8 ms·

Asteroid stated earlier: "At worse this is nice gesture " I mostly wanted to correct that to say at worse it is a non gesture. Somewhat helping a couple hundred

Asteroid stated earlier: "At worse this is nice gesture " I mostly wanted to correct that to say at worse it is a non gesture. Somewhat helping a couple hundred people out of a million plus, is not quite the "nice" gesture. Yeah no correction needed here buddy - I get it you have anti-Elon syndrome and anything any of his companies do are bad, and you have decided to use your intellectual prowess to delude yourself into this conclusion regardless of facts. These devices are not even being setup by the locals, and no one is forcing them to buy into the ecosystem. The FIRST RESPONDERS REQUESTED THIS CHANGE, because they are bringing them on the ground with them. They successfully removed a hurdle which was preventing them from a rapid rescue effort. The fact you are willing to cast that as some sort of evil advertising campaign to hook them on hardware they can't afford is perhaps one of the dumbest things I have read here -- and apparently quite a few people here are influenceable enough to fall for this nonsense. How you can manage to be so upset that they removed the device activation hurdle is beyond me -- but I'll go ahead and judge this situation based on the facts on the ground not my pre-conceived decision about a companies motives. How poor appalachia is entirely irrelevant, the people aren't helicoptering out to bring StarLinks back to trick the community into getting locked into hardware. First responders had trouble activating and responding and made a direct request, which was granted for humanitarian reasons whether you like the company or not. The fact that you are letting your biases cloud your judgement and drive absurd villain arcs is clear for everyone to see, and I for sure don't need you 'correcting' me (you also spelled my name wrong btw). You are calling out other people for polluting the dialog by accurately calling you out, and in the same breath claiming this is really about Elon's savior complex. Maybe if you stop letting Elon live in your head rent free, you can make room for some nuance and critical thinking. Every claim you made here is based on a complete misrepresentation of the facts.

seadan83 2y ago
Not accepting claims is different from anti elon bias. You say X is good or bad, my response is prove it. You say X is meaningful, I have the same response. That is not being upset, it is being skeptical. With that said, I now concede there is more than marginal utility happening and I've done the numbers in sibling comments. The fact I've evolved my opinion based on further information I think makes most of your screed moot. > The FIRST RESPONDERS REQUESTED THIS CHANGE, Are you referring to FEMA? Since there is at least one cajun navy style person who requested this that I am aware of, I would largely agree. My contention is whether any of this actually all that meaningful. For that, I'm not going to assume it. Which was my initial position. > and I for sure don't need you 'correcting' me My apologies. I am stuck on a phone and my diligence is not what I would like it to be. Rather than "correcting", I was disagreeing with you (pending more information). I should have said something more like: without yet seeing the full numbers of how much this helping, I am not sure whether this is worst case even more than a non gesture. Since you wrote "worst case", my initial thought is the "worst case" was even lower on the spectrum than "nice: > Every claim you made here is based on a complete misrepresentation of the facts. Every claim?? Can you give a few examples? This feels like hyperbole. Though, I try not to make unsupported claims. It would be a useful learning to me to know which claims I positively made without facts. (Please keep in mind not accepting claims is very different from putting forward a claim - perhaps you are conflating the two?? If not, I'm happy to apologize and retract any unsupported claims.)
- astroid 2y ago
  "You say X is good or bad, my response is provd it. You say X is meaningful, I have the same response." - No I didn't. Your bias is showing again. "Are you referring to FEMA? Since there is at least one cajun navy style person who requested this that I am aware of, I would largely agree." No - I am referring to the on the ground actual FIRST responders who were there helping immediately (and continue to volunteer their time, money, and skills) -- not the government agency that came in after. Are the only first responders that matter FEMA? Is this supposed to be some kind of logical fallacy gotcha like "OOOHHHHHHhhhhhh that dude that bought 50 StarLinks on his own credit card and hauled them out to those in need is actually SECOND to respond, doesn't matter if FEMA didn't help those people yet FEMA First, FEMA best." I know off-hand of a handful of volunteers that got over a hundred terminals out -- that could easily make a tangible difference for 1,000s of people alone. I'm sure there are many many more I don't have direct knowledge of. You literally just fake quoted things I never said, misconstrued what I did say, laid out several logical traps, and somehow smugly think that everyone does not see through you. "Every claim?" Yep. Will I continue to dissect your disingenuous points? Nope, my time is more valuable than yours - and it's clear you have no problem pissing yours away to waste mine. Yeah no thanks, I will patiently await your totally non-biased post-mortem-analysis of the data. Until then I have nothing more to say other than I feel sorry for you.
  - seadan83 2y ago
    Wow.. what did I fake quote? What claims were unsupported? My question to you whether you were talking about FEMA or civilians was a QUESTION!! It was not a logical trap. I wanted to understand what you were saying better. That you ranted about it, put words into my mouth - does not bode well. It was a clarifying question. I don't need you feeling anything about me just as much as you don't need correcting. I do think you are reading way more into what I'm writing, and are conflating the lack of accepting your claims with making those of my own. If you can clarify, it would be helpful. Otherwise calm down since the personal attacks are not in the spirit of this discussion board.
    - astroid 2y ago

seadan83 2y ago

Not accepting claims is different from anti elon bias. You say X is good or bad, my response is prove it. You say X is meaningful, I have the same response. That is not being upset, it is being skeptical. With that said, I now concede there is more than marginal utility happening and I've done the numbers in sibling comments. The fact I've evolved my opinion based on further information I think makes most of your screed moot. > The FIRST RESPONDERS REQUESTED THIS CHANGE, Are you referring to FEMA? Since there is at least one cajun navy style person who requested this that I am aware of, I would largely agree. My contention is whether any of this actually all that meaningful. For that, I'm not going to assume it. Which was my initial position. > and I for sure don't need you 'correcting' me My apologies. I am stuck on a phone and my diligence is not what I would like it to be. Rather than "correcting", I was disagreeing with you (pending more information). I should have said something more like: without yet seeing the full numbers of how much this helping, I am not sure whether this is worst case even more than a non gesture. Since you wrote "worst case", my initial thought is the "worst case" was even lower on the spectrum than "nice: > Every claim you made here is based on a complete misrepresentation of the facts. Every claim?? Can you give a few examples? This feels like hyperbole. Though, I try not to make unsupported claims. It would be a useful learning to me to know which claims I positively made without facts. (Please keep in mind not accepting claims is very different from putting forward a claim - perhaps you are conflating the two?? If not, I'm happy to apologize and retract any unsupported claims.)

astroid 2y ago
"You say X is good or bad, my response is provd it. You say X is meaningful, I have the same response." - No I didn't. Your bias is showing again. "Are you referring to FEMA? Since there is at least one cajun navy style person who requested this that I am aware of, I would largely agree." No - I am referring to the on the ground actual FIRST responders who were there helping immediately (and continue to volunteer their time, money, and skills) -- not the government agency that came in after. Are the only first responders that matter FEMA? Is this supposed to be some kind of logical fallacy gotcha like "OOOHHHHHHhhhhhh that dude that bought 50 StarLinks on his own credit card and hauled them out to those in need is actually SECOND to respond, doesn't matter if FEMA didn't help those people yet FEMA First, FEMA best." I know off-hand of a handful of volunteers that got over a hundred terminals out -- that could easily make a tangible difference for 1,000s of people alone. I'm sure there are many many more I don't have direct knowledge of. You literally just fake quoted things I never said, misconstrued what I did say, laid out several logical traps, and somehow smugly think that everyone does not see through you. "Every claim?" Yep. Will I continue to dissect your disingenuous points? Nope, my time is more valuable than yours - and it's clear you have no problem pissing yours away to waste mine. Yeah no thanks, I will patiently await your totally non-biased post-mortem-analysis of the data. Until then I have nothing more to say other than I feel sorry for you.
- seadan83 2y ago
  Wow.. what did I fake quote? What claims were unsupported? My question to you whether you were talking about FEMA or civilians was a QUESTION!! It was not a logical trap. I wanted to understand what you were saying better. That you ranted about it, put words into my mouth - does not bode well. It was a clarifying question. I don't need you feeling anything about me just as much as you don't need correcting. I do think you are reading way more into what I'm writing, and are conflating the lack of accepting your claims with making those of my own. If you can clarify, it would be helpful. Otherwise calm down since the personal attacks are not in the spirit of this discussion board.
  - astroid 2y ago