5 ms·

FYI SpaceX and Starlink were not involved in this feud at all until the judge froze Starlink's bank account just for the connection to Elon. In reality the one

FYI SpaceX and Starlink were not involved in this feud at all until the judge froze Starlink's bank account just for the connection to Elon. In reality the one that decided to involve SpaceX was the judge.

RIMR 2y ago
The judge froze Starlink's bank account because Elon refused to comply with a legal order given to SpaceX by the Brazilian government to block X. Agree with it or not, it's something that is legally required of ISPs operating inside of Brazil. Elon Musk refused on "free speech" grounds, and they retaliated. He's now complying and blocking X to Starlink customers in Brazil.
- ripjaygn 2y ago
  That is not true, Starlink's bank account was frozen before even the ban on X.
stetrain 2y ago
My understanding was SpaceX were operating as an ISP in the country of Brazil, and refusing to comply with the ruling to block X.com within the country of Brazil. Is that not the case?
- soulofmischief 2y ago
  Ideological grounds are a great reason to risk exposure to multiple assets. Musk should use any power at his disposal to resist government censorship. (This is not a statement about Musk's general attitude towards censorship, which is extremely circumstantial) Musk needs to set expectations around Starlink now regarding censorship and unwarranted, broad-scope data requests. If he doesn't, then one of the most important wins of non-terrestrial, NGO-provided internet will be taken away. The war for a fair and free internet rages on, shareholders be damned. edit: nvm, I didn't realize he already gave in: https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/3/24235204/starlink-block-x-brazil-comply-elon-musk https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/3/24235204/starlink-block-x-... That's pretty sad.
  - surgical_fire 2y ago
    > Ideological grounds are a great reason to risk exposure to multiple assets. Musk should use any power at his disposal to resist government censorship. Like he does on Turkey and China? Cool story bro.
    - soulofmischief 2y ago
      Did you completely gloss over the very next statement wherein I admonished Musk's circumstantial and inconsistent ideology/attitude towards censorship?
  - rich_sasha 2y ago
    A world where a supranational private company is above the law is literally my worst nightmare. No less, beaming unstoppable propaganda from space.
    - soulofmischief 2y ago
      Overgeneralization does no good here; I specifically shaped the conversation around censorship resistance, which is a net win for humanity. This isn't a conversation about allowing supranational companies free reign to do anything they want. I am all for both individuals and organizations resisting governmental attempts to restrict freedom beyond what is absolutely necessary for a relatively safe and functioning society. If suddenly that individual or organization acts in an authoritarian or antisocial manner, I no longer support it. This is the eternal battle. How much should a government control? How much control should people have over their government? What are the limits of collectivized resistance? Etc, etc. Obviously, Starlink has profit motives, but to say the company isn't built on ideology wouldn't paint the full picture; I absolutely want ISPs fighting for net neutrality and censorship resistance. See, ultimately, it should be such that if the government allows something, it's because the people have allowed it. So in an ideal society, all anti-government behavior would be antisocial behavior as well. Unfortunately, that's not the reality we face. Collectivized resistance against overreaching governments is crucial in order to secure our free future.
- TiredOfLife 2y ago
  The asset blocking was before the x ban.
ibero 2y ago
that’s not the whim of a judge, that’s brazilian law. piercing the corporate veil is different than in the US, that’s how Starlink got involved.
gibsonf1 2y ago
Actually, its worse than that. They froze Starlink as Brazilians can bypass state internet censorship via that. Its all about censorship.
surgical_fire 2y ago
That's not entirely true. The judge froze Starlink's bank account because it refused to block X. And X was targeted because it was refusing to comply with judicial decisions.
- inemesitaffia 2y ago
  You're wrong. Calendars work
PunchTornado 2y ago
the judge can be wrong or not, but Musk is so hated at this point, that anything done against him will be welcomed by the masses. my mind almost works like this now: Musk said something? the opposite must be true then. And it's Musk's fault for this hatred.

RIMR 2y ago

The judge froze Starlink's bank account because Elon refused to comply with a legal order given to SpaceX by the Brazilian government to block X. Agree with it or not, it's something that is legally required of ISPs operating inside of Brazil. Elon Musk refused on "free speech" grounds, and they retaliated. He's now complying and blocking X to Starlink customers in Brazil.

ripjaygn 2y ago
That is not true, Starlink's bank account was frozen before even the ban on X.

stetrain 2y ago

My understanding was SpaceX were operating as an ISP in the country of Brazil, and refusing to comply with the ruling to block X.com within the country of Brazil. Is that not the case?

soulofmischief 2y ago
Ideological grounds are a great reason to risk exposure to multiple assets. Musk should use any power at his disposal to resist government censorship. (This is not a statement about Musk's general attitude towards censorship, which is extremely circumstantial) Musk needs to set expectations around Starlink now regarding censorship and unwarranted, broad-scope data requests. If he doesn't, then one of the most important wins of non-terrestrial, NGO-provided internet will be taken away. The war for a fair and free internet rages on, shareholders be damned. edit: nvm, I didn't realize he already gave in: https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/3/24235204/starlink-block-x-brazil-comply-elon-musk https://www.theverge.com/2024/9/3/24235204/starlink-block-x-... That's pretty sad.
- surgical_fire 2y ago
  > Ideological grounds are a great reason to risk exposure to multiple assets. Musk should use any power at his disposal to resist government censorship. Like he does on Turkey and China? Cool story bro.
  - soulofmischief 2y ago
    Did you completely gloss over the very next statement wherein I admonished Musk's circumstantial and inconsistent ideology/attitude towards censorship?
- rich_sasha 2y ago
  A world where a supranational private company is above the law is literally my worst nightmare. No less, beaming unstoppable propaganda from space.
  - soulofmischief 2y ago
    Overgeneralization does no good here; I specifically shaped the conversation around censorship resistance, which is a net win for humanity. This isn't a conversation about allowing supranational companies free reign to do anything they want. I am all for both individuals and organizations resisting governmental attempts to restrict freedom beyond what is absolutely necessary for a relatively safe and functioning society. If suddenly that individual or organization acts in an authoritarian or antisocial manner, I no longer support it. This is the eternal battle. How much should a government control? How much control should people have over their government? What are the limits of collectivized resistance? Etc, etc. Obviously, Starlink has profit motives, but to say the company isn't built on ideology wouldn't paint the full picture; I absolutely want ISPs fighting for net neutrality and censorship resistance. See, ultimately, it should be such that if the government allows something, it's because the people have allowed it. So in an ideal society, all anti-government behavior would be antisocial behavior as well. Unfortunately, that's not the reality we face. Collectivized resistance against overreaching governments is crucial in order to secure our free future.
TiredOfLife 2y ago
The asset blocking was before the x ban.

ibero 2y ago

that’s not the whim of a judge, that’s brazilian law. piercing the corporate veil is different than in the US, that’s how Starlink got involved.

gibsonf1 2y ago

Actually, its worse than that. They froze Starlink as Brazilians can bypass state internet censorship via that. Its all about censorship.

surgical_fire 2y ago

That's not entirely true. The judge froze Starlink's bank account because it refused to block X. And X was targeted because it was refusing to comply with judicial decisions.

inemesitaffia 2y ago
You're wrong. Calendars work

PunchTornado 2y ago

the judge can be wrong or not, but Musk is so hated at this point, that anything done against him will be welcomed by the masses. my mind almost works like this now: Musk said something? the opposite must be true then. And it's Musk's fault for this hatred.