Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[lemon10]

Mhh, I think giving up mineral rights in return for protection *could* be worth it for Ukraine (a classic case of burning the future for the sake of the present, but the same is true of war), but that would rely on trusting Trump or Putin, which hopefully Zelensky is smart enough to not do.

And what, Putin relies upon Trump's assurances that Ukraine will never join NATO?

Putin is Trump's good friend and ally, who has repeatedly helped Trump and bailed him out whenever he was in trouble and who can *keep* helping him (unlike those failures like Guliani). I don't think him betraying Putin in the next few years is in the cards.

And betray him for what gain? Trump gains nothing if Ukraine joins NATO, and he would lose his leverage over them. No way would Trump go for it.

It's strange how with all the talk about the security risks of Chinese based companies controlling communication networks, that so many people ignore the similar risks of US based companies.

Oh, I don't discount those risks, but as a US Citizen, it's better if US based companies are doing it for me personally.

It's also not a major risk to Ukraine: Several British broadcasters exist, and Ukraine has its own broadcaster.

Because our interests align with western nations and other nations that use the world market and we haven't been abusing our power to do bad stuff to them. Obviously guys that hate us or that we hate (like China, Iran, Russia, ect) might have different opinions, but the only one with the capability to meaningfully make their own communication network without importing all kinds of tech is China, and I'm pretty sure they are doing so as much as they can.

If by communication network we are talking about media/social media companies (eg. facebook, twitter) that's a little different, but here its mostly a what ya gunna do thing. Even dictatorships are hesitant about banning all social media, and making your own is tough and costly.

[Starver]

Several British broadcasters exist,

Newswise (for contemporaneous factual information), you're basically talking BBC (home and/or World services, depending on context, plus non-English variations), ITN (ITV+C4+others) and probably Sky. Listed alphabetically, and with no other implied reason behind that order. The first two sets found in the lower 10 of entirely free-to-air terrestrial channels (scheduled in programmes within 'wider' channels), full 'news channel' versions sit up in the "100+" ranges (including DAB->DVB copy-overs of audio channels). Not sure if the third has representation 'for free', maybe on FreeSat (will try to check that, next time I'm over at somebody's house that uses that, mostly because FreeView-terrestrial is too patchy a signal where they are).



Beyond that, starting with some of these are in the channel-100+ range (at least listed, if not steady enough to show, if at all, and might even depend where in the UK you are), it's onto:
* whatever newsfeeds get syndicated/Cc:ed by 'local' (non-BBC) radio stations, including direct from AP/Reuters/etc,
* one channel with "News" in its name but a British "Fox" in its heart,
* another with "Talk", about which I know little (I know Jeremy Kyle is on it, so... meh...)
* those that are external in origin:
** France24 (there's English version),  like possibly other european ones (Deutsche Welle? RTE?)
** Al Jazeera (fairer than some would make out, last I bothered to check)
** RT (if they're still around, may need to, there being even more obvious issues with their licensing and standards,cbut of course not likely to be useful to count in this context).
* tabloid and similar newspapery-backed channels (streamed, not broadcast?), on a continuum probably leading all the way down to the level of individual 'citizen journalism', in all types of measure.

Feel free to disregard/refute any facts or opinions I may have voiced, as you wish. I've probably missed some aspect.

...though I'm not sure if this meshes with the "loss of Starlink as an ISP" issue, unless I've misread it and infered a connection to that which wasn't intended.

[Frumple]

It's strange how with all the talk about the security risks of Chinese based companies controlling communication networks, that so many people ignore the similar risks of US based companies.

Oh, I don't discount those risks, but as a US Citizen, it's better if US based companies are doing it for me personally.

Man, people keep saying shit like that and I keep side-eying it. A china based company probably isn't going to give a shit about what I do at home; they're too far away and don't have meaningful stake in the ground game. A US based one? They're close enough to fuck with me intentionally, spiteful enough towards people in arms reach to do exactly that, and directly involved in corruption on a level high enough I'm even less likely to come out ahead if it comes to legal action.

I don't trust either one, but better the tyrant on the other side of the planet than the one next door. One has problems back home. The other is the problem back home

[Jopax]

Yeah you guys are talking like these massive corporations have any loyalty other than "line must go up"

Fuckers have shown time and again their only loyalty is to themselves and to profit, everything else is either an obstacle or something to be exploited.