• fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    7 hours ago

    SpaceX and Starlink should have to be broken up. xAI’s purchase by SpaceX never should have been allowed. The contracts for NASA should have always required ownership of the investments made and the amount of rented tech never should have been allowed critical mass. Starlink should have been allowed a monopolistic ownership of its spots in space and should have been for forced to create an open interoperability standard from the jump.

    The fact that “SI” is how SpaceX is talking about those AI projects shows they are very much still a government contractor even in this phase, just looking at different pots of money. Contracts that Musk’s massive ties to corruption should be viewed as last resort, at least until they cut him out of the company (while he is charged and tried for his corruption).

    • UnpoppedCorn@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      In the long run that makes sense. In the short term, they’re linked. SpaceX doesn’t have contracts to fill every launch, so they fill in the extra space with Starlilnk launches. Starlink doesn’t exist without SpaceX.

      • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Starlink needing a subsidy for launches is only because they are operating as a monopoly. Competitors get flights just fine without it