Elon Musk poses a clear and present danger to American national security. The sooner the US government revokes his security clearance, terminates its contracts with him and the entities he controls, and builds its own alternatives to Starlink and SpaceX, the safer America will be. (emphasis mine$

The government not doing that in the first place lead to SpaceX having the monopoly, so I think that is part of the problem.

[–] Streetlights@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Most of the blame for SpaceX's dominance can be laid at the feet of Boeing.

[–] Pandantic@midwest.social 4 points 1 month ago

I mean, underfunding our own governmental space program might also be a contributing factor. 🤷

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 2 points 1 month ago

Boeing was ran into the ground by criminal clones posse. These fake shake ups are just a circle jerk. Clearly you can't trust corpos to run a government contractor. Union and feds need seats on the board. Not if sure if that would fix the grift...

This level of grift can't go unpunished, the empire will fall if this keeps up.

[–] Archer@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So weird to see Sam’s Dad pop up in the news

[–] Trae@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

"Sam's Dad" has been politically newsworthy since the Clinton administration.

How do you think Sam got the money to buy college humor?

[+] tal@lemmy.today -16 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

‘Musk’s SpaceX has nearly total control of the world’s satellite internet through its Starlink unit.’

The British, on the other hand, have a competing satellite network, OneWeb, which is the principal competitor of, and doing a rather poor job of competing with Starlink.

I don't feel a burning need to go look to a British newspaper for advice as to whether-or-not to use an American satellite network versus a British satellite network.

If you guys across the pond want to use OneWeb instead, knock yourselves out.

EDIT: And speaking of national security, the last time we were relying on a British global network for intercontinental communications, we wound up with British intelligence spying on our diplomatic communications channels. Thanks, but I'm pretty comfortable using an American network.

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago (2 children)

I'm curious why you keep saying we here. A private company run by a South African does not represent the American people. Certainly no one should be foolish enough to think he has the interest of the American people in mind. So I'd appreciate you stop saying we. I don't view him as someone working for my good. I view him as a parasite to my country.

[–] tal@lemmy.today 3 points 1 month ago

He's an American citizen, and Starlink is an American company.

[–] trajekolus@lemm.ee 2 points 1 month ago (2 children)

While he grew up in SA, he has no loyalty to South Africa either. We don't want him nor be associated with him

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

Well tough titties he's yours and I think you should take him back.

[–] zabadoh@ani.social 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

To paraphrase badly: "You can take the boy out of Afrikaners, but you can't take Afrikaners out of the boy"

[–] trajekolus@lemm.ee 1 points 1 month ago

He is not an Afrikaner - as the child of immigrants he went to English schools, and has nothing to do with Afrikaans.

Your prejudice makes you dishonest.

[–] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Robert Reich, a former US secretary of labor, is professor of public policy at the University of California at Berkeley

[–] trajekolus@lemm.ee 12 points 1 month ago

Reich did not suggest using a British alternative.
His words from the article: "The sooner the US government revokes his security clearance, terminates its contracts with him and the entities he controls, and builds its own alternatives to Starlink and SpaceX, the safer America will be"