• Maeve@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      I thought about that; then I thought what that guy makes in a few minutes’interest on his offshore accounts is probably more than all of Brazil, in a year, and since taxes fund the government and a host of other things, idk

          • aesthelete@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            Leveraged buyouts specifically should be outlawed.

            EDIT: And billionaires should be taxed on the money they receive as loans.

            The “buy borrow die” tax strategy should either be completely outlawed or the government should be able to get portions of those loan payments back as tax money.

      • hope@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        17 days ago

        The country of Brazil makes something like 20x Musk’s total net worth, but every year.

  • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    17 days ago

    On one hand, fuck Musk. On the other hand, internet from space that can’t be blocked by governments is a net positive in my book.

    • Shdwdrgn@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      17 days ago

      Don’t forget that Musk is also the one who intentionally blocked paid service from Ukraine during a critical moment in the early days of Russia’s current genocide, because Musk sucks up to Putin. Dude needs to answer for his actions.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      16 days ago

      Oh? What about internet controlled by a billionaire who makes sure his toxic website featuring his version of “free speech” is always available to protect his profits and spread his bullshit while undermining the policies of a sovereign state?

      So much better than the evil government.

      • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        That’s better than a dictator who only wants to protect his own power. At least a billionaire can be bought.

          • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            I think there is a difference in mentality between people who chase power and people who chase money. Bull Gates certainly chases money, but he’s not trying to take over a country somewhere.

              • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                15 days ago

                Are you saying he is trying to take over the country by buying all the land? Seems like he’s just using land as an investment.

                • Todd Bonzalez@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  15 days ago

                  I’m saying that buying insane amounts of agricultural land gives him and his family a permanent rent-seeking position over a basic necessity, so yeah, he is taking over a part of the world.

    • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      17 days ago

      Controlled by governments or controlled by corpos and the super rich? I say there’s hardly an improvement.

            • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              14 days ago

              You got another one job at the the other starlink?

              There’s a reason the system requires a certain percentage of unemployment to keep working. There’s also a reason there’s homeless people and children living in flood security.

  • h4lf8yte@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    What i love about musk is that he is the best bad example. Maybe someday he’ll start a war with some country and then people will start to understand that no single person or group should hold this much power. Because there are also a handful of other people and groups with the same resources who choose to hide in the background.

    • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      Yes, then he got a bunch of backlash and now he’s doing the reverse. And people are losing their shit even more

        • StinkySocialist@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          15 days ago

          I think he’s just a hypocrite who will say anything and contradict it when it’s better for him.

          Have you ever seen his trans daughter who he disowned for being trans talk about him? He’s not a good dude. For years when I first heard of him I was tricked too. Look into him some more man. He’s a piece of shit.

          Here’s some reasons:

          Taking credit for other people 's work. I don’t think he actually founded any of the companies he owns besides the boring company. That hasn’t done anything right? Lol

          Having emotional temper tantrums where he tries to ruin people’s lives, for example that diver he called a pedophile for no reason.

          Again his hypocrisy around his political beliefs. For example how he champions “Free speech” but also will censor words like ‘cis’. It’s clear to me and many others that “free speech” to Elon just means people are free to say what Elon wants.

          • Eezyville@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            15 days ago

            Personally I don’t give a shit about Musk. I don’t care about any celebrities but I try to not hate any of them because that’s way too much attention I’m giving to someone who is so insignificant to me. I’m just always aware of them from being on these social media sites because there’s always a legion of fans and haters. Maybe I’m really just complaining about social media and wish we were in the time of MySpace. Things were simple then and the internet was wild and untamed.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    17 days ago

    how are people supposed to pay starlink if their accounts are frozen? is starlink offering free internet?

  • Stern@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    16 days ago

    Brazil has an extradition agreement with the United States. Would love to see that shit get put to use.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      16 days ago

      That’s not how extradition works. You have to give people up to the US criminal system. They don’t reciprocate. They just promise not to coup your government.

      • AlotOfReading@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        15 days ago

        Extradition treaties are almost always reciprocal and this particular treaty is publicly available. No public treaty is going to include a promise not to coup another government because of the obvious political consequences of admitting you might to everyone else.

      • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Why would the US strain their relationship with Brazil over Musk? Politically, it makes sense to extradite him.

        Also imma need a citation on how extradition works, I searched the wiki and couldn’t find anything.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          15 days ago

          Why would the US strain their relationship with Brazil over Musk?

          He’s in deep with the US financial sector and the MAGA GOP base.

          • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            15 days ago

            I’m failing to see the connection with Brazil here.

            What would the backlash be from the US financial sector?

            Why would MAGA be mad about the US Government extraditing an African American?

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              15 days ago

              What would the backlash be from the US financial sector?

              Lobbyists would lean on federal and state legislators to impose retaliatory sanctions.

              Why would MAGA be mad about the US Government extraditing an African American?

              Because they see him as on their “team”.

              • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                15 days ago

                So in your mind the possibility of Musk being extradited could lead to those colossal outcomes?

                The starlink thing died yesterday but, I can’t imagine a reaction this strong from the US financial sector or MAGA.

                I disagree with the intensity of this response, if it were to happen.

                • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  15 days ago

                  So in your mind the possibility of Musk being extradited could lead to those colossal outcomes?

                  In my mind he just doesn’t get extradited, because it’s too much trouble and sets a bad standard for American billionaires.

  • flashgnash@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 days ago

    Do people here not generally dislike government censorship? The root of this seems to be x refusing the country’s government’s demands to ban certain people

    • shikitohno@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      X doesn’t seem to have any issue censoring accounts for Musk’s autocratic buddies like Erdogan, so let’s not try and pretend that he’s above caving in to government censorship. He’s just pissed off in this case that he’s being asked to do it in a way that would hurt his friends in Brazil. The site has been called out over the last several years multiple times for refusing to take any steps to moderate misinformation spread by Bolsonaro and his political allies in attempts to undermine democracy and influence the results of the last election, like the endless claims of electronic voting being insecure in the lead up to the last elections, Bolsonaro’s COVID denialism and many other examples.

      • flashgnash@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Absolutely not trying to take the side of musk here, dude’s a shitter. Fact of the matter remains the government in this case is using its power to remove people from the public eye, I would dislike that regardless of what platform or who was refusing to do it

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          16 days ago

          the government in this case is using its power to remove people from the public eye

          These aren’t people, they’re accounts. And the accounts in question appear to have been coordinating the attack on the Brazilian congressional office in 2023. This is comparable to, say, the traffic on Parlor shortly before the J6 riot in the US.

          Organized violence would not be tolerated as “free speech” in Brazil or the US. No government or civilian authority considers active insurrection a protected category of speech. These accounts were effectively coordinating a military coup. They weren’t just trash talking the new President and his party.

          Blocking traffic from an enemy military force is a military response to a rival military operation. And Musk’s refusal to shut the accounts down amounts to taking a side in a military campaign.

          • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            16 days ago

            Is it though? Refusing to take a side isn’t the same as taking a side. You should never be obligated to remove content the government doesn’t like, you should merely be required to provide data about accounts to local authorities to assist in investigations. If someone is posting illegal content, they should be accountable to the law, but it should always be the host’s discretion whether to remove that content.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              15 days ago

              Refusing to take a side isn’t the same as taking a side.

              He’s been outspoken in his support for the Bolsonaro movement

    • OldWoodFrame@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      16 days ago

      We don’t dislike government censorship of CSAM. it’s all a spectrum based on the legitimacy of the government order and the legitimacy of the tech billionaire’s refusal to abide.

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        16 days ago

        Honestly, while I think CSAM is disgusting, I am kind of against government censorship of it. Some go so far as to ban anything resembling CSAM, including imagery that looks like it, but doesn’t actually involve a real child. The problem is the abuse required to create it, but if that abuse didn’t happen, there is no crime, and it should therefore be completely legal.

        The same goes with free speech more broadly. The speech itself should never be illegal, but it should be usable as evidence of another crime. A threat of violence is the crime, and that should be prosecuted, but that shouldn’t mean the government should force the host to censor the speech, that should be at the host’s discretion. What the government can do is subpoena information relevant to the investigation, but IMO it shouldn’t compel any entity to remove content.

        That said, Brazilian law isn’t the same as US law, and X and Space X should respect the laws of all of the countries in which they operate.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          16 days ago

          That’s…actually a pretty reasonable take. Fuck Musk, but you’ve convinced me that government censorship is just a bad thing in general and that should apply to Musk as much as anyone else.

          I do think there’s a counter argument to be made that the resources involved in setting up fake accounts to spread bullshit are trivial compared to the resources required to track down and prosecute account owners for crimes, so in a practical sense banning accounts is possibly the only thing one can do (especially if the account owners are foreign). If you give lies the same freedom as truth, you tend to end up with 10 lies for every truth.

          • Omniraptor@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            16 days ago

            Op’s take is not reasonable imo- if you think threats are harmful enough to prosecute they should also be harmful enough to censor.

            Maybe a more soft form of censorship, such as hiding them behind a cw and a “user was vanned for this post” label rather than outright removal, but you can’t just do nothing.

            • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              16 days ago

              Prosecution implies a trial before punishment. Censorship is immediate punishment based solely on the judgment of the authorities. That’s not a minor difference.

              • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                15 days ago

                Exactly. If a judge states that an individual is no longer allowed on SM, then I absolutely understand banning the account and removing their posts. However, until justice has been served, it’s 100% the platform’s call, and I think platforms should err on the side of allowing speech.

                • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  15 days ago

                  I realize I’m jumping back and forth between sides here, but that’s because it’s a complex problem and I haven’t made my mind up. But that said, to return to the previous point…if you need a court order to ban every spammer and troll, you’ll drown in spam and propaganda. The legal system can’t keep up.

  • sumguyonline@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 days ago

    So Nazi’s eh? I hate Nazi’s. Let’s unravel this knotted beast a bit. If the Brazilian citizens are posting illegal content, arrest them. Forcefully cut off their internet, -snip snip- done, seize their bank accounts, works on Russia. It should never be the job of a privately owned corporation to enforce the law when the law is perfectly capable of neutralizing the offending entities and enforcing the rules it’s own damn self, are they going to make it illegal for Walmart to sell them a cell phone? Couldn’t they just create a new account with a new email over VPN? Wouldn’t it be easier if the citizens are breaking the law to arrest them rather than take away their Twitter account? I am not a fan of that fat musky sum bitch, but there is literally no reason that judge has to go after X(I really hate that name), other than he’s swinging his dick around and doesn’t like to be told to put some damn underwear on. Arrest the citizens if they are breaking the law, if they aren’t breaking the law then what gives anyone the right to silence them? Just an egomaniac judge with no actual laws backing him and a tiny shvance facing off against a megalomaniac with a tiny shvance that consistently protects only the free speech he agrees with. There. Unknotted. If the people of Brazil want Nazi propaganda to end in a prison sentence, it should be law, and then all Twitter has to do is the same thing it does with other illegal content, turn over the user to the authorities and wash their hands of the mess. Not some judge unilaterally making free speech decisions(even in Brazil)