this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2024
414 points (99.3% liked)

World News

39096 readers
4003 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Elon Musk-controlled satellite internet provider Starlink has told Brazil's telecom regulator Anatel it will not comply with a court order to block social media platform X in the country until its local accounts are unfrozen.

Anatel confirmed the information to Reuters on Monday after its head Carlos Baigorri told Globo TV it had received a note from Starlink, which has more than 200,000 customers in Brazil, and passed it onto Brazil's top court.

Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes last week ordered all telecom providers in the country to shut down X, which is also owned by billionaire Musk, for lacking a legal representative in Brazil.

The move also led to the freezing of Starlink's bank accounts in Brazil. Starlink is a unit of Musk-led rocket company SpaceX. The billionaire responded to the account block by calling Moraes a "dictator."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 73 points 2 months ago (3 children)

The comments here are weird TBH. No, Brazil will not start shooting down satellites. It can just simply outlaw and sanction Starlink, stop anyone from paying Starlink for their internet subscription, and have peeps go around and confiscate ground stations.

Also, they can just go and ask the US to help enforce their ruling, telling them "do you want to be friends with us or Musky boi?"

[–] plz1@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That's a really good point. Starlink can ignore this order, but the courts can order banks to stop processing payments to them. Pretty sure Starlink isn't going to "protest" this at the cost of profits.

Of rourse Starlink could then go be further shady by taking payments in Bitcoin to get around it. It's an interesting arms race to follow.

[–] HK65@sopuli.xyz 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Brazil is well within its rights to sanction Starlink and prosecute people for evading said sanctions, and have people pay fines and go to prison for buying Starlink with Bitcoin.

Just like the US does with Iran and Cuba.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

How would they know it's been paid by Bitcoin?

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Because it's very easy to track bitcoin?, that argument about bitcoin being untraceable is so funny, like it's literally in bitcoin protocol to log every single transaction, and people need to convert money to bitcoin, easy to track there too

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

So tell me, where does the government link the person to the coin? I do a cash trade to buy Bitcoin, who logs it's me and puts my name on the wallet for the government to track me down?

[–] YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The exchange where you traded BTC for USD, which had to comply with AML and KYC laws in order to have access to the US banking system in the first place.

Like, it's theoretically possible to work with perfect operational security and never ever link your Bitcoin address to the real world, but doing so basically precludes you from doing anything in the real world with it, including buying crypto in the first place.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world -2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Google anonymous Bitcoin... I'll wait.

[–] YourNetworkIsHaunted@awful.systems 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, mate. This is the most credible source I can find and it's literally about how impossible it is to actually use crypto without tying yourself to the wallet somehow.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 0 points 2 months ago

https://www.expressvpn.com/blog/guide-how-to-buy-bitcoin-anonymously/

There are at least half a dozen ways well within the reach of just about anyone.

[–] Vilian@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

You need to pay a bank or something to trade your money to bitcoin, the bank only need to log what bitcoin it send to you or your wallet, the thing is, bitcoin isn't anonymous it was never made to be, something like monero would be better, but you still need to trade your money for the crypto

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Anyone can send anyone with a wallet bitcoin. There are services that do anonymous trades, the feeds don't look great.

Thing is, it doesn't have to be bitcoin to be opaque to the banks, there are dozens of payment services that don't clearly state the end provider. just doing paypal is enough to hide it from an occasional glance.

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They need a dish to operate, check for dishes and fine people for breaking trading laws by dealing with a company that has been sanctioned.

[–] linearchaos@lemmy.world -3 points 2 months ago

Just because the dish exist doesn't mean it's still being used. You have to do a blanket ban on having the dish at all. And even then they're kind of tiny and easy to camouflage. You'd probably have to make the enforcement penalty scary enough to dissuade them. Or pay neighbors to rat each other out

[–] irotsoma@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Unfortunately, the US is now fully reliant on SpaceX for access to space now that they decided to rely on corporate spacecraft rather than building our own and Boeing has proven themselves unreliable since that change was made, and now that they finally have a craft they ended up stranding astronauts on the space station until SpaceX can rescue them due to defects. Plus we can't use Russia like we did after the shuttle program ended but corporate space travel wasn't there yet. And SpaceX isn't publicly traded to where it might be possible that enough investors could pressure Musk to cave.

So I doubt anything will come of it. Brazil will rattle their sabers. Musk will stand his ground, and the US will stay on Musk's side while pretending as much as possible to be staying out of it.

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 15 points 2 months ago

Haha, that sort of dependency can be just as dangerous for a company as it is for the state. You start fucking around like that and antitrust and defense production act start knocking.

[–] GaMEChld@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Is there precedent for the US government just flat out nationalizing a company like SpaceX?

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Don't have to. Defense production act allows them to legally direct the company without owning it.

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

No 737 has ever leaked helium. So why did the Star liner leak helium? Why couldn't it just pop an emergency exit hatch mid flight like standard procedure? Why? Why? So many questions!

[–] Dkarma@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Easier than than just freeze musks money in brazil