• The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Journalists are generally not allowed to report on cases like this until a court case has been concluded

    • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      He openly admitted at the start of service he wouldn’t allow use in crimea.

      Not sure why people are acting all surprised when it’s been known from the start.

      This has never been a secret.

        • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t really have an opinion on his stance other than I understand his concern.

          What I find more frightening is people wanting to seize private assets because they don’t like the rules around the service. That isn’t how America works.

            • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              We are not at war with Russia. I personally don’t want to be at war with Russia but I support helping Ukraine.

              Seizing the company is not only illegal but it’s fascism. It’s crazy how quickly people go fascist when they don’t get their way.

    • Thorny_Thicket@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Someone else posted this yesterday relating to these allegations:

      It’s being pushed hard by someone, a few weeks ago there were vague “unnamed sources in the government” stories about them being “concerned” with how much power Elon has over Starlink, this morning Issiacson had to walk back his description of “drones washing up on shore” after it was clarified that there never was coverage in Crimea, Ukraine asked for it and Elon said “no, that’s a conflict area” which is consistent with where they have enabled Starlink up to that point.

      • 73 million seconds@infosec.exchange
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        @Thorny_Thicket @chaogomu

        That quote is wrong though. There absolutely was coverage for Crimea at one point. Elon took it away when he decided Ukrainians should not be able to use Starlink too far in Russian occupied Ukraine.

        That “conflict area” thing is a joke also. The front lines elsewhere in Ukraine are not a conflict area?

        @ukraine

  • downpunxx@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    Seeing the entire Free world which is spending Hundred of Billions of Dollars supporting Ukraine in it’s fight against the Russian invasion of aggression and genocide, be shocked into virtual silence on the matter, it’s nice someone is saying “fuck that, what’s going on here”, but the fact literally EVERYONE else in the Free world governments are as silent as lambs tells me Musk has got his hooks deep into multiple nations Defense infrastructure, and until the United States moves to formally nationalize Starlink, the only important positive moves bringing Musk into line, will be behind the scenes we’ll never get to see or know about.

    • meyotch@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      While I would love seeing it nationalized for the pure schadenfreude, there are other more likely punishments, like refusing further government contracts until a certain someone is removed from day to day decisions. SpaceX could easily stay private as long as Musk loses the ability to play Risk with geopolitics. If the US government is paying most of the bills, they could mandate such a move.

  • taanegl@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Uh oh, Spaghetti-o’s! Someone might be found out as an agent of foreign principal… let’s watch…