[Ray20]

> fly a plane that detects Starlink signals

Starlink are quite directional. They are easily detected even from a standard vehicle.

> International law and -lawsuits are a thing

No, it's not a thing. International laws operate on exactly the same principle "Or what?".

> but at the same time we (as humanity) are not (or should not be) savages.

Part of not being a savage is the ability to not give a f.ck about what the savages have written on their papers, which we call laws. Or to give a f.ck depending on what is most convenient for us, the non-savages, from the standpoint of the "or what?" principle.

[close04]

Didn’t Musk ask Brazil the same “or what” question and had to back down? Musk and Starlink do legitimate business in Myanmar, why put it all at risk just to protect those 2500 subscriptions?

Why is everyone with a keyboard so adamant to “fight” when compliance was obviously the better business decision?

[inemesitaffia]

You think Starlink should switch off in Sudan? Iran? Cuba?

There's no legit business in Myanmar or any of those other locations

[close04]

> There's no legit business in Myanmar

I'm thinking the same. But there's probably plenty of illegitimate business, non-scammy terminals in the country which generate revenue.

Complying was the best option for Musk even if he doesn't care about Myanmar local law. It's a bad look to have your brand associated with supporting scam centers that defraud Americans as it was pointed out by the top US senator investigating the use of Starlink in the scam operations. This hits closer to home.