this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2025
1158 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

71448 readers
2306 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 week ago (3 children)

The precedent that will set and the implications... No... We should not do this.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Health insurance, ISP, Oil Cos, and utilities should also be nationalized. The US is a weird place where everything is a business. A shithole capitalist hellscape

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Those are different to taking over private companies. The government should, imo, compete against private enterprise in those areas, in turn bringing prices down and making it better for the taxpayers.

NASA is government owned. Look at the state of it. Do you think the government taking over SpaceX would really be a good thing?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nice 30-year-old Fox News talking points you got there. Time to go to bed, grandpa.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

What points are you talking about exactly?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You think the state of NASA isn't caused by privately funded politicians?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So you think those privately funded politicians should be in charge of the state of SpaceX?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, the private funding of politicians, which nowhere in the world happens as thoroughly or blatantly as in the US, is another issue to solve. It's companies pushing for privatization of services that they sabotage first to show that the government doesn't do well with them. It's like the postal service headed by that Trump appointee that was a big cheese in a transport firma. I forgot his name.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

So they were sabotaging nasa for all those years before SpaceX was a thing for what reason?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Tankies live in alternate reality where they think that nationalization is extremely common and is a magical solution to all of societies problems... even though this view is entirely delusional.

For example, only 3 countries have nationalized the entire ISP industry, and those are Cuba, Turkmenistan, and North Korea. All three of which are horrid tyrannical dictatorships with horrible internet. We should NOT be like them. Even when it comes to health insurance, except for 3 countries I just mentioned, every single country allows private health insurance, even if their system is public. Clearly nationalization is not what you think it is.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Tankie your ass. You don't have to have a shitty dictatorship to have nationalized services. Clearly you don't know as much as you think you do.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Most countries have public options for services and private alternatives as either competitors, backups, or complimentary pieces. It's very rare for countries to completely nationalize sectors, and it's especially rare for them to national that many sectors.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Yep that's my point. Not everything needs be a business.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Allowing government to compete with business creates better outcomes in both. There is certainly something to be said about a more involved government. It’s really silly to allow big business or the government to have a monopoly on critical services.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

My point is that this can be and is often done without nationalizing entire sectors of the economy

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

LOL "We should NOT be like them."
And then starts talking about health insurance. What health insurance?
You can only dream of being like Cuba.
But your shithole country keeps licking the boots and are good little servants of the oligarch ruling class.
And that's great, you deserve all you get, all you do is comlain and cry about it online anyway.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Tankies

boy howdy you've got the entire strawman army mustered in this thread.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It seems like you don't know what that term means

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Sure thing sport. I must be a tankie lol. You toolbag

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

A strawman is when somebody mischaracterize an argument, calling someone a tankie is not that.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

sure thing bud. I'm not going to waste my afternoon going through your shitstream to point out how you're wrong, I simply have better things to do with my life. in fact, gonna block you now, QOL plus

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Please do. I would very much not see a clown on my feed who accuses others of things they don't even understand.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 week ago

I hate tankies, but not as much as I hate Nazis. Desperate times call for desperate measures. We’re losing 100 years of social advancement. But here you are telling us to protect the fucking corporations that are sucking them up.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nationalization is the opposite of privatization, it's how the US's bureaucratic state was really built, we should absolutely do this and right now is the time

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

No, this is just pure ignorance. The US never nationalized any sector. The US has only used nationalization as a means to stabilize certain sectors from collapse temporarily, and even this happens very rarely.

Nationalization stable, growing industries would have devastating impacts on the economy. These companies are running just fine, and they're providing their services reliably and at competitive prices, what would be the justification to nationalize them? If the government feels like it needs more control on these companies they can pass regulations, and if they want total control then they should launch their own public alternatives.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Gotcha. So fascism it is then. How's that working out for y'all? Lmao

Your comment doesn't make sense. You say the US never nationalized and in the next sentence you say that they have. Remember after the 2008 collapse when the automotive industry was nationalized for a while and the government made a profit? Maybe you need to check your own ignorance.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Gotcha. So fascism it is then. How’s that working out for y’all? Lmao

This is going to be shocking for you, but there's more to politics than fascism and marxism

Your comment doesn’t make sense. You say the US never nationalized and in the next sentence you say that they have.

My point was that the US never nationalized any sector permanently for the sake of making it public. It also temporarily nationalized portions of some sectors to stabilize them before making them private again.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Omg you really think you're smarter than everyone. Of course there's in-between. Lmao glad you were able to clear it up for yourself.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

I'm not smarter than everyone, but you are dumb enough to think Marxism and Fascism are economic opposites otherwise you wouldn't have said what you did earlier.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The precedent that will set and the implications

and what precedent is there for dealing with the executive of your country's entire space launch infrastructure when they become dependent on horse drugs?

No really, what's the precedent here, I want to know. Because if we set a precedent by ignoring it until the problem is impossible to ignore, that's gonna be a far more expensive fix.

So yeah, yeah we should consider this very strongly.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

If the government actually nationalized SpaceX, the precedent would be insane. You’d be telling every private company working in defense, infrastructure, or tech that if they become too essential, the government might just take it. Doesn’t matter how much risk or capital they fronted.

SpaceX isn’t just launching rockets for fun—it’s practically a branch of the U.S. space program at this point. GPS, Starlink for military comms, launching classified payloads, putting astronauts in orbit. If we nationalize that over a political pissing match between Trump and Musk, we’re basically saying innovation is conditional on obedience.

And let’s be honest—once you do this to SpaceX, you open the door to doing it to AWS, Tesla’s energy grid systems, Google’s AI infrastructure. Any private company that gets too important suddenly becomes “too critical to stay private.” That’s a fast track to killing private innovation in sectors where we need it most.

If Trump’s threatening funding, and Musk is threatening to walk, and the public’s response is “just take the company,” then we’ve officially politicized the tech-industrial base. That’s not governance, that’s dysfunction.

Nationalizing SpaceX would be a Cold War move in a modern economy. It might feel good in the moment, but long-term, it's a terrible idea.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

how can you be so casually apathetic about saddling our soldiers sailors airmen and spaceforce with the products of a horse drug addled asshole?

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/30/us/elon-musk-drugs-children-trump.html

What kind of prick tells these people VOLUNTEERING TO DEFEND YOUR COUNTRY "hey man, the ketamine kid is the only way!" - how are you comfortable or confident in the products produced when he's tripping balls in the oval office?

meh. this is a pointless argument, I'm never going to convince these elon fanboys their hero is a prick

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'm sorry were you talking to me? Because nothing in your response had anything to do with what I actually said.

I never claimed to like Elon. I don’t. I never expressed support for this administration’s policies. I don’t.

My argument is about the moral, ethical, and historically dangerous precedent of nationalizing a private company.

That drug-addled sycophant stood before the most powerful political body on Earth wearing a baseball cap and a T-shirt while the Vice President of the United States told President Zelensky to put on a suit.

Unbelievable.

Where the hell do you get off making wild, baseless assumptions about things you barely understand? What exactly prevents you from engaging in civil discourse like an adult, instead of spouting off like you did in that comment?

Fine if we’re slinging assumptions now, here’s mine: You strike me as a fedora-wearing, vape-huffing, woman-hating neckbeard. Am I wrong? Don’t care. That’s the image your words paint.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

I never claimed to like Elon. I don’t. I never expressed support for this administration’s policies. I don’t.

you just defend his right to run spaceX on specialK.

mmkay bud.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

you just defend his right to run spacex on specialK.

Is not the US "the land of the free" ?
Obviously he has the right to run SpaceX, like you have the right to try to build another one.

But obviously you seems to not understand what are the implication of setting this kind of precedent and all the implications that will arise. But that's ok, after all the only important thing is to hate Musk.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

But obviously you seems to not understand

Yeah, and obviously, you only have a passing familiarity with the english language.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

ffs have better standards in your selection of contractors. or perhaps you're on too much horse tranq too.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I don't give two flying fucks who runs space x. Once again. I'm not defending Elon in anyway.

I am expressing my concern about the United States government nationalizing a private company. You're still making bassless assumptions. Pull your head out of your own ass and actually think about what I'm saying before spouting off at the mouth.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago (1 children)

then defend his drug use. defend doge. come on, make rational arguments for the bullshit, oh, you can't, that's why you're down to insults.

look fuckwit, you couldn't find your point with a flashlight and a map, and you're telling me to remove my rectum from MY CRANIUM? You want a man addled on horse tranq to run the only company producing orbital launch for the US.

I think it's your head that's rectum-fied. In fact, this entire discourse is dragging me down to your level. Gonna block you, should have done it before. Enjoy your ketamine kid, hope when he's responsible for killing astronauts you pause and reflect.

pfft

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

Absolute moron. You absolute moron. Once again my argument is about nationalizing a private company.

Is there anything that you'd like to talk about concerning that!