Science fiction of the 90s was the time to discuss philosophy. We didn't come to a conclusion then. The future is now. A global low latency, highly available communications network is technologically inevitable. In our timeline, a rich narcissist has gathered enough support and competence around himself to start building that network. So now we have real, concrete questions that need answers: who should have access to that network, and who should decide?
The way I see it, the options are (besides opening the network for everyone globally):
- limit access to non-military purposes: practically impossible
- limit access to the country of which Elon calls himself a citizen: what happens if he moves?
- destroy the network: everyone is worse off
- have the government take over control of the network: I don't think we want this precedence
Do you have another suggestion?
Surveillance is a usecase for communication. I can't think of a communications technology that hasn't been (ab)used for surveillance... Books even! Historically people have been prosecuted due to the books they possess! Should our target of ire be the entity building the network? Or the entity wanting to use it for surveillance? The vibe I'm getting from this thread is that folks would prefer the US government, via NASA or otherwise, have control of the whole thing instead.