What an utter piece of shit.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    -241 year ago

    Wow, this thread. All he did was switching off his satellite network though, not somehow sabotaged the operation.

    • Flying SquidOP
      link
      171 year ago

      That act literally sabotaged the operation. On purpose.

      • @jarfil
        link
        41 year ago

        Except the network was already off, he refused to switch it on for a foreign country’s operation without his own country’s approval. On purpose.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          41 year ago

          I don’t understand why Ukraine didn’t ask the US government for this and instead asked Musk directly. Ofc he wouldn’t do it unless pressured by the government.

        • Flying SquidOP
          link
          51 year ago

          Let’s see… he allowed the Ukrainian military to use Starlink but put it in the ToS that they couldn’t actually use it in any military operations.

          Yes, that sounds very plausible. Very plausible indeed.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -11 year ago

            It’s quite possible the internet was intended to be used for communication proposes. For instance, civilian GPS chips shut down themselves if high enough velocity is detected to prevent usage in rockets.

            • Flying SquidOP
              link
              61 year ago

              Feel free to present even a shred of evidence that supports this idea. Because as far as I can tell, all you have is “he didn’t sabotage it because maybe they violated the TOS” when he admits to sabotaging the operation.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -11 year ago

                Evidence of what? I don’t know what was the agreement between Musk and US military, but I’m sure if Musk violated it he’ll be liable for it.

                  • @SupraMario
                    link
                    21 year ago

                    ITAR look it up. Starlink cannot be used in military applications if it’s being used in a commercial application. Musk didn’t pull the plug on this, lawyers and the laws did. I don’t care for the guy either but get your facts straight before believing what CNNs CEOs book tells you.

    • archomrade [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      131 year ago

      All the doctor did was switch off life support 🤷‍♂️ it’s not like they forced the patient’s body to shut down.

      Real “Stanly was attacked by his own heart” vibes.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        -61 year ago

        But it’s more like it’s doctor’s own life support system and the patient connected himself to it.

        • archomrade [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          imagine being so brainwashed that you think owning the life support machine morally entitles you to decide who is kept alive with it.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -11 year ago

            Good argument, but where do you draw the line? You can save someone right now by an act of a good will, but do you do it?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            -11 year ago

            Imagine being so brainwashed that you think since someone else owns a life support machine, you have the right to use it to kill people you don’t like.

            • archomrade [he/him]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Weird how the thrust of your statement doesn’t change regardless of the status of ownership

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -11 year ago

                Nope. In this case the doctors machine isn’t a life support system, it’s more like an xray machine. The ownership remains the doctors the entire time. The doctor chooses to stop a patient who wants to use the machine to kill another patient.its his machine to begin with. The ONLY morally correct decision is to not allow it. Get mad at the doctor all you want, at the end of the day you’re advocating for murder.

                • archomrade [he/him]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  You honestly think who owns the tool being used changes the morality of murder?

                  Nevermind that we’re actually talking about war between nation states, not a doctor stopping a hospital patient from, erm, repeatedly shooting someone else with X-ray radiation?

                  What a silly allegory you’ve come up with

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    01 year ago

                    Lol the ownership of the tool is not at what the point is. The point is that you and many others think Elon is somehow obligated to assist Ukraine in killing Russians with his tools. Not only is he not obligated, he is morally obligated to NOT help them. The morality of murder doesn’t change, the only thing changing is the vast majority of brain washed peons who think Elon is somehow responsible for Ukrainian deaths. I changed the tool to x-ray because in this case, Starlink is not a tool that is designed to kill or keep alive, only aide in communication. In this situation, Ukraine wanted to use this tool to kill. Fuck anyone that thinks this is okay. Fuck anyone knocking elon for denying it. Unlike the vast majority of users here, I am an actual combat vet who has experienced these things first hand. It’s easy for anyone to sit behind a computer desk and dehumanize people because of their country. No different than the piece of shit politicians making money off the backs of these murders.

                    If you can’t see this point or comprehend these allegories then perhaps you’re part of the problem.