Just because something obscure was bombed and erased in Ukraine (that you don't really care about) instead of shooting Starlink satellites off the sky, doesn't mean there was no response and that it wouldn't trigger a disastrous chain reaction otherwise.
> This is a danger of megalomaniac billionaires
That is assuming that allowing the use of civilian communications infrastructure for war and high-profile military operations is a norm that should be endorsed, and not just as a megalomanic war profiting as we see with military industrial complex fat purses.
> He needs a quiet tap on the shoulder and remind him that his toys can be taken away.
Can they? And what exactly would be the legal framework behind this threat?
> Can they? And what exactly would be the legal framework behind this threat?
I think it's already happening/happened. Space-X is "working much more
closely with US military from now on" - what exactly that means or
what went down you or I will likely never know. But I am not surprised
at this turn of events.
Just because something obscure was bombed and erased in Ukraine (that you don't really care about) instead of shooting Starlink satellites off the sky, doesn't mean there was no response and that it wouldn't trigger a disastrous chain reaction otherwise.
> This is a danger of megalomaniac billionaires
That is assuming that allowing the use of civilian communications infrastructure for war and high-profile military operations is a norm that should be endorsed, and not just as a megalomanic war profiting as we see with military industrial complex fat purses.
> He needs a quiet tap on the shoulder and remind him that his toys can be taken away.
Can they? And what exactly would be the legal framework behind this threat?