this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2023
489 points (97.1% liked)

politics

19089 readers
5804 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] grue@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Elon Musk straight up directly helped protect the offensive military assets of an enemy nation during their ongoing, unprovoked invasion of a country ours is fully invested in protecting, and nothing happened.

I think the problem there might be that we don't actually have a law prohibiting that yet (probably because until recently, it wasn't possible for one guy to have the power to do that sort of thing in the first place). We apparently need one, but we can't do anything about the Musk incident because of the whole "ex post facto" thing.

[–] SatanicNotMessianic@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

I’m assuming that because his network is carrying what the US would consider classified information, he (and his involved employees) have clearances and have signed those great NDAs that will send you to prison for violating them.

I’d be interested to see an infosec audit of the top offices.

[–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You're suggesting a law mandating that private businesses must allow their products to be used for military purposes? That sounds fashy as fuck to me

[–] grue@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

First of all, no, that's not at all what I said and I resent the your dishonest attempt at DARVO-ing. Musk is the fascist here, not me.

Second, your argument about SpaceX being a "private business" is ridiculously oversimplistic. It is intimately intertwined with the US government in myriad ways, from receiving grants to develop its technology in the first place, to having contracts to launch stuff on behalf of NASA and other government agencies, to being subject to the regulations of the FCC, FAA, etc.

Third, Musk allowed his product to be used to help Ukraine voluntarily, then he betrayed that commitment in order to play kingmaker and interfering in something he had no right to. He shouldn't get to pick and choose what Ukraine does with the service any more than Comcast and AT&T should get to pick and choose what websites people visit.