This is a continuation of Musk's tacit pro-Putin stance. It wasn't that long ago when he came forward and asked the Ukrainians to negotiate with Putin, which included an ignorant take on Crimean history, but no made such similar request for Putin, the person who actually has the power to end this war.
LOL. I figured you would be pleased. But I am coming around to your point of view.
Who knows, maybe I'll be convinced to rejoin the Republican party too, one of these days! (Actually, I am fairly likely to re-register as a Republican just to cast a pointless vote for Ron DeSantis, whom I dislike intensely, in the primary to beat Trump.)
I can't disagree, but I will point out that Twitter remains the main locus of NAFO, a fascinating (and, imho, inspiring) grassroots group that has grown up organically to counter Russian misinformation. If you aren't familiar with NAFO, you should be, as it may well restore your faith in the good sense, decency, ingenuity and power of ordinary humans. I remain on Twitter solely to bonk vatniks and tankies. 😀
Congrats, you are now $50/year richer (well, minus whatever cut Substack gets) as this well-reasoned article has inspired me to become a paid subscriber.
I have been checking on on your original site from time to time, as well as read your free Substack content. Really enjoyed your one article for the Dispatch once upon a time, too.
I am also in the "stepped away from Twitter but not 100%" camp, and agree that you don't have to step away totally to make your point.
Hope to be reading more from you on both Substack and your OG site soon.
SpaceX Starlink just lost a bunch of recently launched satellites to a geomagnetic field. probably a solar flare. This is an incredibly expensive private venture service that the DoD should be buying for Ukraine rather than burning private capital. DoD could offer Starlink a profitable amount of money under contract to deliver xyz to Ukraine. I'd like to see the Pentagon realize that you can't burn private cash and make them deliver a service for free. SpaceX just announced their first cash flow positive quarter ever and thinks they may even may a bit of money in 2023. You have to realize, Musk is on the record saying that if SpaceX avoids bankruptcy, it will be a success. SpaceX is on the verge of financial success and the Pentagon should pick up the Ukrainian bill with the caveat that Ukraine can use the service provided for whatever the DoD deems fit
I actually agree with a lot of this. The thing is, the Pentagon might already be doing this to a large extent. I'm not sure they publicize all the funding they do. But if they're not, I do think they should be funding it, and Musk and his stupid pro-Putin politics could then be irrelevant because as you say, the Pentagon could use the service as they see fit.
If Musk's only complaint were the money (it's not) I'd be less hostile to his position. I certainly would not be backing away from Twitter over it. I'd be pressuring our government to lay out the funds -- funds that, by the way, any sensible society would allocate, and that only the stupid fringes on both sides of the aisle would oppose disbursing.
Thanks for the conversation. I think Musk can be a bit petulant and impulsive but I'm thinking the attitude in a large part is leverage. Musk is smart enough to have known from the jump that all military communications passing through his service were going to contain a mix of information from soup to coordinates, non-lethal to lethal. I guess I might also be persuaded maybe his conscience is now troubling him, but this latest seem off more than that.
I also would not hold any of it against him if Musk clearly say he is simply very afraid that his company is facilitating a collapse of Russia to a point where Putin would feel compelled use nukes.
I am very concerned about the next season of offensives, counter offensives. I've been following Julia Davis' Russian Media Monitor twitter and the Russian state media has been calling for every weapon to be used to smash Ukraine, Poland, France, UK, Germany, USA and since Russian tactics are like its doing a smash and grab at a jewelry store with a wrecking ball...
By and large I agree with you (I don't have an interesting twitter feed to deny the Content Maw). I don't see how starlink is actually denying such use if VPN's are used. But. What if one of the threats Musk has received was "we have anti-satellite weapons. How would you like to watch your investment turned into debris?" Nation-states can do that sort of thing.
After Musk with his man-child humor got locked into paying $46 billion for twitter, he really can't afford that many more losses.
First, he has not articulated that as his reason, so you are offering a justification he has not himself offered. Also, I think any a Russian attempt to take down a satellite run by an American company would not go without significant response. I doubt Putin would dare try it.
It’s the best I can do, I’m afraid. I appreciate the advances he has driven in spacex and tesla. I don’t doubt (China) that he will pander to totalitarianism if it benefits his companies. I just doubt that he actually *likes* Russia’s leadership for itself.
I should also have taken issue with your drive-by smears of Taibbi, Greenwald and company. I don’t agree with their positions on Russia generally, but they don’t support the crushing of Ukraine, just object to our involvement. (That our lack of involvement would result in that crushing really can be put down to priorities if you listen to them in good faith; I end up disagreeing with them in the end.)
The point of my post was not to lay out the reasons that a reader should distrust Taibbi or Greenwald; I assumed that knowledge on the part of my readership, but obviously such assumptions will miss the mark here and there. Rest assured that my attacks on these two men are not "smears." The definition of a "smear" is to "damage the reputation of (someone) by false accusations; slander." If I cared to, I could give you chapter and verse as to why these two people are not worth your trust.
Honestly, for Greenwald, the link is in the post; if you have not read the saga of his sock puppetry at my site and others' . . . well, like I said, the link is in my post and I'll repeat it in this comment in case you missed it:
Read that and tell me all about Glenn Greenwald the Serious and Honest Journalist.
As for Taibbi, I could go on and on, but I refer you to notorious left-wing activist John Nolte of notorious left-wing site Breitbart.com, who describes how Taibbi is either a liar or a "misogynist monster":
Taibbi is also, like Greenwald, a total Russian shill. Again, I could go on and on about this. But it's not really the point of this post or this thread. I just caution you to be careful about the people in whom you put your trust.
I doubt Russia has the ability to knock out Musk's satellite network, not when he has 4,000 satellites and is releasing a payload of 50 satellites per rocket launch, practically every week.
This is a continuation of Musk's tacit pro-Putin stance. It wasn't that long ago when he came forward and asked the Ukrainians to negotiate with Putin, which included an ignorant take on Crimean history, but no made such similar request for Putin, the person who actually has the power to end this war.
Huzzah!
LOL. I figured you would be pleased. But I am coming around to your point of view.
Who knows, maybe I'll be convinced to rejoin the Republican party too, one of these days! (Actually, I am fairly likely to re-register as a Republican just to cast a pointless vote for Ron DeSantis, whom I dislike intensely, in the primary to beat Trump.)
Now THAT is a bridge too far!
I can't disagree, but I will point out that Twitter remains the main locus of NAFO, a fascinating (and, imho, inspiring) grassroots group that has grown up organically to counter Russian misinformation. If you aren't familiar with NAFO, you should be, as it may well restore your faith in the good sense, decency, ingenuity and power of ordinary humans. I remain on Twitter solely to bonk vatniks and tankies. 😀
https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3782298-can-the-west-create-a-nafo-thats-built-to-last-beyond-ukraine/
Hi Patterico!
Congrats, you are now $50/year richer (well, minus whatever cut Substack gets) as this well-reasoned article has inspired me to become a paid subscriber.
I have been checking on on your original site from time to time, as well as read your free Substack content. Really enjoyed your one article for the Dispatch once upon a time, too.
I am also in the "stepped away from Twitter but not 100%" camp, and agree that you don't have to step away totally to make your point.
Hope to be reading more from you on both Substack and your OG site soon.
SpaceX Starlink just lost a bunch of recently launched satellites to a geomagnetic field. probably a solar flare. This is an incredibly expensive private venture service that the DoD should be buying for Ukraine rather than burning private capital. DoD could offer Starlink a profitable amount of money under contract to deliver xyz to Ukraine. I'd like to see the Pentagon realize that you can't burn private cash and make them deliver a service for free. SpaceX just announced their first cash flow positive quarter ever and thinks they may even may a bit of money in 2023. You have to realize, Musk is on the record saying that if SpaceX avoids bankruptcy, it will be a success. SpaceX is on the verge of financial success and the Pentagon should pick up the Ukrainian bill with the caveat that Ukraine can use the service provided for whatever the DoD deems fit
I actually agree with a lot of this. The thing is, the Pentagon might already be doing this to a large extent. I'm not sure they publicize all the funding they do. But if they're not, I do think they should be funding it, and Musk and his stupid pro-Putin politics could then be irrelevant because as you say, the Pentagon could use the service as they see fit.
If Musk's only complaint were the money (it's not) I'd be less hostile to his position. I certainly would not be backing away from Twitter over it. I'd be pressuring our government to lay out the funds -- funds that, by the way, any sensible society would allocate, and that only the stupid fringes on both sides of the aisle would oppose disbursing.
Thanks for the conversation. I think Musk can be a bit petulant and impulsive but I'm thinking the attitude in a large part is leverage. Musk is smart enough to have known from the jump that all military communications passing through his service were going to contain a mix of information from soup to coordinates, non-lethal to lethal. I guess I might also be persuaded maybe his conscience is now troubling him, but this latest seem off more than that.
I also would not hold any of it against him if Musk clearly say he is simply very afraid that his company is facilitating a collapse of Russia to a point where Putin would feel compelled use nukes.
I am very concerned about the next season of offensives, counter offensives. I've been following Julia Davis' Russian Media Monitor twitter and the Russian state media has been calling for every weapon to be used to smash Ukraine, Poland, France, UK, Germany, USA and since Russian tactics are like its doing a smash and grab at a jewelry store with a wrecking ball...
By and large I agree with you (I don't have an interesting twitter feed to deny the Content Maw). I don't see how starlink is actually denying such use if VPN's are used. But. What if one of the threats Musk has received was "we have anti-satellite weapons. How would you like to watch your investment turned into debris?" Nation-states can do that sort of thing.
After Musk with his man-child humor got locked into paying $46 billion for twitter, he really can't afford that many more losses.
First, he has not articulated that as his reason, so you are offering a justification he has not himself offered. Also, I think any a Russian attempt to take down a satellite run by an American company would not go without significant response. I doubt Putin would dare try it.
It’s the best I can do, I’m afraid. I appreciate the advances he has driven in spacex and tesla. I don’t doubt (China) that he will pander to totalitarianism if it benefits his companies. I just doubt that he actually *likes* Russia’s leadership for itself.
I should also have taken issue with your drive-by smears of Taibbi, Greenwald and company. I don’t agree with their positions on Russia generally, but they don’t support the crushing of Ukraine, just object to our involvement. (That our lack of involvement would result in that crushing really can be put down to priorities if you listen to them in good faith; I end up disagreeing with them in the end.)
The point of my post was not to lay out the reasons that a reader should distrust Taibbi or Greenwald; I assumed that knowledge on the part of my readership, but obviously such assumptions will miss the mark here and there. Rest assured that my attacks on these two men are not "smears." The definition of a "smear" is to "damage the reputation of (someone) by false accusations; slander." If I cared to, I could give you chapter and verse as to why these two people are not worth your trust.
Honestly, for Greenwald, the link is in the post; if you have not read the saga of his sock puppetry at my site and others' . . . well, like I said, the link is in my post and I'll repeat it in this comment in case you missed it:
https://patterico.com/2006/07/27/annotated-wuzzadem-the-facts-behind-the-greenwald-sock-puppetry/
Read that and tell me all about Glenn Greenwald the Serious and Honest Journalist.
As for Taibbi, I could go on and on, but I refer you to notorious left-wing activist John Nolte of notorious left-wing site Breitbart.com, who describes how Taibbi is either a liar or a "misogynist monster":
https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2017/11/04/rolling-stones-matt-taibbi-either-misogynist-monster-journalistic-fabulist/
My reaction is: why not both?
Taibbi is also, like Greenwald, a total Russian shill. Again, I could go on and on about this. But it's not really the point of this post or this thread. I just caution you to be careful about the people in whom you put your trust.
I doubt Russia has the ability to knock out Musk's satellite network, not when he has 4,000 satellites and is releasing a payload of 50 satellites per rocket launch, practically every week.