← Back to context

Comment by throw0101a

4 days ago

> In a normal world, this would be treason by an illegal immigrant to the US.

As other comments have stated, this is not treason. However, a private individual/citizen should not have the ability to dictate national security policy:

* https://paulkrugman.substack.com/p/its-time-to-take-starlink...

Would you say the same thing about Anthropic defining the terms of use of its technology to the military?

  • > Would you say the same thing about Anthropic defining the terms of use of its technology to the military?

    No. With Anthropic (AIUI) the terms of use were agreed to beforehand. With Starlink things were changed suddenly on a whim.

    If Starlink doesn't want to be involved with military operations, then put that in the ToS, and Ukraine cannot / will not use it for that.

    But Starlink agreed to the use — especially with defence-only operations which were part of the agreement, and what was being done — and suddenly yanking capabilities basically means aiding the murder of civilians.

  • If Anthropic's business was as important to national security then it should be nationalized. As should SpaceX.

"This is not treason" is a false statement.

The true statement is: "This is not considered treason in the current legal framework of the US".

Which is exactly the point the OP is making: it is not normal.

What Russia is waging against the US is war according to their own doctrinal documents[1].

If we're stupid enough to accept this as peace while they make one gain after another, it's not a basis for saying that Elon's meddling isn't treason.

This should be a wake-up call.

The world has changed. War has changed. And Russia was brazen enough to publish the new rules.

I hope at least people here have the clarity of mind to read them and understand the implications, beyond "the Constitution uses a particular wording to define treason".

[1] https://www.armyupress.army.mil/portals/7/military-review/ar...