×
top 200 commentsshow 500

[–]angels_exist_666 255 points256 points  (22 children)

[–]NothingGlad1024 32 points33 points  (21 children)

It was 100% obvious obvious just based on the low sales of Starlink and seeing it used in the Ukraine war for the last couple years.

I mean it's pretty obvious that supporting a network of thousands of satellites is not the simplest possible way to get Internet so you need a lot of subscribers or you need very premium subscribers and even then I'm not sure you're gonna justify like 10,000+ satellites.

I would say, realistically, Elon could already have more starling satellites up there, but they're not really selling so launch rate has probably declined based on reality.

We also have Elon Musk saying that Starling will probably fail without the starship to lower the cost, which is probably a very irresponsible plan because he doesn't really know what the cost of starship will be and lower the cost won't necessarily get sales up much since few consumers have a need.

[–]ifuckmothers 56 points57 points  (10 children)

didn't starlink just surpass two million customers? and 500k of those 2million were added in the last 6 months or so?

i'm no elon fanboy but at least be honest in your critiques of his companies. starlink internet is such a transformational technology

[–]EducationalGrass 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It's all relative. In 2015 SpaceX themselves forecasted 22 Million subscribers in 2022, so they are 20 Million short what they told investors was possible.

It's a tremendous product, I'm glad they made it, but the jury is still out if it's a good business decision.

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/09/spacex-projected-20-million-starlink-users-by-2022-it-ended-up-with-1-million/

[–]fd6270 65 points66 points  (3 children)

Lol launch rate this year is the highest it has ever been - they're launching almost every 2 weeks, if not more.

[–]ioncloud9 42 points43 points  (2 children)

They are launching twice per week, not once every 2 weeks.

[–]Pcat0 37 points38 points  (1 child)

Yeah SpaceX has an insane launch cadence, they are on track for a world record breaking 80-90 launches this year. Which will crush the previous records of 61 launches set by SpaceX last year.

[–]challengingviews 12 points13 points  (0 children)

SpaceX to literally anyone on the globe: "Do you even launch bro?"

[–]sysadminbj 2990 points2991 points  (258 children)

Yeah... This won't turn out horribly. No chance of that at all.

[–]wsucoug 1927 points1928 points  (217 children)

satellite network for military use

Yeah, until Elon decides to turn it off to prevent SpaceX from being “complicit in a major act of war and conflict escalation.”

[–]PETNman 665 points666 points  (142 children)

Well, then I guess that taxpayers will be acquiring a new space toy for free then.

[–]azurleaf 680 points681 points  (118 children)

Just imagining SpaceX nationalized and given to NASA for Christmas cracks me up.

[–]GlibJoseph 288 points289 points  (36 children)

You guys joke but it's happened before that's how NASA got the TDRS technology from TRW.

[–]Rainbow-Death 173 points174 points  (3 children)

And how bell labs ended up giving us most devices used today…

[–]LeroyJenkies 127 points128 points  (24 children)

The country nationalized the entire US railroad system in WWI. It was one of the largest industries of the time. We should have no problem doing it for other industries or entities critical to national defense.

[–]PerpWalkTrump 155 points156 points  (19 children)

We should have no problem doing it for other industries or entities critical to national defense.

God forbid we nationalize essential services though, that's communism and that's wrong.

[–]Lucius-Halthier 34 points35 points  (3 children)

Not if it’s for the military, then it’s freedom.

taps helmet with handgun

[–]Maxpowr9 34 points35 points  (4 children)

Like internet.

[–]Kaymish_ 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yeah well the internet is Authoritarian Communism.

[–]Wizard_with_a_Pipe 20 points21 points  (0 children)

We can only hope so.

[–]uneducatedexpert 50 points51 points  (0 children)

Keep going…

[–]Kayne792 54 points55 points  (70 children)

NASA doesn't want SpaceX. Everyone at JPL shit talks SpaceX all the time. They think of Elon as just a useful idiot to make things go up.

[–]Nerezza_Floof_Seeker 82 points83 points  (32 children)

Elon being an asshole, a narcissist, and an idiot? yea defintely.

But Spacex is defintely not something to be disregarded, theyre still the leader in reusable rocket technology and have one of the most reliable rockets currently in use (falcon 9), thats currently the only way the US has to get astronauts into space, as well as one of the most advanced engines ever built (raptor). I doubt that JPL would laugh at them.

[–]Kayne792 27 points28 points  (15 children)

My wife is a former JPL scientist. We watched the Perseverance landing on the private channel (essentially the Slack/Teams feed). At successful touchdown one of the mission specialists screamed, "Thank God! I don't have to fuckin' work for SpaceX again!" Cue general laughter.and hooting.

JPL doesn't laugh at SpaceX so much as pity them because they know what an absolute tool of a boss Elon is.

[–]Best_Pidgey_NA 13 points14 points  (3 children)

Yeah pretty much anyone who's had to work with SpaceX knows it's a fucking terrible experience. We always joke that we're just working with a bunch of lawyers trying to waive literally everything rather than engineers actually trying to accomplish something.

[–]ScopionSniper 2 points3 points  (7 children)

Unfortunately, if you want to be at the cutting edge of rocket science in regards to getting people and equipment into space and have it affordable. SpaceX is the only place to go work. NASA unfortunately has just run into massive over costs and delays with things like the Space Launch System. While SpaceX long term looks like the much better solution to space heavy lift capacity.

[–]Kayne792 2 points3 points  (6 children)

I reject the idea that SpaceX is the only source of cutting edge innovation. JPL, Lockheed, Rockwell, Northrop, and Boeing all continue to push boundaries in aeronautic.

I reject that the purpose of space flight can be found in the balance of a spreadsheet. We don't have a space program in order to generate a profit (even though NASA does). We explore space to better understand our universe and to push the boundaries of what is possible. I'm so sick of everything having to have a capitalist angle. So NASA's $6 billion over budget. So what? NASA gets less than half a penny out of every tax dollar. The F-35 project is $200 billion and no one is suggesting we turn the Air Force over the Elon Musk.

[–]NothingGlad1024 8 points9 points  (15 children)

I think it turns out the reusable rockets tend to get replaced with more customizable 3-D printed rockets.

NASA has a much better rocket engine in the works posting huge thrust gains.

In fact, Japan already launched one, so realistically rocket ends, are probably all going to get redesigned, because the thrust efficiency on the detonating engines will be the largest boost in efficiency to rockets we've seen for almost ever.

[–]BeerPoweredNonsense 13 points14 points  (2 children)

NASA has a much better rocket engine in the works posting huge thrust gains.

What rocket engine?

[–]Lokky 18 points19 points  (4 children)

The two things are not incompatible. Reusing rockets doesn't mean you can't put more efficient engines on them.

[–]Zettomer 14 points15 points  (1 child)

He said that. He said rocket ends.

[–]PrivatePilot9 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What are you, a rocket surgeon or something?

[–]TheZardooHasselfrau 2 points3 points  (0 children)

For it to work the rocket needs a redesign - the top needs to be more pointy, not round

[–]Wizard_with_a_Pipe 4 points5 points  (0 children)

They aren't wrong.

[–]hiddencamela 38 points39 points  (18 children)

That's what I was thinking... fucking around with the government doesn't allow one to hide behind laws and "Wait you can't do that" ... violating contracts has some pretty dire consequences government wise.

[–]somethingimadeup 35 points36 points  (16 children)

Guarantee this premium priced contract with starlink technology lets the government do whatever the fuck they want with the satellites. Not to mention extra encryption and security that they will need in the future when adversaries try to develop technologies to counteract their use.

[–]kevinpbazarek 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I'm sure the Pentagon is going to roll over and accept that /s

[–]Nato7128 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Thats when he'll FAFO, can't fuck around with military contracts

[–]somethingimadeup 20 points21 points  (8 children)

Pretty sure that was his way of flexing that starlink was an essential backbone for the modern military and the US government should buy a premium version of it if they want full control of its use.

And it looks like it worked.

[–]Stonedfiremine 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Don't think Elon that smart. Elon was requested to explain after the media blew this up. And I can tell you from videos of Elon leaving that day. He was not happy. I'm sure the goverment was just "helping" Elon come to his senses. Notice the nonstop Crimea strikes now. Elon has been put in his place.

[–]verugan 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm going to assume this is in the legal contracts somewhere. Hopefully someone thought about it after Ukraine.

[–]GeorgeCauldron7 9 points10 points  (3 children)

I hope the government has drawn up some plans on how to seize SpaceX under Eminent Domain laws. You know, for a rainy day...

[–]gucci_bobert 1 point2 points  (1 child)

DOD’s legal department must be sweating rn

[–]NickyRD 2 points3 points  (0 children)

"Of course I have a back door to turn it off at my whim based on whichever dictator needs me to do so at specific times."

[–]LucyFerAdvocate 5 points6 points  (3 children)

Yeah, fuck Elon for obeying US law. He should have broken international sanctions the moment a random Ukrainian general asked him, instead of waiting for presidential/Pentagon approval to turn on a US based system in Russian occupied territory it's explicitly illegal to provide services to. This lack of spontaneous action with a donated system action has something to do with providing the US military something on a direct and iron-clad contract.

[–]Trygolds 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Unless he puts in a back door the military will have control of the satellites and will be running them not Musk or space X.

[–]DAS_BEE 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Hopefully there's a clause they can just call in an air strike on musk if he screws with it

[–]i_like_my_dog_more 10 points11 points  (1 child)

Yeah, the US is just awesome at punishing billionaires who endanger National security and public safety.

In the meantime, have we recovered all of those national secrets Trump stole, or the ones Kushner illegally sold to the Saudis? Has anyone checked to see if Milley is ok after Trump asked his legion of idiots to execute him? I assume Trump is in custody, right?

[–]BubonicButtBlaster 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Was Elon in a contract with Ukraine?

[–]Lucius-Halthier 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Muskie: that’s right Mr. president, I will not activate your defense network to stop those missiles unless you pay me

puts pinky at lip

ONE BILLION DOLLARS!

[–]Cupcakes_n_Hacksaws 95 points96 points  (4 children)

Star link is seperate from Star Shield. If Elon plays fuck-fuck games with the DoD regarding this? It's over for him. DoD using private contractors isn't anything new either.

[–]Signalguy25p 26 points27 points  (4 children)

It is just a tech contract. They will basically develop a more "military appropriate" terminal to be sold to the branches that will use the already existing and future starlink LEO satellites.

Since the US military is ALREADY using starlinks as commercial solutions, this would just make it a big picture budget line item. Musk will have little to do with it other than continue to cash his check.

[–]Suspicious-Pasta-Bro 44 points45 points  (11 children)

Well, the good news now is that if he fucks around with the Pentagon, Elon is going to jail for a really long time.

[–]ambulating_meatbag 71 points72 points  (1 child)

It just gets turned off when Russia requests

[–]iPaytonian 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Elon has only received over $3 Billion from China and Putin was just being nice when he was praising SpaceX less than two weeks ago. This seems like a great deal :)

[–]BartWellingtonson 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I wonder if you’ll change your view when SpaceX doesn’t breach the contract or betray the DoD in any way? 🤔

Nah, nothing will change that!

[–]drew101 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Give the budding Super Villan, A doomsday weapon.

[–]LoveThySheeple 473 points474 points  (50 children)

Elon Musk should not be trusted with undertaking any task involved with American National Security.

[–]Nervous-Profile4729 43 points44 points  (1 child)

Idk what your talking about he’s the most trusted South African National /s

[–]Matt3989 26 points27 points  (26 children)

So we should be depending on Russia as our sole human rated launch provider? Boeing certainly can't do it.

[–]Suedocode 5 points6 points  (25 children)

NASA should've always been the one to get funding to do it. It costs all the same funding these billionaires for SpaceX and Blue Origin, but the only difference is that the technology is privately owned.

[–]Thunderbolt747 16 points17 points  (18 children)

Ah yes, NASA...

the one who's spent the past two decades building the SLS, the suposed largest rocket currently in use and which costs billions of dollars per rocket using parts from the 80s...

Quickly being dwarfed by SpaceX who's trailed and errored their Starship program into existance in 3 years, with a fraction of the budget and with a capacity 400 tons heavier than the SLS.

Relying on NASA would set us back decades in space exploration.

[–]Suedocode 1 point2 points  (17 children)

the suposed largest rocket currently in use

Just to be clear, it is the largest rocket in terms of range and carrying capacity in existence.

Quickly being dwarfed by SpaceX who's trailed and errored their Starship program

Lol maybe wait for Starship to not explode before using it as a successful example of billionaire worship. SLS's first mission to the moon was a complete success. Starship is on attempt #9. Yes yes I know, failure is success in Musk fanboy world.

a fraction of the budget

The SLS program was 11.8B (not including Orion), whereas Starship is estimated 5-10B (according to Musk, so take with a grain of salt). I don't think "a fraction" is a good descriptor here.

Relying on NASA would set us back decades in space exploration.

Defunding NASA set us back, who now has to forgo technology ownership in lieu of hoping some egomaniac can do it right for slightly cheaper. What a horrible tradeoff.

[–]Thunderbolt747 6 points7 points  (16 children)

The SLS program was 11.8B (not including Orion), whereas Starship is estimated 5-10B (according to Musk, so take with a grain of salt). I don't think "a fraction" is a good descriptor here.

Cap. Where's your source for these figures? I work in industry and the minimum budgitary cost is 2 Billion PER SLS launch, and the SpaceX Starship is fractional, with development costs only being 5 Billion in total thus far, with an anticipated launch cost of 40 million a piece.

Lol maybe wait for Starship to not explode before using it as a successful example of billionaire worship

Get off your high horse, you pedantic redditor.

[–]Suedocode 1 point2 points  (13 children)

GAO report:

Since 2011, NASA has spent $11.8 billion to develop the initial SLS capability.

A lot of the higher estimates you see include other stuff like the Orion capsule.

Elon Musk:

Musk has said that Starship will cost the company between $5 billion and $10 billion to develop

[–]Thunderbolt747 3 points4 points  (12 children)

NASA'S MANAGEMENT OF THE ARTEMIS MISSIONS.

"SLS/Orion Production and Operating Costs Will Average Over $4 Billion Per Launch [...] We project the cost to fly a single SLS/Orion system through at least Artemis IV to be $4.1 billion per launch at a cadence of approximately one mission per year. Building and launching one Orion capsule costs approximately $1 billion, with an additional $300 million for the Service Module supplied by the ESA [...] In addition, we estimate the single-use SLS will cost $2.2 billion to produce, including two rocket stages, two solid rocket boosters, four RS-25 engines, and two stage adapters. "

Office of Inspector General (United States). NASA.numbered page 23, PDF page 29.

As per your second link; https://www.wsj.com/articles/elon-musk-expects-spacex-to-spend-around-2-billion-on-starship-rocket-this-year-31f768fb

Elon's spent only 5 Billion on the development of 10 bllion budget, for which 3 Billion is dedicated to the fabrication and population of the Starbase factory/town.

Which then if we take the 2 Bil that was actually used to develop Starship thus far, it includes 15 prototypes (8 of 16 have survived) as well as two stacked ships for a total of 18, means that each prototype has been roughly worth 120 mil plus or minus.

So right now we have 2-4 Billion dollar single launch asset, or we have a prototype asset which has gone through nearly 20 iterations for the same price.

[–]BartWellingtonson 20 points21 points  (5 children)

He already is. He’s been a trusted partner of the DoD and NASA for a decade.

It’s very likely the DoD doesn’t agree with your assessment at all, and maybe even agrees with his actions in the Ukraine incident.

[–]Pcat0 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Yep, it’s one thing for SpaceX to be a bit conservative with the help they give Ukraine (which as far as I’m aware doesn’t pay for Starlink). It would be another thing entirely for SpaceX to betray their sugar daddy the DoD.

[–]Remarkable-Month-241 14 points15 points  (3 children)

You mean the same guy who has his team save sex tapes from Tesla cameras??

[–]elconquistador1985 20 points21 points  (0 children)

"no, no, see, it's blurred, and it only gets shared within that one office, so it's fine" - something I've actually seen a Tesla fanboy say

[–]punchheadkick 573 points574 points  (16 children)

Dude is in league with Russia. Is this really a good idea?

[–]khoabear 307 points308 points  (5 children)

Half of Congress is in league with Russia. Is this really a surprise?

[–]BartWellingtonson 19 points20 points  (3 children)

Isn’t it much more likely that the DoD disagrees with your assessment?

EDIT: LOL at the downvotes with no replies. I wonder if that indicates something…

[–]Reserved_Parking-246 1 point2 points  (2 children)

I would be more willing to bet that this is going to come with more conditions and DoD control than before.

A useful tool is even more useful when you know it has a microphone straight to the opposition built into it.

[–]joe2352 627 points628 points  (33 children)

Welfare billionaire is given more public assistance.

[–]dkf295 229 points230 points  (11 children)

Plenty of criticism to go around with government handing staggering amounts of money to corporations and with Elon Musk in general, but launching a military-controlled LEO satellite constellation under a short term contract that no other company or government entity is capable of deploying for 70 million is hardly a great example.

[–]SacrificialPwn 39 points40 points  (0 children)

Agree. There's ample criticism for the rampant waste and fraud associated with government contracts with corporations. Musk is a self-promoting narcissist who has been successful at obtaining investor money based primarily in his antics and unrealistic promises. With that all said, our government has had contracts with satellite system providers similar to SpaceEx, which cost way more and offered way less. We hardly have any knowledge what they will use Starshield for (it's all being kept secret), it appears to be in combination with over a dozen other companies and the odds of it being "controlled" by SpaceEx is slim to none. I have way more issues with SpaceEx basically owning a corporate town and their intent to dump toxic materials in the Gulf.

[–]Jeeper08JK 27 points28 points  (5 children)

Sorry, but this is Reddit and anti Musk sentiments only. Please refrain from critical thinking during your stay here. Regards.

[–]dkf295 20 points21 points  (4 children)

What’s funny to me is that I have extremely strong anti musk sentiments. What drives me bananas is when people let their negative opinions about a person interpret literally everything the person is directly or indirectly involved with as negative - often undermining their own arguments in the process.

Don’t like the government giving corporate welfare to rich people? Because I dislike THIS rich person in particular, let’s give 5x as much to this other rich guy to get half as much done in 4x the time!

[–]Jeeper08JK 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Exactly, Legitimate reasons to dislike and like him and what he's done/doing. But the blind hate/love is annoying.

[–]babysunnn 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Yea! We should have gone to that other company that’s making global wifi… oh wait there isn’t one.

[–]No_Lychee_7534 6 points7 points  (0 children)

He can finally pay his rent.

[–]Imjustmean 280 points281 points  (39 children)

Bad idea. He's shown he's not trustworthy.

[–]Zenshinn 112 points113 points  (33 children)

And that he's a Russian ally.
What could go wrong?

[–]Breezgoat -2 points-1 points  (27 children)

I don't think the government would partner with him if that indeed were the case of him being an “ally.”

[–]Zenshinn 6 points7 points  (26 children)

He shut down Starlink during an Ukrainian offensive against Russia. The US is allies with Ukraine. Not only that but his excuse of not wanting to be part of an act of war is moot since his action directly helps Russia , which is the aggressor here and is still killing civilians every day. He has clearly picked a side.

[–]Breezgoat 35 points36 points  (8 children)

Don't you think the Pentagon reviewed that incident before this contract? StarLink had a justification for why they shut that down. If you want to believe it's because Elon loves Russia and wants to protect them, then go off, but why would he put Starlink over there in the first place if he wanted Russia to succeed

His politics sucks and he’s weird but let’s use logical thinking here

[–]Soulshot96 26 points27 points  (0 children)

His politics sucks and he’s weird but let’s use logical thinking here

You're asking far too much.

[–]Zenshinn 2 points3 points  (4 children)

I think that the Pentagon would review it and demand that they would have total control over Starshield to prevent that kind of situation.

Logic only works if everybody involved is logical. Elon is a weirdo who is trying to control information through Twitter/X at the World level and who has private phone calls with Putin (who called him an outstanding person). Who knows why he had Starlink there just to disable it when Ukraine needed it. All I know is this is not the action of someone siding with Ukraine in this invasion.

[–]happyscrappy 8 points9 points  (2 children)

Yeah, I figure the entire reason Starshield exists and not just Starlink is to put control in the government's hands. They want the SpaceX tech and they don't mind paying him. But they won't hand him the keys to what they bought.

[–]trumpet575 38 points39 points  (8 children)

This is the dumbest comment section I have ever seen. You do know that Musk is not an engineer and won't be designing anything for this, right? And that the government will review the design and approve it? And then be the operators, only calling in SpaceX when necessary?

I know not everyone is an aerospace engineer at a defense contractor who designs satellites for the military like I am, but you should be able to at least use your brains to think for four seconds before commenting.

[–]Jeeper08JK 17 points18 points  (1 child)

>"at least use your brains to think"

I'm sorry sir, but this is Reddit.

[–]GeekFurious 13 points14 points  (1 child)

It's the most logical choice. They've already established a working platform and relationship with the military. The US government loves sticking with operations they know.

[–]psat14 66 points67 points  (12 children)

I am pretty sure pentagon will take over all command and control. If u think they will allow Musk any control over it ur mistaken

[–]Signalguy25p 19 points20 points  (0 children)

It is just a tech contract. They will basically develop a more "military appropriate" terminal to be sold to the branches that will use the already existing and future starlink LEO satellites.

Since the US military is ALREADY using starlinks as commercial solutions, this would just make it a big picture budget line item. Musk will have little to do with it other than continue to cash his check.

[–]BaldingMonk 44 points45 points  (13 children)

But wait. I thought Musk didn’t want his stuff used for wars.

[–]ioncloud9 17 points18 points  (5 children)

Its not "his stuff." Its satellites and launch services sold to the US government.

[–]Dawnfreak 43 points44 points  (7 children)

Musk should not have anything to do with US military projects. FFS

[–]BartWellingtonson 35 points36 points  (1 child)

SpaceX had been an integral part of Space Force and the Air Force before them for a decade launching top secret payloads to orbit.

NASA trusts them to launch their astronauts to the ISS. They trust them to land astronauts on the moon for the first time since Apollo.

The odds are your interpretation of the situation is just way off.

[–]BeerPoweredNonsense 24 points25 points  (1 child)

Musk should not have anything to do with US military projects

Maybe the US DoD is better informed than you?

[–]NothingGlad1024 11 points12 points  (0 children)

He probably doesn't really have much to do with any of his projects. That's why he has so much time to run his mouth.

[–]tdclark23 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Elon can't become President, but he can control a hell of a lot of our government and military.

Ronan Farrow on Elon Musk

[–]Estrife 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Relax the Ion Cannon is still in research and development stage.

[–]KptKreampie 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Until the autistic man boy says no.

[–]Hugh-Jassul 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re going to give that guy potential control of military equipment ?

[–]yuefairchild 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What happens when he says we have to stop respecting trans people to keep his network on?

[–]Hodl2Moon 2 points3 points  (1 child)

I’d like to keep Elon away from gov contracts

[–]rabbiferret 4 points5 points  (0 children)

So the company that has been deploying a net of satellites on the promise of fast, low-cost internet for rural residents has now won a defense contract?

wHo CoUlD hAvE sEeN tHiS cOmInG?

[–]GlibJoseph 1 point2 points  (9 children)

I thought Musk was against using satellites for military targets?

[–]Nerezza_Floof_Seeker 34 points35 points  (0 children)

The key was that using the civilian version as part of a weapon (like ukraine did) could've made all the terminals they normally sell fall under ITAR regulations, but having a military version under contract (the important bit) to the US government wouldnt cause that issue.

[–]Cupcakes_n_Hacksaws 12 points13 points  (3 children)

Guy's a cunt, but he does seem genuinely concerned about the civilian/corporate version of Star link being used in Ukraine, as that essentially makes it a viable military target in Russia's eyes. Star Shield is the military version, and AFAIK only the US government has access to it

[–]dannylew 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Either the pentagon is fucking nuts or they got an unimaginably solid guarantee that they can control the world's biggest manchild

no, no they are nuts

[–]Von_Quixote 2 points3 points  (0 children)

“I’ve got a bad feeling about this”

[–]JohnWad 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thought this was a “The Onion” article from the title.

[–]sogladatwork 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great. Musk in charge of military contracts. What could go wrong?

[–]NSYK -3 points-2 points  (8 children)

I’m against this. We’ve clearly seen the shortcomings of utilizing commercial internet resources already with Ukraine. Additionally, haven’t we learned the vulnerability of lean manufacturing and corporate cost cutting after COVID and our (necessary) investment in critical manufacturing infrastructure that’s been offshored through cost cutting measures?

[–]TheMonkDan 32 points33 points  (6 children)

This is not a commercial internet resource. Made strictly for government use. No different than any other government satellite constellation. A commercial contractor develops the system, and then the government takes over command and control.

[–]TmanGvl 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s a bold strategy Cotton! Let’s see how it plays out for the US!

[–]azducky 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This isn’t going to backfire when we need it most

[–]noshowthrow 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Doing any business with Elon like this is WILDLY stupid. He will fuck the U.S. first chance he gets.

Just look what he did to Ukraine.