> SpaceX, the least bad, is still a trash fire of malfeasance that's doing harm to ground based astronomy and also allows Musk to interfere in world politics, as he did when he defended Russia by blocking StarLink access to Ukraine's offensives.

I'm not a fan of Musk by any means, but this seems to wildly mischaracterize what happened. Are you going by the actual details of the situation, or just the reported headlines?

My understanding, which I just backed up with some review of the situation, is that SpaceX allowed starling service continuously, and footed the bill until the US government stepped in to pay it. They allowed it for humanitarian and defense purposes, but refused to extend service into contested territories that Ukraine was assaulting to recover, especially after a Starlink enabled assault drone was discovered.

I'm not sure it's accurate to say they defended Russia be refusing to allow their service to be used as an offensive weapon when they had the ability to control that. Many companies would do the same. Many developers would do the same for their code. I doubt they would consider their actions defending Russia.