[gambiting]

>> you're basically saying that you'd rather have Starlink not exist at all than to have Musk in charge

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying having Musk in charge makes it distopian, but even without him at the helm I'd rather it didn't exist.

>>Confirmed: You'd rather have every Starlink customer go dark than have someone you've been told to dislike provide those customers with a service they willingly sign up for.

No, I'd rather not have my sky polluted to satisfy an American billionaire's fancy, even if he has willing and paying customers. The night sky is a common good of every single person on earth, and he's playing with it to make money. I'd have the exact same complaint about any competing constallation, and in fact I am going to have it because Amazon is building a competing service themselves.

[panick21_]

> night sky is a common good

But that good shouldn't to serve millions of people with something they need.

You rather have it totally unused instead at all.

> I'd have the exact same complaint about any competing constallation, and in fact I am going to have it because Amazon is building a competing service themselves.

I have bad news for you because there are about 10 other major constellation in development and those are only the ones that are a public.

Not a single country has put major effort into stopping it.

Pretty much every country agrees that this space should be used to serve the needs of its people.