U.S. billionaire Elon Musk has agreed to sell a portion of Starlink assets to the U.S. Department of Defense, removing himself from decision-making regarding geofencing Ukraine’s access to the satellite internet service

  • FfaerieOxide
    link
    fedilink
    1310 months ago

    Why are they paying him?

    Just take “his” stuff and kick him in the dick.
    Fuck him.

    • Chariotwheel
      link
      fedilink
      1710 months ago

      Maybe because it’s easier. There are probably quite a few steps before the US government can just take your shit. Don’t think the Americans are very huge fans of nationalisation and the government just taking from the rich.

      • keeb420
        link
        fedilink
        310 months ago

        and fucking around with national security, or showing you can and would, is a good way to cut through a lot of it.

        • Chariotwheel
          link
          fedilink
          610 months ago

          And yet, empirically, they bought, not seized it, which was the distinct point of the question. Even with all he did, pressuring him to sell was the thing they did.

        • FfaerieOxide
          link
          fedilink
          110 months ago

          I don’t think it should be seized and he kicked in the dick because he fucked with national security.

          I want those things to happen because I hate him.
          Fuck that guy.

      • FfaerieOxide
        link
        fedilink
        110 months ago

        Don’t think the Americans are very huge fans of nationalisation

        They prefer nationalization

      • FfaerieOxide
        link
        fedilink
        210 months ago

        What makes you think I have any respect for a rag drawn up by slavers?

        • @Ullallulloo@civilloquy.com
          link
          fedilink
          110 months ago

          Most of the drafters owned no slaves. Regardless of the source of the document, generally discussion of government focus around the law. I guess if we’re ignoring the law, sure a populist totalitarian government can do whatever you want. There’s not much to discuss then.

          Personally, I’m a fan of the rule of law. I guess even if there wasn’t a specific law, I would still want to respect unalienable human rights anyway though.

          • FfaerieOxide
            link
            fedilink
            310 months ago

            Personally, I’m a fan of the rule of law. I guess even if there wasn’t a specific law, I would still want to respect unalienable human rights anyway though.

            We’re probably closer in opinion than you think, but I don’t think billionaires have an “inalienable right” to the stolen efforts of workers.

    • 520
      link
      fedilink
      110 months ago

      Simply seizing his shit would trigger a hostile response from the world’s most powerful people, realising that the government could easily do the same to them.

        • 520
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Don’t underestimate what they can do. We’ve already seen one particularly moronic specimen try to seize power in the Capitol Riots and almost succeed. Imagine if it was led by someone competent who could put armed mercenaries in the crowd

          • wanderingmagus
            link
            fedilink
            110 months ago

            Sounds like it’s time to “set condition 1SQ” on some civilians who think they can get away with that. Literally and unironically, I welcome the order to fucking launch. Or do it smaller scale and send a few flying razors through windows like with the Iranian general, except through penthouse windows and estates. Then keep going with all their relations and relatives and acquaintences. Hooyah. That’s one battle stations missile I wouldn’t mind rigging ship for.

            • 520
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              You do realise there are a million different approaches in between ‘total appeasement’ and ‘total seizure’, yes?

              We do with them what they do with the rest of the population; give them just about enough that it doesn’t look like a raw deal to people outside this deal, in exchange for taking away their power to destabilise countries. Meanwhile, set up an execution plan for if they step out of line.

              Individually, they can still be a danger (see Donald Trump) but you do not want to see these people coordinate.

              • FfaerieOxide
                link
                fedilink
                110 months ago

                But I like ‘total seizure’. I don’t like these people and I want their stuff taken. Why should I compromise by giving them anything?