4 ms·
Starlink will now be free in Brazil since remote hospitals, schools use it: Musk
- LorenDB 2y agoRelevant Elon tweet: https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1829317832489816083 https://x.com/elonmusk/status/1829317832489816083
- tbrownaw 2y agoSo it's for existing customers, and it's because they're unable to accept payment for reasons that aren't the customers' fault.
- supriyo-biswas 2y agoTo be fair, Starlink can't continue offering services to new customers either because they've been effectively forbidden from doing business there. (The merits of the case and each parties viewpoints are a separate matter.)
- scarab92 2y agoIs this judge freezing SpaceX’s finances because Twitter won’t censor speech? Those are two completely different companies.
- isodev 2y agoI don’t think the technicalities of incorporation and branding matter that much, it’s a “Elon Musk company”, unfortunately.
- andsoitis 2y agoThat’s thuggish, lawless behavior that undermines trust in Brazil’s business environment.
- viraptor 2y agoIt's possibly immoral? It's not really lawless if the local Supreme Court makes the decision.
- aaomidi 2y agoSome countries hold executives and figureheads responsible cross companies. This is actually a good thing. The SpaceX board can now decide if they want to keep someone like Elon up. If this cost is worth keeping Elon around then the free market has spoken :)
- mr_toad 2y agoMusk has nearly 80% voting control, and 40% equity. So he has more control over the board than they do over him.
- coffeebeqn 2y agoIt sounds like they’re freezing one companies payments due to the conduct of another company. Aren’t these two totally distinct legal entities? Whether they share a figurehead that doesn’t sound like a place I would want to start my business in ?
- cassianoleal 2y ago[flagged]
- Sirizarry 2y agoDid I miss something? How is musk using spaceX to evade justice?
- cassianoleal 2y agoMusk ceased Xitter operations in Brazil to evade justice.
- 2y ago
- waihtis 2y agoisnt it funny how its completely obvious, yet the mere mention of this attracts a downvote brigade on this site.
- ivewonyoung 2y agoIf there is one place where technicalities should matter, that is in a court of law. SpaceX is only 40% owned by Musk.
- jltsiren 2y agoSometimes what matters is voting control, not ownership. If the same entity has >50% control in two companies, the companies may not be seen as fully independent before the law.
- andsoitis 2y agoThe fact that the same person owns both does not necessarily make them dependent on one another unless they are structured or operated in a way that intertwines their activities, finances, or management.
- isodev 2y agoI think the point is that if the same person is accountable for both, they're pretty much "intertwined".
- threatofrain 2y agoImagine we realized that Sundar Pichai also had a major position in Costco. So then we started to crash Costco to make Sundar Pichai direct Google policy. And the stakeholders in both companies who don't care and are just using this as retirement strategy are exposed. This has some major levels of "I want to direct a result so badly I'm going to start spilling harms all over the fucking place" kind of economic policy.
- isodev 2y agoThe idea is that responsibility is held by the CEO/owner in control. So if someone owns companies A and B and they do something illegal through company A, then it's logical to say that the CEO/owner of company B has committed something illegal (it's the same person!). I understand certain CEOs are elected by their respective boards, so it's then their decision to keep someone like this onboard. I'd also question the bigger picture - how come is a single person allowed to be at head of so many companies. Can they really be an effective CEO in this case?
- Rinzler89 2y agoWhy is them being separate companies relevant when they have the same ownership? If a judge goes after you they go after all your assets.
- Sparyjerry 2y agoThey don't have the same ownership though. Imagine if you own 70% of one company and 40% of another, and then the company you own 40% of is de-banked in a country because the company you own 70% of chose to stop doing business in that country. It's corruption at an unprecedented scale.
- Rinzler89 2y agoHow is this corruption just because countries have different rules and laws? Not every country has the same laws like the US/Angloshpere. Just because you don't like the ruling, and see it as unfair, doesn't automatically make it corruption. Did the judge break Brazilian laws? If yes, then we can say it's corruption. Not saying there isn't corruption in Brasil since there definitely is, I'm saying, is this particular ruling a case of corruption by Brasil's laws, yes or no?
- lobocinza 2y agoIt is not as simple as that. The law said that 2+2=4 and this was the accepted jurisprudence but now he is saying that 2+2=5 because he wants and he can do that because he is a supreme court judge and his decisions legally are the new accepted interpretation of the law. It's a flaw in Brazilian political that enables supreme court judges to virtually do whatever they want including legislating because they can pick any law and bend it. In a healthy system the supreme court would be challenged by the senate but this doesn't happen because most senators are corrupt and it is the supreme court who judge such cases.
- throwawayVDJDJD 2y ago[dead]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- bozonaro 2y agolet me fix that for you: ..because Twitter won’t suppress criminal speech. (see if it makes sense now).
- energy123 2y ago"Free... until this matter is resolved."
- decremental 2y agoGood move, Elon. Very cool
- r721 2y agoReuters story: https://www.reuters.com/technology/brazilian-court-suspend-x-brazil-if-musk-does-not-name-new-country-2024-08-28/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/brazilian-court-suspend-x...
- billti 2y agoWow. I thought Reuters was an upper tier publisher. That is totally unreadable on my iPhone. The page is jumping all over the place as I try to scroll.
- bpodgursky 2y agoSet aside the details of the case — if money actually translated into power, the richest man in the world wouldn't be struggling to strong-arm an unelected bureaucrat in a country of middling importance. Kind of obvious IMO that money translates into less real-world power than ever before in history. In 1800, this judge would be at the bottom of the Atlantic ocean. In 1950, he'd be deposed in a paid coup. In 2024... the richest man in the world complains about him on Twitter.
- aplummer 2y agoI think you are just looking at one specific issue on the wrong timescale. Palms will be greased and he will get what he wants.
- zadler 2y agoIm not disagreeing, but how do you figure that it’s obvious and in 1950 or 1800 it would have been different?
- rgbrenner 2y agoBrazil is both richer and more powerful than Musk. It's one of the top-10 largest economies in the world. They have so much more money than Musk they can maintain exclusive control over land, raise a military, and enforce their own laws and regulations within their borders. Never seen Musk even attempt anything like that.
- joegibbs 2y agoBrazil the country is, but Brazil the country is also made up of people, and none of them individually hold $250 billion of assets that they could use against someone - that's about 10% of Brazil's GDP (not that GDP/net worth is a particularly good comparison for a ton of reasons, but it gives a general indicator). 100 or 200 years ago someone with that kind of wealth could definitely have had a country strong-armed into doing what they want - someone like the owners of the United Fruit Company or the East India Company.
- 2y ago
- ivewonyoung 2y agoSpaceX statement. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1829253524842303678.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1829253524842303678.html
- brcmthrowaway 2y ago[flagged]
- stackghost 2y agoI recommend Firefox and ublock origin.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- forgot-im-old 2y ago[flagged]
- ivewonyoung 2y agoSource for "can't mention on X" ? Also some redditor writing up a very political conspiracy theory rant on a Musk hate sub isn't much substance.
- waihtis 2y agoMinister of the Supreme Federal Court Alexandre de Moraes has frozen Starlink's bank accounts in regards to an ongoing complication between X (Twitter) and the state of Brazil. It should be noted these are two entirely different companies. Hard to see this as anything else except Brazil having a "rocket man bad"-moment.
- Rinzler89 2y agoWhy is them being separate companies relevant when they have the same ownership? If a judge goes after you they go after all your assets.
- aaomidi 2y agoAmericans and Europeans are used to a very specific definition of liability when it comes to large businesses.
- pjerem 2y agoWhich is an issue honestly. Not saying that Brazil have the good definition but it’s pretty infuriating how in US and Europe, you are pretty rarely accused when your company really misbehaves. I mean, we may have thousands of cases of companies killing people due to bad decisions and executives are mostly never prosecuted.
- waihtis 2y agoThe legal dispute isn't with Elon Musk (the person) but X (Twitter) However, the judge is punishing Elon (the person) via collateral damage to his other businesses If you can't see any difference here I really can't help you
- threatofrain 2y agoThe problem is that those other businesses aren't really his. There are too many other people on board. They're also not related businesses. It's one of thing if there's a cabal of companies acting in concert to stifle competition, but these companies are as different as they could possibly be. Now stockholders should be asking whether going into Brazil is worth the risk because any major stockholder might be punished for their position in an entirely unrelated company. The answer may be yes, it's worth the risk, but the question should definitely be asked.
- pr337h4m 2y agosome context: https://www.americasquarterly.org/article/brazils-most-powerful-judge-is-in-the-spotlight-again/ https://www.americasquarterly.org/article/brazils-most-power...
- geitir 2y agoThis thread has been shadow banned
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- bozonaro 2y ago[dead]
- dfadsadsf 2y agoUS should respond symmetrically and freeze accounts of some random(with Durov arrest), EU (threatening letter to Musk) and UK (prison sentences for mildly offensive tweets) are fighting to limit free speech under very similar pretenses that freedom of the press was limited in Nazi Germany or USSR (fighting foreign influence, “misinformation”, protecting kids) Some societies are robust and can afford free press/free speech while keeping peace major Brazilian company. /s On a serious note it’s interesting to see how countries around the world from France and internal cohesion. Modern multicultural and multi-ethnic states in EU may have to become way more authoritarian to keep going.
- pjerem 2y ago> Some societies are robust and can afford free press/free speech while keeping peace Oh yeah. The US were an interestingly robust society and democracy to observe since the Trump election.
- ChrisArchitect 2y agoRelated from earlier: Starlink's financial assets frozen in Brazil https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41392962 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41392962
- sidcool 2y agoWhy the hell does Elon want to meddle in other countries' internal strifes? And why should a foreign country accept influence from another country's business man? Ethics aside, this is about something else.
- pixxel 2y agoTake a day off. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41397639 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41397639
- Diederich 2y agoDoes anyone have a sense of how practically difficult it would be to detect an active Starlink installation?