What an utter piece of shit.

    • Melllvar
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1781 year ago

      It may be a violation of the Logan Act, which makes it illegal for private citizens to interfere with foreign relations.

      • @DarthBueller@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        101
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The Logan Act deals with private citizens negotiating with foreign governments. Unless he fucked with Starlink at the direct request of the Russian gov’t, I don’t see how the Logan Act applies. EDIT: apparently he did it after speaking with Russian government officials. So never mind, Logan Act is absolutely implicated.

        • @instamat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          61 year ago

          *Foreign governments having a dispute with the United States. I don’t think this qualifies. Unfortunately.

            • @instamat@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              31 year ago

              What’s your point? We’re still not in a dispute with Russia. A proxy dispute, maybe, but we’re not in active conflict with them.

              I’m on your side! Elon is a fuckwit and Russia is run by a despot but I don’t think the Logan act applies

    • @orclev@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      851 year ago

      Against Ukraine certainly, but since he’s not a citizen of Ukraine, then no. If these were US forces that he sabotaged, or the US was actually fighting in the war then it would also qualify, but once again that doesn’t apply. It definitely runs counter to US foreign interests, but that’s not enough to qualify (and probably good it doesn’t, a LOT of stuff people regularly do it could be argued would run counter to US foreign interests).

      • @TokenBoomer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        691 year ago

        He did this with federal funds. And the US hasn’t declared war since, what, WW2? The Rosenbergs were executed for treason, and we never declared war with USSR.

        • @orclev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          23
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The Rosenbergs were convicted on espionage charges. They were sending classified info to the USSR. That’s different from treason although it’s related. The funding angle is an interesting question though. It still wouldn’t be treason, but it could qualify as… breach of contract maybe? Not sure exactly what the charge is when the government pays you for a service and you don’t fullfill the service in a satisfactory manner.

          • @4am@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            61 year ago

            Would this not be espionage? Or would he have to have been acting under the direction of a state actor?

            • @orclev@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              71 year ago

              Espionage would require providing confidential intel to a foreign power. As far as I’m aware he didn’t share any intel, merely disabled the internet service he was providing within key areas. Even then, leaking Unkranian intel to Russia while arguably espionage against Ukraine would likely not qualify. He would need to provide confidential US material to Russia (or another foreign power) for it to be espionage.

              • @Questy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                21 year ago

                Espionage can also encompass acts of sabotage, there are ways this could qualify if it was American forces affected. It’s also a glaring example of why many countries maintain state share in major defence companies. No idiot scrolling conspiracy theories on Twitter should be able to not only breach operational security, which he clearly was since he knew the operation was underway, but also sabotage it.

        • @PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          He did not actually do it with federal funds. These were donated Starlink terminals and service was paid for by SpaceX.

          That’s the whole point, the US government allowed civilian technology to be used in war by a foreign government.

            • @jarfil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Tesla got some preferential loans in 2010, it paid them off by 2013. Now it benefits from buyers of any brand electric car getting subsidies… so, “kind of”?

              SpaceX got government contracts for specific services… which could have been inflated or not, but didn’t include Starlink (at least not officially).

              This is different from direct subsidies like those given to Boeing, which also gets inflated contracts (see NASA’s SLS), but in addition gets preferential tax discounts and lowered export taxes.

          • @Ado@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            41 year ago

            Although a bit irrelevant to the discussion about treason, I had to giggle at the WW2 bit. A simpler statistic would be when the US was not at war.

            • @orclev@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              151 year ago

              It’s mostly a semantics game. The US is involved in military conflicts all the time, but those are not officially “wars”, since the US going to war requires Congress to officially declare it. Therefore anytime the US was involved in a military conflict, but Congress did not issue a formal declaration of war, the US was not technically at war. He is correct in that the last time that Congress formally declared war was WW2.

              However, all that said, that’s just silly semantic games, everyone understands that if the US deploys military forces against another nations military forces that is in fact war, and on that metric the US has had many wars since WW2.

      • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        9
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This has nothing to do with being Ukrainian, but everything to do with being American, and actively working against American interests and official national and White house policies.

        He is actively working against the support USA is providing, and has paid him for, and has ordered him not to sabotage or diminish.

        This is treason, which is logical, since Elon Musk is a Trump supporter and they are both traitors and Elon Musk is a pedophile Nazi.

        • @orclev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          While I think we can all agree that it’s treasonous or at least treason adjacent, it however does not meet the specific legal definition of Treason used by the US. Like most of the rich and powerful he’s threading legal loopholes to do what he wants without actually violating the letter of any laws while simultaneously stomping all over the spirit of them. There’s a strong argument to be made that he is committing sabotage against Ukraine, but once again that’s not technically illegal in the US. I don’t even think Ukraine has an extradition treaty with the US, so even if Musk was charged and convicted in Ukraine, there isn’t really anything they could do about it.

          At the end of the day, Ukraine fucked up by trusting and relying on a private contractor for their critical infrastructure. They were in a bind and needed a solution so they leapt at the first one that was dangled in front of them, but it was a hasty decision that has bitten them in the long run. For better or worse there’s a reason that no nation relies on infrastructure they don’t control for military support, and it’s exactly this situation. Even if the hardware was manufactured by a contractor, they would make sure their country was the ones in control of it. Starlink should have been at best an emergency stopgap while Ukraine found another long term solution specifically because it puts their military at the mercy of the whims of a foreign national (not to mention the operational security nightmare where now they have a private US corporation able to literally watch and track their military movements in real time).

          Elon Musk is a pedophile Nazi.

          While I think Musk is a slimy piece of shit that’s made a career out of stealing credit for other peoples ideas, this might be going too far.

          • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            3
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            While I think Musk is a slimy piece of shit that’s made a career out of stealing credit for other peoples ideas, this might be going too far.

            Pedophile is something Elon Musk himself apparently finds it appropriate to call people he disagree with. So I call him a pedophile because I disagree with him.

            A Nazi is because he has shown quite a bit of Nazi like opinions and sympathies.

            Here he is literally using Nazi imagery: https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-shared-twitter-meme-nazi-soldier-image-2022-11?r=US&IR=T

            Also I think it’s fair to call Russia a Nazi regime, and Musk has shown several times he sympathizes with Russia, and he has used Russian talking points about Ukraine.

            Same goes for Trump and his very clear Russian sympathies and connections, and Elon Musk is a Trump supporter.

            So all in all, it’s seems to me absolutely fair to call Elon Musk a pedophile Nazi. It’s not a title I generally use about other people, only Elon Musk, because he deserves that title 100%.

    • @fubo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      271 year ago

      Treason is very narrowly defined in US law. The US is not at war with Russia, and the US is not Ukraine, so no, it’s not.

        • Again. The US government is not the Ukrainian government.

          The most painful thing the government could do would be to sanction Musk and his companies for taking actions counter to US foreign policy prerogatives, but then Musk would just pull the plug on Starlink altogether. So nothing will be done.

          • @meco03211@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            6
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Seeing as musk could unilaterally act in a fashion contrary to US foreign policy, in the interest of national security the government should take control of the company then.

            Obviously that would be an extreme step but… how bad would that get?

            • @orclev@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              51 year ago

              That’s basically a variant of eminent domain, but I suspect it would be a hard case to argue. Ukraine chose to use Starlink, and the US governments power to invoke eminent domain is based on the common good provided to the US public via the seized property. It’s arguable whether the US public would see much if any value from the US government running Starlink unless they’re going to start providing free service to US citizens. There’s also the problem that there are plenty of other options that don’t require seizing of property.

              • @jonne@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                51 year ago

                The US could just nationalise it. SpaceX is basically running on government money anyway, just fold it into NASA.

                • @jarfil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  NASA is basically being forced by Congress to funnel SLS program money into select contractors against NASA’s own assessments. I don’t think you want any of their hands near SpaceX if you want it to stay operational.

          • WuTang
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -8
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            as EU members but somehow, they decided to mess with Russia and we, EU citizen, were taken in this sh*.

            • @jarfil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              As an EU citizen, I fully support EU’s “messing” with Russia to support Ukraine, and I thank our NATO allies for keeping us “in this sh*”.

              • WuTang
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -31 year ago

                HAHA, nobody would say that, NO ONE except maybe if you have a relative in UA, still…

                It’s easy to argue on internet but IRL, this pseudo unconditional support does not exist.

        • @HikingVet@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          Nope, he wasn’t trying to overthrow the government of country he is a citizen of. He could be considered a non state actor though.

            • @HikingVet@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              51 year ago

              The Ukrainians can certainly call him that.

              Notable examples of Non State Actors are: Blackwater(American security company) Wagner (Russian).

            • @jarfil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              -1
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Weird “enemy” who’s actively supporting 99% of one’s war efforts.

              By that rule of thumb, would the US be an “enemy” for being reluctant to supply latest gen weaponry to Ukraine?

  • BeautifulMind ♾️
    link
    fedilink
    English
    2121 year ago

    It’s cute how if Ukraine fights back that risks nuclear war, but when Russia invades a sovereign country it doesn’t

  • @iyaerP@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    1531 year ago

    If he loves Russia so much, we should deport him there, and nationalize all his assets since SpaceX is a critical security apparatus and he’s clearly the foreign agent of a hostile power.

  • @Hiccup@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    1511 year ago

    Elon is not the president, a leader, the military, nor a government. This parasite should be in a prison or a brig at the very least. This is fucking treason.

  • @Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    138
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Fucking charge him with something. This is insane… If it’s not treason, it sure as hell is undermining the billions of dollars in aid were sending Ukraine. We’ve sent 76 billion dollars so far.

    • @gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      831 year ago

      Yeah, if an unelected CEO can tell a democratically elected government what it can and can’t do we’re no better than medieval peasants who had to bow and scrape for the nobles’ favor

      • @MartinXYZ@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        101 year ago

        we’re no better than medieval peasants who had to bow and scrape for the nobles’ favor

        It’s been like that for decades(centuries?). The rich do as they please and the rest of us are treated like livestock. It’s impressive citizens don’t revolt more than they do these days.

      • @MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        -1101 year ago

        Vote with your wallet. If you hate him so much don’t buy anything from him. It’s a fair meritocracy, if you think you can run a better space satellite company you are welcome to try

        • @bemenaker@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          241 year ago

          You know at SpaceX and Tesla, there is a layer of management between Musk and the actual production team, that does nothing but run interference. Their job is to make sure the companies stay running and moving forward, DESPITE, what Musk says.

            • I think it’s funny that Musk simps think peoppe are jealous when we criticize him. Honey, I wouldn’t trade places with Musk if you paid me. I already dealt with teenage insecurities, and I’d rather have average amounts of money and people who actually love me than a yawning void in my soul constantly sereking approval from adoring crowds. I want to be decent and useful to the world more than I want to be rich. And I’m not alone. You wanting to be Elon Musk doesn’t mean everyone does.

              • @havokdj@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                31 year ago

                You people need to stop feeding the trolls. If you actually think this isn’t a satirical account after reading the other shit he has posted, then you yourself are likely insane.

                Stop wasting your time, the only way to make them go away is to ignore them.

                • Bold of you to assume I took the time to read the other stuff he posted. And ignoring trolls doesn’t actually do much to discourage them, ime. So I’ll keep doing as I please, thanks.

      • @Notyou@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        261 year ago

        When you have a contract with the federal government it comes with stipulations. Don’t “private citizen” this. It’s not a mom and pop store.

        • @PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          -15
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          But Starlink DIDN’T have a contract with the US government, DOD, or Ukraine government. That’s the point. And they went ahead and used it for guided munitions.

          Which is a violation of the terms of service and not what anyone at SpaceX had intended.

          Problem is, that’s exactly how they ended up being used!

          • @Burninator05@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            71 year ago

            You’re tracking that Starlink sells service directly to the US military for activities that aren’t exactly tickle parties right?

            • True, but didn’t Starshield happen after this stuff? I guess I need to relook at the timeline. But as I remember things, he started tossing starlink access at Ukraine, tried to get DoD to pay, they chose not to. Then he started to these games, and after that DoD started paying up. Starshield was announced a little bit after that.

      • @sirjash@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        191 year ago

        Where do you draw the line? Should he also be allowed to sell his services to Russia? Should private companies from the US be allowed to sell arms to Russia?

        • Zagorath
          link
          fedilink
          English
          141 year ago

          Never mind that. Let’s suppose he can sell his services to whomever he likes.

          What about the privacy implications? How did he know that specific attack was planned? Can he just listen in on any communication going across Starlink? I don’t think anyone should be okay with that.

          • @jarfil@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            How did he know that specific attack was planned?

            Ukraine asked him to extend Starlink coverage for the attack.

            No conspiracy theory needed, they just told him.

          • @PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            -41 year ago

            Since he runs Starlink, he has a map of where every single Starlink receiver is located. Literally, a real time map with GPS coordinates.

            Russia would kill to have that info.

            However, musk also hack and jam proofed Starlink to help Ukraine too.

        • @kava@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The whole reason this happened is because he disabled Starlink satellites over Russia in order to help the Ukrainian war effort. He just refused to turn it on for a specific offensive operation in Crimea that Ukraine requested - claiming he wanted to avoid escalation. Him and the US government were in agreement during time. Remember the US did not want to give tanks and planes because of fear of escalation.

          I don’t mean to try and put a damper on the 5 minute hate session but I wish people would make an effort to try and understand what is happening before they make all sorts of wild conclusions and statements.

        • @Wilibus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          -11 year ago

          I’m not sure where the line is but expecting a private citizen to provide vital defense infrastructure to your foreign allies and continually act in your best interests is clearly past it.

          • @khannie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            61 year ago

            The issue is removing infrastructure on your own personal whims when it goes against what your own tax payers are paying for, especially when they have funded your company / companies. It’s obscene.

            • @jarfil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              Except it wasn’t “removed”, he declined to “extend” it before getting paid by those tax payers.

          • @Vespair@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            221 year ago

            Nah, I’d rather attack the cancer that is capitalism at the source and work to rid the world of its scourge once and for all. Sorry you chose the loser’s side.

          • @Burninator05@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            81 year ago

            How do you figure he stopped anything? If he wanted to stop a war he should reach out to the Russian leaders he’s claiming to have talked to and get them to leave Ukraine. Instead he believes their bluffs goes back for more.

            • @MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              -141 year ago

              He saw a nuclear war coming and he used his space satellite techno-prowess to stop it. We can only be grateful he was there to head it off, or you wouldn’t even be able to type stupid things on the internet anymore

              • So, he’s the final arbiter of nuclear war? Not you know, someone in the military, not someone who actually knows anything about war. A single private citizen who just happens to have a ton of money and power. Uh huh.

                • @Jarix@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  Well if Castro got what he wanted, he would have launched nukes in the 60s. But russia didnt give him the codes

      • @Meowoem@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Exactly, you can’t have your cake and eat it - if we want to live in a sane and moral world we shouldn’t let private citizens own things that are important, especially not satellite infrastructure

  • @IchNichtenLichten@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1141 year ago

    I know it’s an anathema to most in the US but the government needs to step up and take Starlink and Space X off Musk for a fair price. He’s way too unstable to be trusted with tech that important.

    • Hegar
      link
      fedilink
      80
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      A fair price would be musk in jail for his crimes.

    • @Etterra@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      511 year ago

      The older I get the more socialist I am. Yeah, take it away from his dumb ass, but don’t keep it ffs. Make it employee owned. Make every business employee owned.

    • TimeSquirrel
      link
      fedilink
      24
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is how I feel about Starship. Amazing progress is being made and he’s going to fuck it all up before it ever has a real mission. It’s sad. World’s first fully reusable launch vehicle capable of building real shit in space like colonies and infrastructure and it had to be him that did it.

      • FARTYSHARTBLAST
        link
        fedilink
        39
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Did he really do it? I’m pretty sure that was the engineers, which Musk is not.

        • @cerevant@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          131 year ago

          But he says big words about rockets on Twitter. That means he’s an engineer, right?

        • TimeSquirrel
          link
          fedilink
          7
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          What I meant was it had to be him that became the figurehead. I want someone with the drive and passion for space exploration, not someone with the passion for profit. A humble engineer or scientist who exists only to expand their knowledge and with plenty of fascination about the universe, not this dollar store Tony Stark wannabe narcissistic blowhard.

          I guess I’m shouting at clouds though, because that’s how the system is set up. People don’t start companies because they want to do something awesome. They start them to make money.

        • @Chriskmee@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          As much as I hate Musk, I doubt something that ambitious would be tried without him or someone like him. Same with starting a fully EV car company when everyone thought we were just but ready for it. Yes the engineers are the ones who do the work, but it takes someone willing to risk a lot of money, and the ability to bring in more money, to make that stuff happen.

            • @Chriskmee@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              He bought a small dying company and turned it into the most valuable one they ever existed. He made the Tesla we know today.

          • @dezmd@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            He didnt start a fully EV car company, HE BOUGHT ONE.

            Quit holding people on high regard based on their cult of personality.

            • @Chriskmee@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              He made the Tesla we know today, the Tesla we know today would not have existed without Musk, it likely would have died a small silicon valley startup that nobody had ever heard of.

              Just because I hate him doesn’t mean I won’t give him credit for doing what he did.

      • @hellweaver666@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 year ago

        I’m pretty sure someone at Tesla or SpaceX put the Twitter idea in his head so he would fuck off and meddle with something else and let them do their actual work instead of dealing with his stupidity, micromanaging and narcissism.

    • @gazter@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      51 year ago

      I would love a SpaceX without Elon.

      But the thing that made SpaceX what it is now is largely that it is not a government entity.

    • @collegefurtrader@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      01 year ago

      “How am I in this war?” Musk asked Isaacson. “Starlink was not meant to be involved in wars. It was so people can watch Netflix and chill and get online for school and do good peaceful things, not drone strikes.”

    • @wahming
      link
      English
      -11
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Elon can’t be trusted with it, but NASA would just stall all progress on it for the next fifty years

      All the downvoters should take a good close look at the cockup that is the SLS program

      • @31337@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        NASA just contracts everything out. I think NASA would be much different if they had something like SpaceX (and was funded properly).

        • @jarfil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          2
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          NASA just contracts everything out. I think NASA would be much different if they had something like SpaceX (and was funded properly).

          NASA gets so much funding for the SLS, which is so expensive, that NASA itself is saying it’s throwing money away. It’s US Congress routing tax payer funding to disastrously inefficient contractors, not to have an actually functional space program.

    • @MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      -181 year ago

      It’s his company that he built from the ground up, and the government doesn’t know what to do with stuff like satellites, that is best left to the free market

  • @krayj@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1001 year ago

    Any system capable of manipulating the outcomes of international conflict needs to become property of the government via eminent domain…especially if that system is used…especially if used by an entrepreneur operating without oversight.

  • @YeetPics@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    991 year ago

    I mean if a person does anything directly affecting a war (for any side) I’d say that person is a wartime volunteer.

    Wartime volunteers that have taken up arms are a absolutely viable target for military strikes.

    Just saying 🤷‍♂️

      • @mob@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        471 year ago

        Anyone considering striking US likely realizes the fallout from that strategy though

        • During the cold war, there were plenty of instances of fighting between us and soviet forces, not to mention the huge amount of proxy fighting done. Personally, I’m not interested in drawing up a sequel to the cold war.

            • @letsgocrazy@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              Why though? There’s been plenty of hot and cold wars, plenty of proxy wars.

              This isn’t special in that regard, except now using the propaganda talking points of view a fascist enemy is done without a hint of shame from the stooges who do it.

            • @MomoTimeToDie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              -161 year ago

              As I see it, we’re at a turning point. Either we continue a path of escalation, or we back down, either would be feasible given our current position, but that said current position isn’t somewhere we can stay. We either need to accept that sacrificing some global influence is necessary to avoid foreign wars, or that maintaining our current global influence inevitably requires putting soldiers behind our words.

              • This is a weird take… The war in Ukraine is largely being fought because Russia isn’t going to stop with Ukraine. We’re protecting our allies in Europe, and looking to prevent further escalation, not simply exerting influence on a far-away foreign war.

                The escalating party is 100% the aggressing party that’s invading a sovereign nation. That’s Russia, not the United States.

                I mean, unless you’re speaking as a Russian citizen? Perhaps I’m misunderstanding your point of view here.

                • This is the exact attitude I was trying to call out. We are absolutely escalating our participation in this conflict. Trying to strattle the line of participation, where nothing we do is our own fault, and neither are any of the consequences we face. Because I’m not sure how well you did in middle school geography, but the US is, in fact, not a part of Europe. This war has no direct impact on the US beyond the extent we choose to be involved.

                  Now if you view the benefits of involvement as greater than the risks, fine. That’s a perfectly coherent position. One I don’t agree with, but a rational position nonetheless. But to pretend our involvement is just a force of nature we have no control over? That’s just a bunch of excuses to support involvement without having to openly commit to a position of involvement.

              • Flying SquidOP
                link
                fedilink
                131 year ago

                Are you seriously saying we should just stand back and let Russia take Ukraine?

        • Oh yeah, I don’t mean to say otherwise. It was more a rhetorical question to point out the nature of how these things always end up escalating.

          • Anduin1357
            link
            fedilink
            2
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Starlink is not providing an essential service to Ukraine. They do not have the right to expect SpaceX to cooperate with their military effort when SpaceX is a US company under dual-use rules to not unilaterally provide military connectivity to weapons systems to foreign nations.

            Ukraine must do military procurement properly and go through the US government to get approval, not whatever this is. They used a civilian service for military purposes, so they are in breach of the terms of use of Starlink and should not be surprised when services degrades at SpaceX’s whims.

            The law priorities the health of people, but Starlink isn’t meant for use like this, so this analogy is moot.

  • @muzzle@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    57
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    But the truly galaxy brain move is in this article:

    After CNN’s reporting, Musk reversed course, tweeting “the hell with it … we’ll just keep funding Ukraine govt for free.”

    Gwynne Shotwell, Musk’s president at SpaceX, was livid at Musk’s reversal, according to Isaacson.

    “The Pentagon had a $145 million check ready to hand to me, literally,” Isaacson quotes Shotwell as saying. “Then Elon succumbed to the bullshit on Twitter and to the haters at the Pentagon who leaked the story.”

  • @Red_October@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    561 year ago

    Make sure to save this for the next time that shitbird or one of his moron suckups tries to say he helped Ukraine. Fucker oughtta be treated the same as any Russian collaborator.