Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Either way, trunks will use a network that is not under sovereign control. So sovereignty here means access must exclusively be through the locally controlled monopoly. Foreign powers will still have the ability to shut down or manipulate traffic, which is hardly sovereignty at all.


The biggest problem with Starlink's proposed solution would be that it would have been B2C - people in Greenland would talk to other people in Greenland through Starlink's satellites. That would put communication inside Greenland at the whims of another foreign power, which is a whole different level of loss of sovereignty than getting communication with the rest of the world cut off.


> Foreign powers will still have the ability to shut down or manipulate traffic, which is hardly sovereignty at all.

Apparently, some partners/"friends" are more likely to take military action against you than others.

If you're considering sovereignty and you have a choice between one partner who've said "I'll protect you" and another that said "Well, we'll never rule out military action against you", working together with one of those are obviously better for your sovereignty than the other.


This reads to me as letting perfect be the enemy of better.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: