1984: Starlink First Partner: Local Cops and State Military

[jim bell]

 On Wednesday, September 30, 2020, 11:48:44 AM PDT, Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 <punks at tfwno.gf> wrote:
 
 
 > >    Cool! So Jim Bell was right! Musko is a Libertarian Randroidic Hero and US Technology is making the world even more freer and perfect!
> 
> I think you are (deliberately) misrepresenting what I actually said.  

> 
> What I believe I DID say, and what I will say again, is that Musk is putting himself into a position where he could do a great deal of good for libertarian causes, in part by bypassing governments' ability to censor or cut off Internet access.   

    There's little to no connection between "libertarian causes" and "internet access".

Then you have a poor imagination.  Access to the Internet _IS_ a "libertarian cause".   The fact that nations such as India are selectiely  obstructing its people's access to the Internet should anger you immensely.  Authoritarian (and certainly totalitarian!) nations are merely the epitome of such obstruction.  Many people might not think mere "India" as being unfree, but nevertheless it's a problem.


 >   Government 'censoring' the arpanet in iran is not a libertarian cause at all. It is a US military fascist cause. Which you keep advocating. Now go ahead and try to acuse me of 'strawmanning' you. 
Okay, maybe it's BOTH "a libertarian cause" AND "US military fascist cause".   A stopped clock is right twice a day.   The fact that you can assert some "US military fascist" issue doesn't negate other possible interests that you don't happen to want to talk about.  

>    On the other hand, censorship and surveilance on the arpanet are problems caused by the US government and its 'private' facades like google, facebook, amazon and the like. Those companies have to be destroyed, and destroying them IS a libertarian cause.
In other words, you're waving a shiny object, to divert attention to other issues that Cypherpunks ought to be interested in.  


>> Musk is putting himself into a position where he could do a great deal of good for libertarian causes

    >That's a ridiculous, unfounded assertion. Actually musk is a high ranking enemy of freedom like any other high ranking US corporatist.
Musk is making the technology which could make itt POSSIBLE for a huge number of people in countries around the world to have continuous, uncensored access to the Internet.  Which is what I was referring to.   Will Musk actually accomplish what I'd like to see him accomplish?   He could either deliberately choose it, or deliberately refuse to choose it.  Your pessimism is highly uninteresting to me.  My goal is ensuring that Musk has little choice but  to assist freedom, rather than refuse to assist freedom.  
What _IS_ interesting is if Musk could be pursuaded to go through with it:  The way I see it, there is potentially an enormous difference between Starlink "working hard to prevent the 'guerilla' use of Starlink" and the opposite:  "working hard to ASSIST the 'guerilla' use of Starlink.

 >   What you're saying is that the most corrupt members of the US oligarchy can "do a great deal of good for libertarian causes", which makes as much sense as saying that eating cyanide is great for your health.
I don't know that Musk is CURRENTLY  one of "the most corrupt members of the US oligarchy".  But I don't believe in giving up before finding out the truth.  
  
>If he chooses to do so.  And I think, therefore, it is important that "we" (Cypherpunks and pro-freedom people) make sure he is aware that we know what he will be able to do, and what we think he SHOULD do.

  >>  Explain why you think a highly corrupt criminal whose only purpose in life is to advance US fascism is going to do the exact opposite of what he does? Your claim is pretty EXTRAORDINARY, so you have to provide a pretty EXTRAORDINARY explanation as well. I'm all ears. 
How about actually documenting and proving your claims?


 >   Of course, like anybody else musko SHOULDN'T be a criminal, but that observation applies to any moral agent, so it's irrelevant/useless. 
You are rather useless.  

 >   You think musko isn't aware of the meaning of his own actions and that you're going to teach him 'libertarianism'? (especially you, who have been constantly parroting US military propaganda). Please.
That's NOT what I said.  Use whatever brains you ever had.  To me, the issue isn't whether Musk has had enough time to think through these issues.  To me, the INTERESTING issue is getting the public to consider the implications of Starlink as a way to break through government censorship.  And to make them aware that Musk will have the ability to control whether Starlink helps, rather than stops, 'guerilla' use.  
If enough people make this an issue, MAYBE Musk will feel he must act on the side of communication and freedom.   Your foolish pessimism does not help anything.  


      
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 7441 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20201001/83e26ddc/attachment.txt>