5 ms·

Disappointing to see they were flagged, but moreso to see the apparent ratio between downvotes and negative comments on those threads. Apparently a large subse

Disappointing to see they were flagged, but moreso to see the apparent ratio between downvotes and negative comments on those threads. Apparently a large subset of the community felt those posts should be removed from the front page, but didn’t feel obliged to explain why. It’s like Elon is becoming a radioactive element for this community’s health too. Edit: This submission also briefly showed as flagged sometime in the last 20m

mschuster91 4y ago
People are sick and tired about constant news about Musk's latest crap antics, just like with Trump - basically, at least here in Europe, you can't go to bed and wake up without yet another newsflash of either a large Twitter outage or Elon Musk shitposting again. I get why people are exhausted, but the desensitization is dangerous on its own - when there are no consequences, people escalate their behavior... and Musk already has intervened to make Starlink less usable for Ukraine. I don't want that to continue.
- 93po 4y ago
  > Musk already has intervened to make Starlink less usable for Ukraine. and here you are perpetuating the fake shit about Elon that gets everyone engaged. Elon doesn't want Starlink to be directly used on weapons to kill people. Would you also fault the World Nuclear Association for being willing to provide uranium to power Ukraine, but refusing to provide the same material for nuclear bombs? He has a right to determine whether he wants his technology to be used directly for offensive war efforts. He is still providing Starlink for general military operations and communications. He just doesn't want it directly enabling weapons.
  - mustacheemperor 4y ago
    Ukraine wants to use Starlink to make war, so when Elon intervenes to prevent the use of Starlink for certain applications in making war, he is making Starlink less usable for Ukraine. You're raising an argument for why it is in your view justifiable for Elon to do this, but that doesn't make the basic elements of what the commenter above said false. Nuclear weapons are far more destructive, and indiscriminately destructive, than the use of satcomms with conventional weapons, so I think that choice of comparison is hyperbolic and unreasonable. This seems more like Garmin sending GPS units to Ukraine but refusing them to be issued to tanks, and as much as Elon has the right to determine the use of the technology his firm is donating to Ukraine, people have the right to criticize his choice to do that. Ukrainians will die because of this decision, and it is fair for people to criticize the choices that lead to that result. Edit: I can't reply any further so I will just reiterate in reply here. Ukraine is using starlink for war, so making starlink unusable for weapons is making it less usable for Ukraine's use case, defending their country from invasion. How you choose to morally equivocate the invaders to the defenders is your decision, but it doesn't make what the commenter above said "fake" and it doesn't insulate Elon from criticism over his own decision.
    - 93po 4y ago
      It's not "less usable for Ukraine". It's working perfectly fine for Ukraine and Elon is going through massive efforts to ensure this. It's less usable for weapons. What the parent comment said was outright misleading to the point of basically being a lie. > Ukrainians will die because of this decision And Russians would die if he made the other decision. Even if Russia is on the wrong side here, killing a bunch of 20 year old soldiers while they sit around in mud doesn't help much. They're still humans and I also wouldn't want any part in killing humans.
      - KptMarchewa 4y ago
        >It's working perfectly fine for Ukraine No, because Ukraine needs to kill russians and destroy their war machine. Musk's actions prevents this. >And Russians would die if he made the other decision. Great!
      - mustacheemperor 4y ago
        >Even if Russia is on the wrong side here, killing a bunch of 20 year old soldiers while they sit around in mud doesn't help much Ah, I can reply now. You added this to your reply after I made my edit to my own comment responding to your earlier remarks, so I'll make my additional reply directly here. This view of war reads like naivete to me - the naivete that can develop if you've only learned about war on TV and on Wikipedia, from far away where everything is abstract. I would invite you to talk to some veterans of war, victims of invasion, refugees from combat zones, and consider revising your perspective. My in-laws who fled century-old farms in face of an invading army would strongly disagree with your view on what would or would not help end this war. Abstract moral relativism over individual soldiers hasn't saved any children from being kidnapped to Russia. Assuming you enjoy a comfortable existence in a first world country, you unfortunately play an indirect part in killing humans every day. Our first world system drives less fortunate humans towards death every day to operate, and the people who really, deeply do not want any part in that are spending their lives working for the less fortunate in places outside the first world. But by advocating against the measures Ukraine could use to defend itself, you are playing your own part in allowing Russia to continue mounting a bloodthirsty war of conquest.
  - walrus01 4y ago
    > Elon doesn't want Starlink to be directly used on weapons to kill people The starlink "star shield" program with the US DoD says otherwise. Every satellite company wants a piece of the DOD's many billions a year spent on geostationary and other services, launches.
    - Thlom 4y ago
      Military has been and always will be the milking cow for satcom operators. Every single satcom operator in the world is squeezing as much money from military contracts as possible. But usually they buy satellite capacity wholesale and lands the traffic on their own line cards in the teleport and is not using what can only be described as a consumer service. Maybe the allied countries should help Ukraine get proper satcom so they are not at the mercy of Musk whims.
  - wedn3sday 4y ago
    >> He has a right to determine whether he wants his technology to be used directly for offensive war efforts. Perhaps this is laudable if true, however I havent seen this actually used in any justification for not allowing the use of starlink (by people involved, not internet commentators). Its also a bit of a stretch to call anything the Ukrainians do here as "offensive war efforts" when they're defending themselves from annihilation. Who-invaded-who is kind of an important part of this story.

mschuster91 4y ago

People are sick and tired about constant news about Musk's latest crap antics, just like with Trump - basically, at least here in Europe, you can't go to bed and wake up without yet another newsflash of either a large Twitter outage or Elon Musk shitposting again. I get why people are exhausted, but the desensitization is dangerous on its own - when there are no consequences, people escalate their behavior... and Musk already has intervened to make Starlink less usable for Ukraine. I don't want that to continue.

93po 4y ago
> Musk already has intervened to make Starlink less usable for Ukraine. and here you are perpetuating the fake shit about Elon that gets everyone engaged. Elon doesn't want Starlink to be directly used on weapons to kill people. Would you also fault the World Nuclear Association for being willing to provide uranium to power Ukraine, but refusing to provide the same material for nuclear bombs? He has a right to determine whether he wants his technology to be used directly for offensive war efforts. He is still providing Starlink for general military operations and communications. He just doesn't want it directly enabling weapons.
- mustacheemperor 4y ago
  Ukraine wants to use Starlink to make war, so when Elon intervenes to prevent the use of Starlink for certain applications in making war, he is making Starlink less usable for Ukraine. You're raising an argument for why it is in your view justifiable for Elon to do this, but that doesn't make the basic elements of what the commenter above said false. Nuclear weapons are far more destructive, and indiscriminately destructive, than the use of satcomms with conventional weapons, so I think that choice of comparison is hyperbolic and unreasonable. This seems more like Garmin sending GPS units to Ukraine but refusing them to be issued to tanks, and as much as Elon has the right to determine the use of the technology his firm is donating to Ukraine, people have the right to criticize his choice to do that. Ukrainians will die because of this decision, and it is fair for people to criticize the choices that lead to that result. Edit: I can't reply any further so I will just reiterate in reply here. Ukraine is using starlink for war, so making starlink unusable for weapons is making it less usable for Ukraine's use case, defending their country from invasion. How you choose to morally equivocate the invaders to the defenders is your decision, but it doesn't make what the commenter above said "fake" and it doesn't insulate Elon from criticism over his own decision.
  - 93po 4y ago
    It's not "less usable for Ukraine". It's working perfectly fine for Ukraine and Elon is going through massive efforts to ensure this. It's less usable for weapons. What the parent comment said was outright misleading to the point of basically being a lie. > Ukrainians will die because of this decision And Russians would die if he made the other decision. Even if Russia is on the wrong side here, killing a bunch of 20 year old soldiers while they sit around in mud doesn't help much. They're still humans and I also wouldn't want any part in killing humans.
    - KptMarchewa 4y ago
      >It's working perfectly fine for Ukraine No, because Ukraine needs to kill russians and destroy their war machine. Musk's actions prevents this. >And Russians would die if he made the other decision. Great!
    - mustacheemperor 4y ago
      >Even if Russia is on the wrong side here, killing a bunch of 20 year old soldiers while they sit around in mud doesn't help much Ah, I can reply now. You added this to your reply after I made my edit to my own comment responding to your earlier remarks, so I'll make my additional reply directly here. This view of war reads like naivete to me - the naivete that can develop if you've only learned about war on TV and on Wikipedia, from far away where everything is abstract. I would invite you to talk to some veterans of war, victims of invasion, refugees from combat zones, and consider revising your perspective. My in-laws who fled century-old farms in face of an invading army would strongly disagree with your view on what would or would not help end this war. Abstract moral relativism over individual soldiers hasn't saved any children from being kidnapped to Russia. Assuming you enjoy a comfortable existence in a first world country, you unfortunately play an indirect part in killing humans every day. Our first world system drives less fortunate humans towards death every day to operate, and the people who really, deeply do not want any part in that are spending their lives working for the less fortunate in places outside the first world. But by advocating against the measures Ukraine could use to defend itself, you are playing your own part in allowing Russia to continue mounting a bloodthirsty war of conquest.
- walrus01 4y ago
  > Elon doesn't want Starlink to be directly used on weapons to kill people The starlink "star shield" program with the US DoD says otherwise. Every satellite company wants a piece of the DOD's many billions a year spent on geostationary and other services, launches.
  - Thlom 4y ago
    Military has been and always will be the milking cow for satcom operators. Every single satcom operator in the world is squeezing as much money from military contracts as possible. But usually they buy satellite capacity wholesale and lands the traffic on their own line cards in the teleport and is not using what can only be described as a consumer service. Maybe the allied countries should help Ukraine get proper satcom so they are not at the mercy of Musk whims.
- wedn3sday 4y ago
  >> He has a right to determine whether he wants his technology to be used directly for offensive war efforts. Perhaps this is laudable if true, however I havent seen this actually used in any justification for not allowing the use of starlink (by people involved, not internet commentators). Its also a bit of a stretch to call anything the Ukrainians do here as "offensive war efforts" when they're defending themselves from annihilation. Who-invaded-who is kind of an important part of this story.