• Initiateofthevoid@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    9 hours ago

    No, we should regain control of our nation from fascists (this does not mean just replace the President), then nationalize SpaceX and Starlink, and make telecoms public utilities.

  • hexonxonx@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Starlink should be globalized. A planet only needs one low-altitude orbiting communications network. Better to standardize the technology and platform and let them contribute to one system than to have a dozen identical competing systems crashing into each other and fucking things up for everyone.

  • Knightfox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    A lot of people are calling this a bailout for Elon, but in reality it would be a seizure. Elon doesn’t want to let go of Starlink and the US likely wouldn’t pay him what it’s worth to take it over.

    What people seem to be missing is the precedent this would set. It’s all well and good when we empower the office of the president to seize a private company we don’t like, but after we give them that power what’s to stop them from seizing other businesses?

    XYZ company refuses to get rid of their DEI policy because the shareholders voted to keep it? Well now the orange man can seize it.

    Let’s not forget that previously it took 2/3rd majority to confirm presidential appointments, but the Senate under Obama decided to change that rule to 50% to get past Republican objections. The result of this is all these shit appointments Trump has passed with 51% of the Senate, none of them would have gotten by if the Democrats hadn’t made a precedent for changing the rules.

  • biocoder.ronin@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    No I would not like taxpayer dollars to buy out Elons shit shows.

    Hard pass. Thanks no thanks jacobin

  • gamer@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    14 hours ago

    Throw Musk in prison for his many documented crimes, but don’t support this kind of dictator shit.

  • Sam_Bass@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I wouldn’t nationalize anything long as the orange could possibly profit off it

  • postmateDumbass@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Arrest Musk on violation of controlled substances acts, file immigration violation charges, invalidate his ownership shares due to securities fraud, as he falsified education and naturalization forms.

    Or just emminent domain the shit. The Law is just made up right now.

    • MrSpArkle@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      SpaceX and Starlink basically have no competition, and if they did, said competitor would also need to be heavily subsidized.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        These last few years they’ve had very little successes, but the point is it should stay competitive and not be automatically handed to these doofuses. Even the USSR maintained a competitive rocketry sector.

          • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 day ago

            Compared to previously SpaceX has been seeing more and more failed launches, Starlink is banned in a number of countries and there are already other low orbit internet satellite providers popping up.

            • FreedomAdvocate@lemmy.net.au
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              23 hours ago

              You say “failed”, engineers say “ok what have we learned and what can we improve/fix from this?”. These launches are tests. Every single launch is testing every single part of the hardware and software. Tests failing isn’t a bad thing, as it helps you fix problems and make things better.

    • ikidd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      1 day ago

      NASA hasn’t take the slightest risk since Challenger. They wouldn’t have accomplished 1/20th of the launch capability SpaceX has developed in the last 5 years.

      • finitebanjo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Generally NASA doesn’t “develop” rockets per se, they commission rockets to specification.

        • ikidd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          It’s the specification process that’s the thing, nobody there would have gone out on a limb the way SpaceX has with their recovery systems. Look where they are on a shuttle replacement: the Apollo capsule with more room.