@misk@sh.itjust.works to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish • 2 years agoElon Musk’s Shadow Rulewww.newyorker.comexternal-linkmessage-square28arrow-up158cross-posted to: 196@lemmy.blahaj.zonenews@lemmy.worldspacex@sh.itjust.worksnews@lemmy.worldnews@lemmy.worldpolitics@lemmy.world
arrow-up158external-linkElon Musk’s Shadow Rulewww.newyorker.com@misk@sh.itjust.works to Technology@lemmy.worldEnglish • 2 years agomessage-square28cross-posted to: 196@lemmy.blahaj.zonenews@lemmy.worldspacex@sh.itjust.worksnews@lemmy.worldnews@lemmy.worldpolitics@lemmy.world
minus-square@EvilBit@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish10•2 years agoMost or all of your examples have meaningfully valid competitors in the space. SpaceX does not, at least not yet.
minus-squarepartial_accumenlinkfedilinkEnglish1•2 years agoSo your rationale for seizing a private company is that it is better than its competitors?
minus-square@EvilBit@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkEnglish5•2 years agoNo, it’s that as an effective monopoly, it has unreasonable power over the government.
Most or all of your examples have meaningfully valid competitors in the space. SpaceX does not, at least not yet.
So your rationale for seizing a private company is that it is better than its competitors?
No, it’s that as an effective monopoly, it has unreasonable power over the government.