If you’re hitting a paywall, here’s a CNN link to the same story: https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/elon-musk-biography-walter-isaacson-ukraine-starlink/index.html
If you’re hitting a paywall, here’s a CNN link to the same story: https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/elon-musk-biography-walter-isaacson-ukraine-starlink/index.html
Honestly I’m kind of glad that they didn’t. Imagine if the US government had even more control and surveillance potential over the internet. I know they already basically have 100% but, I dunno, a network of low-Earth-orbit satellites constantly hovering overhead, covering every square centimetre of the earth, is a bit scary.
I don’t think the same network in the hands of an unstable billionaire is an improvement. Given the choice I’d rather the U.S. have control of the network.
You make a good point… what a choice, huh?
I think this one is much easier to look at if I restate the choice:
"A single individual billionaire who has only his self interest in mind has control over the internet "
vs.
“An organization consisting of more than one person, who are voted to power, who must hold their own interests in mind as well as their doners at minimum”
Personally, even if it’s a whole bunch of different billionaires fighting for power, the government ultimately has to answer to more than one person. That makes it an inherently better choice.
Which government? Do you imagine that the vast network of live-feed surveillance satellites run by the various arms of the US intelligence services and military is under the slightest control of the elected government?