• Maeve@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      119
      ·
      4 months ago

      I thought about that; then I thought what that guy makes in a few minutes’interest on his offshore accounts is probably more than all of Brazil, in a year, and since taxes fund the government and a host of other things, idk

      • hope@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        89
        ·
        4 months ago

        The country of Brazil makes something like 20x Musk’s total net worth, but every year.

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Leveraged buyouts specifically should be outlawed.

            EDIT: And billionaires should be taxed on the money they receive as loans.

            The “buy borrow die” tax strategy should either be completely outlawed or the government should be able to get portions of those loan payments back as tax money.

        • The Quuuuuill@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          4 months ago

          Or Brazil. That’s the eight largest economy in the world. They headline BRICS for a reason. Sure, China is the true headliner there, but the fact is that Brazil is included in those 5 countries for a reason (multiple actually). There’s absolutely no way for a single individual to eclipse the value of the world’s 8th largest economy. Pick a country with a lower GDP than Hungary and then we’ll talk

  • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    237
    arrow-down
    51
    ·
    4 months ago

    On one hand, fuck Musk. On the other hand, internet from space that can’t be blocked by governments is a net positive in my book.

    • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      268
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Don’t forget that Musk is also the one who intentionally blocked paid service from Ukraine during a critical moment in the early days of Russia’s current genocide, because Musk sucks up to Putin. Dude needs to answer for his actions.

          • vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            Are the Jewish space lasers more dangerous than the Hibernian and Caledonia Rods of god. Im asking incase we need to up our tonnage to match the Jews. I know for a fact we are lagging behind Suomen Helios lance.

      • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        That is the catch. Ideally they wouldn’t automatically cooperate with the dictators on the ground, but that hasn’t been the case.

    • phoneymouse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      100
      ·
      4 months ago

      How about internet that can be blocked at the whims of a billionaire? At least government is supposed to answer to the people.

      • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        24
        ·
        4 months ago

        Dictatorships don’t answer to the people. It’s absolutely a problem that billionaires are controlling the flow of information, but it’s much worse for a dictator to do it.

        • dustyData@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          Oh honey, do you really ignore that a huge chunk of dictatorships do it for the money and most are already billionaires? Why exactly do you think Musk supports the orange cheeto?

          • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            4 months ago

            Because the orange Cheeto wants to cut his taxes so he gets more money. Dictators want power, not money. That’s why they are famous for blowing it on such exorbitant things. It’s just a means to an end. To billionaires the money is the end.

            • dustyData@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              4 months ago

              That’s an extremely naïve view of the world. If Musk could sit the chair, he would. What do you think the accumulation of unhinged amounts of wealth is about but increased power? What do you think those opulent displays of wealth from dictators is about but to flaunt that they have all the wealth and power?

              • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Musk could easily buy himself a governorship or a senatorial position and work up from there. That’s not his goal. He wants to be the next Thomas Edison. He wants to be admired and remembered.

                Dictator’s opulent displays of wealth are to stoke their egos. They don’t care about the money they spend because they just took it, they didn’t earn it. They care about how much control they have over the people around them. They don’t care if people like them ,only that they fear them.

                • VeryVito@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Musk has already said he welcomes a chance to work in the Trump administration, so…

          • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            4 months ago

            Dictators do things like build and use rape rooms or throw people they don’t like out of helicopters.

            • dustyData@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              You think that billionaires don’t do that? Have you heard of Harvey Epstein? Who do you think the biggest customers of child trafficking and sex slaves are?

              • crank0271@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                I think you’ve conflated Jeffrey Epstein and Harvey Weinstein. Incidentally there is a Harvey Weinstein, but he is a progressive NY State legislator, not whatever either of those two fucks are.

            • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              So as long as this one specific billionaire hasn’t had someone killed (that we know of) that makes it okay for that one individual to have complete control over what people have access to?

        • Kalysta@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Brazil’s not a dictatorship though and twitter is breaking their hate speech rules.

          Musk is just as bad as most actual dictators with his global reach

    • ElCanut@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      91
      ·
      4 months ago

      Not blockable by any government would be a positive in my book if it didn’t imply bloclable by a single billionaire with huge mood swing. Don’t forget how musk switched off starlink in Crimea at Putin’s request when the Russian realized starlink guided missile were heading towards their ships (Source

      • Logi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s not exactly what happened. Starlink was already disabled in Crimea when the attack was launched and Musk refused to enable it specifically for the attack. Then the initial reports got a bit tangled up.

        But yes, none of this should be up to Musk.

    • servobobo@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      How is a billionaire manchild in charge any better, at least a government is accountable to the people.

      • Richard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        18
        ·
        4 months ago

        In theory, but how many governments can actually be held accountable? The power imbalance is often too great for the people to hold anyone accountable. In many countries, the system is rigged.

        • EatATaco@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          20
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          The question was how is it better. Sure there is a question of how much accountability there is with the government…but there is zero with a billionaire.

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      57
      ·
      4 months ago

      Controlled by governments or controlled by corpos and the super rich? I say there’s hardly an improvement.

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah, cables or radio waves, it’s the same thing in the end.

        What we need (IMO) is another layer on top if the classic internet with encryption and hookers.

          • Valmond@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Or Tenfingers (my network protocol for decentralised web pages and data) ofc 😌

        • rkeene@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          This is what IPSec OE was created to solve, but nobody uses it – instead using things like TLS, which also provides protocol aware non-repudiation.

      • Richard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        No, but through the existence of both options, you can get more plurality than by using one individual option.

        • zbyte64@awful.systems
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          If we’re talking about corporations I can only assume you mean options in how to get fucked.

            • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              You got another one job at the the other starlink?

              There’s a reason the system requires a certain percentage of unemployment to keep working. There’s also a reason there’s homeless people and children living in flood security.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Oh? What about internet controlled by a billionaire who makes sure his toxic website featuring his version of “free speech” is always available to protect his profits and spread his bullshit while undermining the policies of a sovereign state?

      So much better than the evil government.

        • irreticent@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Good question. He definitely seems like the type that would have a dungeon with captives.

        • gnomadic@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          4 months ago

          He got his wealth because his parents owned a slave-powered diamond mine.

          Also, as he hides his money and doesn’t pay taxes the US government is overburdened and one of their tools is relying on prisons for free labor.

          Soooo actually quite a lot.

        • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Let everyone incarcerated go and see how that works out for you. Not saying everyone deserves to be in there, but go on. Give it a try.

          You also forget that billionaires are wealth, and so is any dictator. They both seek to protect that wealth, so it doesn’t matter in the end. A billionaire buys his politicians and you get the same result. You start threatening their money and power and they’ll come after you, whether you want equal rights or sometimes just clean water.

      • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        4 months ago

        That’s better than a dictator who only wants to protect his own power. At least a billionaire can be bought.

        • InFerNo@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          A billionaire can’t be bought, they got billions. It’s the dictator that can be bought.

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

            A billionaire chases what gets them the most money. The public can manipulate them by making them lose money. A dictator wants power, which really can only be countered with mass violence.

            • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              Musk has lost a tremendous amount of money between X and his negative effect on Tesla sales. Do you feel this has “manipulated” him into being a better person? 🤣

              • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Even with all the losses, he is still the richest man in the world by more than $50 billion. Musk dumped more than half of his Tesla stock and is focusing more on SpaceX now.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Is Musk doing anything to help people living in dictatorships access information? Or is this just happening in Brazil?

    • Infynis@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      32
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Can’t calculate the net yet, since we don’t know the gross. He has the capability to cause massive damage with the power he wields. It’s already clear that he’s incapable of providing an unbiased platform. It needs to belong to the people or it can never be trusted

      • 0x0@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        It needs to belong to the people or it can never be trusted

        Damn commies!

        • Metz@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          4 months ago

          The ability to recognize sarcasm doesn’t seem to be particularly developed on Lemmy.

          And if fucking hate the /s.

          • 0x0@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            4 months ago

            I get that simple text doesn’t convey as much as images or speech, but, …i find myself having to add the /s (but it’s easier to ignore the downvotes).

          • Zangoose@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            The ability to recognize sarcasm doesn’t seem to be particularly developed on Lemmy the internet.

            FTFY

    • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      That’s an arbitrary metric. What about internet across oceans, or across forests? Blocking content is a question of why and what. Shouldn’t we be able to block child exploitation websites? That is to say, of course we can, and it’s very easy. The only question is whether you want that kind of censorship to be up to your service provider or your government.

      • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        4 months ago

        Governments tend to block things like facts about genocides they have committed and opposing political opinions. I would hope things like child exploitation could be managed at the host level.

        • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          Do you have any idea how eagerly AT&T and Comcast would block half the internet if they had the tiniest profit motive to do so? I wonder how long left wing websites would remain online if it weren’t illegal for multinational corporations to block them.

          • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            6
            ·
            4 months ago

            That’s the thing, they is no profit motive to block wide swaths of public viewpoint because that will cost them customers. They will quickly lose business to a competitor who doesn’t do that. (Local monopolies aside, which is an entirely different problem).

            • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              I wish you were right, but you’re not. Internet providers have monopolies because the cost of laying fiber or launching satellites is so high. That’s precisely what the argument over net neutrality has been about.

      • stupidcasey@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        He is in a unique position, theoretically he can make everything go through the country his servers are in assuming they pay over their own satellite internet, illegal… mmm almost certainly but so is keeping Ex Twitter on in Brazil so he probably doesn’t care about that, and it’s essentially exactly what a VPN does sooo, oh yeah they could also just use a VPN I guess.

        • This is fine🔥🐶☕🔥@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Bruh, VPN for what? If Brazil bans payments to Starlink, essentially sanctioning it, how is end user going to circumvent that?

          I mean they can jump through hoops to convert currencies etc but most people would just give up and move on.

            • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              But still far to much of a hassle for the general public. Hell, half the people I know refuse to figure out a regular e-transfer/cash app. There’s no way they’ll even consider bitcoin; or really any other currency.

    • GreatAlbatross@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      You can block or disrupt communications with LEO.
      But you’d need the blessing of the country’s government to pump out that much interference continuously.

    • alsimoneau@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s not worth the cost of ruining LEO and the environmental effects of them burning up in the atmosphere

  • h4lf8yte@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    What i love about musk is that he is the best bad example. Maybe someday he’ll start a war with some country and then people will start to understand that no single person or group should hold this much power. Because there are also a handful of other people and groups with the same resources who choose to hide in the background.

  • mercano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Usually Gwen Shotwell, SpaceX COO, is good at keeping Elon in check and not screwing up SpaceX business. I wonder what happened this time.

  • downpunxx@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    I hope and pray what Brazil is doing now (but don’t believe it will) becomes a blueprint in choking off Musks cynical use of Freedom of Speech to attempt to overthrow democracies everywhere in service to fascist power

    • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      The problem is that this IS the blueprint.

      Blocking twitter? That’s fine. People generally hate twitter so whatever.

      But starlink? That is a genuinely okay product (so long as it isn’t too sunny where you live…) and actually does serve a niche for people who can’t get better internet. And it rapidly will go from “The government blocked twitter. I guess that is probably good?” to “The government is taking away internet from thousands of people and this is literally worse than china”

      • goalless_banana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Brazilian here, the court couldn’t find anyone in Brazil that represents X to pay the fines and to block the accounts spreading lies about the anti-democratic events of January of last year. Since Elon Musk is one of the major shareholder of both companies they connected the dots and Starlink has representatives in Brazil their account was frozen in order to get the fines owed by Musk’s other company. Later the government found out Starlink was not blocking access to X as any other internet provided was instructed to do so.

        Musk is a big supporter of Far-right Brazilians including former president Bolsonaro and his political allies. It was during Bolsonaro’s government that Brazilian army switched to use Starlink.

        The free speech agenda that Musk is advertising is not the main issue here but a government that goes against Musks interests and his companies.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Free speech has jack all to do with it.

          What matters are people who suddenly can’t watch kitty cat videos… or organize military operations. They don’t care about misinformation campaigns and fines. They care that suddenly The Government has taken something away from them.

      • Merlin@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        4 months ago

        Yeah. It’s really sad that a lot of people on remote areas in the Amazon will be affected by a ban on starlink. They also spent quite a bit of money for Brazil’s standards on the equipment as well.

        Still, this shouldn’t be the reason to put anyone above the law, no one should be above a county’s law.

        If this actually happens it may really backfire on Elon and all companies he’s involved, at least in Brazil.

        As you invested your money in one of his companies products and now because of his massive ego/lack of mental stability you either lost support, functionality or access to parts (for maintenance of hardware) and I doubt any of his companies would pay their users for this inconvenience. This would make using any of the products he’s involved with too risky, better to just use a more “mentally stable” competitor even if the service or product is slightly worse.

        • NuXCOM_90Percent@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          You are assuming people look at this rationally. Rather than “the politicians hate a guy and I suffer”

          It is very similar to the logic by which people go out of their way to bend over backwards to support anti-consumer practices if ti is for the game or movie they want to watch.

      • zkfcfbzr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        4 months ago

        In this case, assuming Brazil made the right call, I’d look at it more as “Starlink is taking away internet from thousands of people” instead of “the government”. Nobody can or should expect any government to allow businesses to operate within their border that blatantly disregards legal orders. If people lose access to the internet the blame is on Starlink’s hubris, not the government’s insistence on the rule of law.

        That said, I have not been following this story and am cautious enough about Brazil’s government that I’m not taking any stance here over which side is right or wrong.

    • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yes, then he got a bunch of backlash and now he’s doing the reverse. And people are losing their shit even more

      • flying_sheep@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        48
        ·
        4 months ago

        Weird how he’s helping the far right in both cases.

        • complying with Erdogan
        • refusing to block fascists
        • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 months ago

          Musk complies where his business lies. China, India, America, Europe…

          Where there’s Tesla there’s Twitter regulation.

      • Avg@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        4 months ago

        It bothers me that he is trying to protect nazis.

        • StinkySocialist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          4 months ago

          I think he’s just a hypocrite who will say anything and contradict it when it’s better for him.

          Have you ever seen his trans daughter who he disowned for being trans talk about him? He’s not a good dude. For years when I first heard of him I was tricked too. Look into him some more man. He’s a piece of shit.

          Here’s some reasons:

          Taking credit for other people 's work. I don’t think he actually founded any of the companies he owns besides the boring company. That hasn’t done anything right? Lol

          Having emotional temper tantrums where he tries to ruin people’s lives, for example that diver he called a pedophile for no reason.

          Again his hypocrisy around his political beliefs. For example how he champions “Free speech” but also will censor words like ‘cis’. It’s clear to me and many others that “free speech” to Elon just means people are free to say what Elon wants.

          • Eezyville@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            Personally I don’t give a shit about Musk. I don’t care about any celebrities but I try to not hate any of them because that’s way too much attention I’m giving to someone who is so insignificant to me. I’m just always aware of them from being on these social media sites because there’s always a legion of fans and haters. Maybe I’m really just complaining about social media and wish we were in the time of MySpace. Things were simple then and the internet was wild and untamed.

            • StinkySocialist@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              I mean you give enough of a shit to comment twice so 🤷‍♂️

              I don’t think a multibillionaire is just a celebrity. The companies he owns and the power he has there aside, he also controls many politicians through lobbying deals.

              I feel you on missing the days of the old web so I think you should know it’s tech billionaires like musk who have destroyed it. Whether through their direct control over platforms like Twitter or by how they have regulated the web through lobbying of our politicians.

  • Stern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    61
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    4 months ago

    Brazil has an extradition agreement with the United States. Would love to see that shit get put to use.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      4 months ago

      That’s not how extradition works. You have to give people up to the US criminal system. They don’t reciprocate. They just promise not to coup your government.

      • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Why would the US strain their relationship with Brazil over Musk? Politically, it makes sense to extradite him.

        Also imma need a citation on how extradition works, I searched the wiki and couldn’t find anything.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Why would the US strain their relationship with Brazil over Musk?

          He’s in deep with the US financial sector and the MAGA GOP base.

          • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 months ago

            I’m failing to see the connection with Brazil here.

            What would the backlash be from the US financial sector?

            Why would MAGA be mad about the US Government extraditing an African American?

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              What would the backlash be from the US financial sector?

              Lobbyists would lean on federal and state legislators to impose retaliatory sanctions.

              Why would MAGA be mad about the US Government extraditing an African American?

              Because they see him as on their “team”.

              • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                So in your mind the possibility of Musk being extradited could lead to those colossal outcomes?

                The starlink thing died yesterday but, I can’t imagine a reaction this strong from the US financial sector or MAGA.

                I disagree with the intensity of this response, if it were to happen.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  So in your mind the possibility of Musk being extradited could lead to those colossal outcomes?

                  In my mind he just doesn’t get extradited, because it’s too much trouble and sets a bad standard for American billionaires.

        • winkerjadams@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          Politically I don’t think it makes sense to extradite him because politics is just money nowadays. If money weren’t in bed so thoroughly with politics I would agree but unfortunately here in america, bribery is legal and not looked down upon because we just decided to call it lobbying instead of bribing.

      • AlotOfReading@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        Extradition treaties are almost always reciprocal and this particular treaty is publicly available. No public treaty is going to include a promise not to coup another government because of the obvious political consequences of admitting you might to everyone else.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    53
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    how are people supposed to pay starlink if their accounts are frozen? is starlink offering free internet?

    • Summzashi@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Can’t really do that when his shit is quite literally in space floating above your country in orbit.

        • Crikeste@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Welcome to the world where money has more power than laws and governments. It’ll all work out fine, I’m sure.

        • Summzashi@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah the Brazilian space police is gonna shoot down them satellites.

          And then they will clean up the fueltas.

          I love fairytales about competence in Brazil.

          • ulterno@lemmy.kde.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            4 months ago

            It most probably can work directly with satellites, but I don’t think some user is going to put the effort into setting up a direct system (∵ high cost), just to use the bloated site, X is (∵ low throughput internet).

      • WoahWoah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        His shit is also on the ground. Do you think the satellites beam an internet connection directly into a laptop or something? That said, finding and seizing the individual receivers seems unlikely. They’ve already instituted a hefty fine (equivalent to more a year’s average salary) for even using a VPN to little effect.

        Beyond that, they’ve also threatened to seize all local assets/offices and emplacements if Starlink doesn’t comply. There’s several dozen as I recall.

        • Summzashi@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          My sweet child, do you think cocaine just appears? No, they need massive farms to produce. Brazil can’t even crack down on literal acres of fields of coca plants. You think they’re going to find some inconspicuous boxes that receive internet from space?

          Also do you think your router is just a plastic box with magic inside?

  • Kalcifer@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    As of 2024-09-03T22:10:25.545Z, Starlink is now complying with Brazil’s X ban [1].

    References
    1. “Starlink says it will block X in Brazil”. Emma Roth. The Verge. Published: 2024-09-03T22:10:25.545Z. Accessed: 2024-09-04T04:17Z. https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/3/24235204/starlink-block-x-brazil-comply-elon-musk.

      “We immediately initiated legal proceedings in the Brazilian Supreme Court explaining the gross illegality of this order and asking the Court to unfreeze our assets,” Starlink says in a post on X. “Regardless of the illegal treatment of Starlink in freezing of our assets, we are complying with the order to block access to X in Brazil.”

  • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    4 months ago

    If Starlink follows through on its reported vow to ignore the X ban, it is likely to face similar sanctions itself for ignoring a supreme court order.

    That could have a big impact in the Brazilian Amazon, where Starlink antennae have spread rapidly since being made available in September 2022, bringing high-speed internet connection to far-flung regions. By the end of 2023 Starlink antennae were being used in more than 90% of the Amazon’s municipalities, according to BBC Brasil.

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/article/2024/sep/02/brazils-supreme-court-upholds-x-ban-over-conduct

  • pedroapero@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    4 months ago

    This statement was later retracted. The Engadget article was redacted accordingly.