit the chair, he would. What do you think the accumulation of unhinged amounts of wealth is about but increased power? What do you think those opulent displays of wealth from dictators is about but to flaunt that they have all the wealth and power?

              • @ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                19 months ago

                Musk could easily buy himself a governorship or a senatorial position and work up from there. That’s not his goal. He wants to be the next Thomas Edison. He wants to be admired and remembered.

                Dictator’s opulent displays of wealth are to stoke their egos. They don’t care about the money they spend because they just took it, they didn’t earn it. They care about how much control they have over the people around them. They don’t care if people like them ,only that they fear them.

                • @VeryVito@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  29 months ago

                  Musk has already said he welcomes a chance to work in the Trump administration, so…

            • @dustyData@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              39 months ago

              You think that billionaires don’t do that? Have you heard of Harvey Epstein? Who do you think the biggest customers of child trafficking and sex slaves are?

              • @crank0271@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                19 months ago

                I think you’ve conflated Jeffrey Epstein and Harvey Weinstein. Incidentally there is a Harvey Weinstein, but he is a progressive NY State legislator, not whatever either of those two fucks are.

            • @CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              29 months ago

              So as long as this one specific billionaire hasn’t had someone killed (that we know of) that makes it okay for that one individual to have complete control over what people have access to?

        • @Kalysta@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          19 months ago

          Brazil’s not a dictatorship though and twitter is breaking their hate speech rules.

          Musk is just as bad as most actual dictators with his global reach

    • db0
      link
      fedilink
      English
      459 months ago

      Controlled by governments or controlled by corpos and the super rich? I say there’s hardly an improvement.

      • @Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        99 months ago

        Yeah, cables or radio waves, it’s the same thing in the end.

        What we need (IMO) is another layer on top if the classic internet with encryption and hookers.

      • Richard
        link
        fedilink
        English
        19 months ago

        No, but through the existence of both options, you can get more plurality than by using one individual option.

        • db0
          link
          fedilink
          English
          39 months ago

          Corporate throws you on the street to starve.

            • db0
              link
              fedilink
              English
              19 months ago

              You got another one job at the the other starlink?

              There’s a reason the system requires a certain percentage of unemployment to keep working. There’s also a reason there’s homeless people and children living in flood security.

    • @RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Oh? What about internet controlled by a billionaire who makes sure his toxic website featuring his version of “free speech” is always available to protect his profits and spread his bullshit while undermining the policies of a sovereign state?

      So much better than the evil government.

    • @Infynis@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      259 months ago

      Can’t calculate the net yet, since we don’t know the gross. He has the capability to cause massive damage with the power he wields. It’s already clear that he’s incapable of providing an unbiased platform. It needs to belong to the people or it can never be trusted

      • @stupidcasey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        He is in a unique position, theoretically he can make everything go through the country his servers are in assuming they pay over their own satellite internet, illegal… mmm almost certainly but so is keeping Ex Twitter on in Brazil so he probably doesn’t care about that, and it’s essentially exactly what a VPN does sooo, oh yeah they could also just use a VPN I guess.

        • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥
          link
          fedilink
          English
          49 months ago

          Bruh, VPN for what? If Brazil bans payments to Starlink, essentially sanctioning it, how is end user going to circumvent that?

          I mean they can jump through hoops to convert currencies etc but most people would just give up and move on.

    • ☂️-
      link
      fedilink
      English
      69 months ago

      it can be (and has been) blocked by musk on occasion though.

    • @alsimoneau@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      29 months ago

      It’s not worth the cost of ruining LEO and the environmental effects of them burning up in the atmosphere