599
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
599 points (93.0% liked)
Technology
58965 readers
4268 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
Since Twitter has nothing to do with Tesla (beyond the emotionally stunted owner) this is serious line being crossed. I mean - I don't care about Tesla. But I do care about SpaceX and Starlink as they have serious geopolitical implications.
Some country's leader disses Twitter and they don't get to launch satellites. Or their people don't get satellite internet.
This amount of power should not be in the hands of one rich guy with an inferiority complex.
SpaceX and starlink are dead in the water and utterly useless until Musk has them taken away. As long as he's running those, they're just shitty companies with lots of empty promises
Don't know why you're down voted. They've been promising man on mars any day now for years.
The mars thing is really a small part of what they do, although it gets the press. They are pretty much the only real game in town for satellite launches, and, I think ISS transport (especially since Soyez is Russian and there's not a lot of good will going on there...). Even Amazon uses them for launches. It's approaching monopoly status for critical infrastructure (we're very dependant on satellites as a society now).
Mars is a labour of love for future ambition, but it's not the main show.
Whether the root cause is historically poor NASA funding or not (I think there's a strong argument for competition and private sector IF it's properly governed, but it never is...), the fact is that we've created a situation where vast amounts of geopolitical control rest with a single person.