this post was submitted on 13 Sep 2023
432 points (97.4% liked)
Technology
59287 readers
5186 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Starlink is perfect for nationalization. Internet is. Infact, nationalize all utilities. Yes, internet should be a utility at this point. It should not be run for profit.
After Musk disabled Starlink to aid Russia, a hostile state in their efforts to invade a sovereign democracy, it should have been clear to everyone that Musk poses a very real security threat, and Starlink should have been seized and nationalised.
Y'all all really think there isn't something more going on there? Like people being like "Crimea is Ukraine!" Well yes I agree with the sentiment, even the US government doesn't consider crimea to be Ukraine
Edit: After looking further I do see the US stance is that Crimea is Ukraine, however they have specifically not been providing weaponry with the intent of retaking Crimea (at least until recently where it seems they've taken a looser stance on it) similarly to how they weren't providing weaponry to attack Russia, the whole idea was that we were helping them defend themselves "only".
*citation needed
Look at how we handle Taiwan for an idea of how wishy-washy the US government is in these situations.
Biden has said we support Taiwan and it's independence, then directly after that our government walks it back to avoid escalating tensions with China.
Sorry I was definitely wrong about the US's stance overall on Crimea, however we specifically were not providing armaments that could/would be used to attack Crimea
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/18/us/politics/ukraine-crimea-military.html
My initial statement was based on my incorrect memory of what was said after the initial faux-"referendum" that caused it to be annexed (forcefully taken) by Russia (which they tried to pretend was by the people living in crimea), as the US didn't do much except slap a few sanctions on Russia.
I'll edit my initial comment to better reflect the truth.