12 ms·

Elon Musk, Travis Kalanick, Indra Nooyi to Join Presidential Advisory Council

210 points by randomname2 10y ago

Symmetry 10y ago
The more non-sycophants advising Trump the better, I suppose. Maybe Elon can move Trump a bit on global warming?
- mhurron 10y ago
  Ya because a bunch of business leaders wont just say yes to whatever business friendly ideas they can exploit. We're just getting rid of the veneer that business interests don't run the country now.
  - cmdrfred 10y ago
    There was a veneer?
- anondon 10y ago
  FWIW, Trump stated in a recent interview that he would keep an "open mind" on climate change. He was probably informed by his advisers that climate change is real.
  - szul 10y ago
    His policies seem to change based on who is in the room with him, so I guess it's best to get the right people in that room.
    - nannal 10y ago
      At least his accent is static
      - ceejayoz 10y ago
        Your "which thing should I give a shit about" decision making process needs some serious calibration. Side note: Humans subconsciously adjust accents to their audience. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/7931299/Humans-subconsciously-mimic-other-accents-psychologists-claim.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/7931299...
      - nerdponx 10y ago
        The accent is the only genuine thing about him.
    - JohnJamesRambo 10y ago
      We need to get someone intelligent to follow him at all times.
      - Ericson2314 10y ago
        A toast to viziers in all ages!
    - nerdponx 10y ago
      Which makes his cabinet appointees all the more unsettling.
      - szul 10y ago
        Agreed.
    - intrasight 10y ago
      Because he has an attention span of 5 minutes (according the the ghost writer of his book) We are doomed.
      - Diederich 10y ago
        We've had worse, and we've seen worse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Removal_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Removal_Act A President Trump very well might be a step backwards, but I'm pretty confident that it will only be a temporary setback.
        morgante 10y ago
        That it's a "temporary setback" is small consolation to the native Americans. I'm sure the Holocaust was also just a "temporary setback" too, right?
        lucasmullens 10y ago
        Godwin's law strikes again.
        morgante 10y ago
        https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/12/14/sure-call-trump-a-nazi-just-make-sure-you-know-what-youre-talking-about/?utm_term=.7aef2e3dcdb9 https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/12/14/...
        intrasight 10y ago
        >We've had worse, and we've seen worse While true, I'd like think things are different now.
    - skhnpnb 10y ago
      Exactly the same as Hillary.
    - vinhboy 10y ago
      Except that's not how protecting the environment works. You can't undo damage to the environment as easily as you can destroy it. So if in one minute he thinks its ok to do something destructive, in the next minute it will be too late to undo that. Please keep this in mind. This applies to other areas of life as well. If you are an undocumented child living in this country. You can't have a normal life if all you know is that Trump might change his mind. You will forever live in fear. That's not fair to anyone.
      - szul 10y ago
        Oh, I don't disagree.
  - burkaman 10y ago
    Have you seen his appointments so far? They matter a lot more than an interview, and he is not surrounding himself with people who are going to tell him that climate change is real.
  - yoyomaforce 10y ago
    I believe with politicians, it's better to just judge them on what they do. They make so many conflicting statements(especially now), it's hard to tell where they actually stand, and they prefer it that way. Trump has appointed an energy secretary and head of the EPA who both believe climate change is a hoax and want to gut any carbon related regulation. The questionnaire they sent to the energy department also makes it seems like they're preparing to purge climate researchers. The only silver lining is that Perry seems to be very open to renewable energy tech based on his time in Texas, and I think the economic argument for it becomes stronger each year, so it becomes harder to deny.
    - ams6110 10y ago
      Here's the reality: fossil fuels will only be replaced by something that's more economical (assuming we don't run out, which doesn't seem close to happening). If renewables get to that point, we won't need regulation to get rid of fossil fuels. It'll happen automatically.
  - gns24 10y ago
    Trump doesn't necessarily need to believe in climate change; renewables are becoming competitive and make sense from an energy security standpoint. Trump just needs to be convinced that subsidising coal makes no sense. Elon may be able to convince him that the jobs that the renewable energy industry can provide are better than those the coal industry can offer.
    - tomp 10y ago
      China might help here - if they ramp up their subsidies & innovation in the green energy space, US/Trump will have a lot of motivation to follow suit!
      - rtx 10y ago
        Or by reducing regulation on lithium mines.
    - jimbokun 10y ago
      Might flip West Virginia back to the Democrats, though. Unless he can find some other way to keep them on board (and I wouldn't put it past him at this point). Don't know if anyone outside of West Virginia really cares about keeping the coal industry going.
      - venomsnake 10y ago
        It don't have to be coal - just stable blue collar jobs. Those people that drill in the mines will be as happy building and maintaining wind turbines. Or dams. Or solar. Also we may be able to use coal for other stuff - has anyone tried to make ground coal into soil with bacteria and worms - with growing soil erosion problem that could be a market too.
        ZeroGravitas 10y ago
        If that is true then they should probably have voted for the candidate that promised $30 billion in tax breaks and re-training to lure green energy jobs to their state.
  - crucialfelix 10y ago
    I think that all these politicians that deny climate change actually do know perfectly well that it's true. They just keep saying it because it turns the minds of liberals to emotional mush. That's why Trump says it - to antagonize his opponents (us) and possibly because of deals (pipelines, drilling) and unwillingness to waste profits on protecting the planet. Some of them really do think that Jesus will come back when they've completely screwed up the planet.
    - untog 10y ago
      > I think that all these politicians that deny climate change actually do know perfectly well that it's true. They just keep saying it because it turns the minds of liberals to emotional mush. No, I think they say it because climate change is very inconvenient in the short term if you represent a state that depends on fossil fuels, which many do. Why try to solve the unpopular problem when you have leave it for the next representative to deal with in 4/8 years time?
      - MaxfordAndSons 10y ago
        Yea this is the main motivator. But there's some truth to gp's theory: many of them undoubtedly love antagonizing liberals by denying their view of reality, all the more so because their denial includes a rejection of hard science, the supposed vanguard discipline of rationality and progress.
  - travmatt 10y ago
    While he told you he would keep an open mind on climate change, he also sent a memo to the DoE seeking the names of every scientist who has worked on climate change related issues. Personally, I believe a persons actions much more than their rhetoric.
  - ChuckMcM 10y ago
    I think the summary is the number of things that Trump has said "in an interview" which are is direct opposition of each other is high. It is unusual to find something he has said consistently in any interview and it is the basis of his appeal (everyone can find him saying something they approved of whether or not they are referring to a time when he said he was for something or when he said he was against that very same thing) As a result, what he says appears to have little relation to how he actually proceeds.
  - Merad 10y ago
    Today he has an open mind, tomorrow he might be a die hard convert, and next week he'll be back to believing it's a Chinese hoax. There's literally no point in taking anything he says at face value.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - Freestyler_3 10y ago
    Or he knows it exists, knows it is an issue, but does not give it priority over all else. He is anti PC, that means he won't fit in the PC box.
  - BurningFrog 10y ago
    My take is that after having won the election, he's moving from saying what wins votes to what helps govern. I'm really confused by all the Trump haters who assume he's always telling the truth when he says things they don't like. More likely he's pandering to someone else.
  - thesimpsons1022 10y ago
    i wanted to believe that but then you who he appointed for secretary of state(exxon ceo), the EPA and rick perry in charge of the department he forgets the name of.
anondon 10y ago
Can Elon, Travis influence Trump's policies in any meaningful way by being part of the PAC? A lot of Trumps plans such as opening up fossil fuel reserves, not believing in climate change (though Trump said he would keep an open mind in a recent interview), going hard on immigration go directly against what Silicon Valley stands for. Will it be possible to influence Trump's plans on these issues? I remain skeptical.
- joezydeco 10y ago
  I have a hunch Trump is influenced by whomever is standing in front of him at any given moment. His attraction to wealth and celebrity might actually be beneficial to the tech scene here. The more he meets with people like Musk, Cook, Gates, hell even Kayne West, the better in my opinion. Honestly, I think the Democrats could actually turn Trump into a left-leaning President given enough careful attention and subtle manipulation. The GOP has been in a mode of "our way or no way" the last eight years and it's a hard habit to break. It could backfire with Trump.
  - yedava 10y ago
    Given that Stephen Bannon will be the white house advisor, I don't see that happening. Trump seems to trust his advice the most.
  - nolepointer 10y ago
    In what way? He's a different kind of conservative, yes, but I highly doubt he'd adopt the irresponsible fiscal and immigration policies, for example, of the left.
- rtx 10y ago
  I hope so, we need more libertarians like Travis close to power.
- paxtonab 10y ago
  It seems pretty obvious based on Trump's choices for head of EPA, DOE, etc. that even if he is "keeping an open mind" he is appointing people to positions of power that have anything but an open mind in regards to climate change and environmental stewardship. His recent interview was probably just political posturing so he doesn't get lambasted by the media while he is making these appointments.
castratikron 10y ago
Didn't see that one coming.
- MIKarlsen 10y ago
  Considering that Trump thinks higher of business-men than career-politicians, this is actually not that far-fetched.
- geodel 10y ago
  Yup. I was expecting tech elites to move to Europe or other liberal place and stick to principles.
  - GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
    Most of those people only have one principle.
  - jimbokun 10y ago
    Did any of the people in the article, specifically, claim they would move to Europe?
- m_fayer 10y ago
  Why not? We're all facing the choice of moving to Europe, or, given the troubles there, a remote cabin in Canada. Musk has apparently, and admirably, considered and rejected those options. Once he's made that call, the only thing left to do is to try your hardest to keep the ship from going too far off course. And if that's your agenda, better get as close to the ship's bridge as possible.
- zamalek 10y ago
  I admit I didn't, but 20/20 hindsight. Trump has been known to wax lyric about "smart guys" and how he listens to them (even though he hasn't really paid attention to the majority of 7bn people). Tesla, by Musk's own admission[1], was doomed to fail - yet he made it work. Uber faces still opposition no matter where it goes and yet still ekes it out. Pepsi took on a Goliath and succeeded. As capitalists, they align very strongly with his vision for America. Trump has shown concern about how complex the office is[2]. He knows that he needs these people. Musk is an interesting one, specifically. Trump: your harshest critic can sometimes be your greatest ally. Musk: keep your enemies close, change the status quo from the inside. After Gate's little chat with Trump, he might be warming up to climate change (especially because Gates is connected to Trump). There might be a little more to that specific position than merely a businessman who succeeded against all odds, at least I hope there is. [1]: http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-thought-tesla-would-fail-2014-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-thought-tesla-would... [2]: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/14/trump-reportedly-surprised-by-scope-of-white-house-staffing-duties.html http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/14/trump-reportedly-surprised-by...
aliaser 10y ago
I remember Elon tweeting "Anything but Trump" when someone asked about his thoughts on twitter. Seems that tweet is deleted.
- beambot 10y ago
  It bothers me that Twitter is frequently considered an original source, and yet comments can be deleted willy-nilly. It's too close to 1984-esque Newspeak. The HN model seems much better: You can only delete comments for some amount of time after initially posting; after that, they're fixed in stone. (But I am glad this new council is somewhat bipartisan!)
  - castratikron 10y ago
    So is this when someone makes a HN post about how he's developing a block-chain based, distributed Twitter alternative?
    - aliaser 10y ago
      No need it's already here - https://steemit.com/ https://steemit.com/ . But i haven't looked how it really works under hood. Given recent events with CEO of reddit who did edit negative post about him [1] it becomes more and more actual. [1]:( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/reddit-ceo-edits-user-comments_us_5839cf32e4b000af95ee5b68 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/reddit-ceo-edits-user-co... ).
      - catwell 10y ago
        I didn't know that one, I did use http://twister.net.co/ http://twister.net.co/ some time ago (and gave up because of the chicken/egg effect).
  - otalp 10y ago
    Yeah but it's usually archived immediately, especially for popular accounts so there's no chance of denying the tweets existence.
em3rgent0rdr 10y ago
Despite how cool Elon's companies are, don't forget for a moment that Elon Musk is just another crony capitalist who likes government money.
- daptaq 10y ago
  Any capitalist likes any money. Being crony or not doesn't change it.
- tankenmate 10y ago
  Let me fix that for you; "Elon Musk is just another capitalist who likes money." Minor snark aside, Musk's companies have not availed of any government money that wasn't available to others. And in many cases Musk's companies weren't even the beneficiaries of said government money, quite often that money went to the purchasers of products made by Musk's companies (Tesla, electric car subsidies go to car owners, not manufacturers; Solar City, feed in payments go to the owners of the solar equipment (and yes I realise sometimes that is to finance companies and/or to Solar City)). In other cases like SpaceX they have competed for government contracts and won those contracts. But at the end of the day Musk's companies typically attract less subsidies (Tesla / Solar vs other car companies / oil / gas / coal companies) or charge the government less for the same work than others (think ULA). So in effect they are better for the government's stated goals than a lot of other companies. And yet at the end of the day Musk's companies need money to survive and grow just like any other company; government or otherwise, and compared to many other companies in their respective arenas their revenue from government contracts can be substantially smaller pro rata. So in the end Musk's companies will use whatever influence they can (this is called hustle in start ups), and they need money (and do whatever they can to avoid being solely dependent on government cash). And to top it off they actively support competition, even when they could afford to stand still and reduce the rate of innovation.
  - notdonspaulding 10y ago
    I don't disagree with the main point of your post, but I do disagree on this minor statement here: > electric car subsidies go to car owners, > not manufacturers I don't know the specifics of buying an electric car, but most tax-break subsidies like this do in fact end up going to the manufacturer, just indirectly. How? Say it costs $10K to make an electric car, and the manufacturer thinks the market will support a 50% profit margin, so they price the car at $15K. Now the government wants to induce consumers to buy this car, so they offer a $5000 tax rebate if you purchase one. The goal is to incentivize customers to think "Wow, I can get this car for 2/3 of what it would otherwise cost me." And if the only two actors in the scenario were the government and the consumer, it would work that way. But the manufacturer is not naive. If they thought consumers were willing to purchase it at $15K outright, they'll still be willing to purchase it at $20K (less the $5K tax rebate). In effect, the price of the subsidized good goes up by some amount close to the subsidy. I'm not merely theorizing here. I built a house in 2011 and was pricing out HVAC solutions. My subcontractor said conventional heat+AC would cost me $7,000. Geothermal (the energy-saving option) would cost me $21,000. The hard costs of a geothermal system are twice as much as a conventional system (it costs the HVAC subcontractor ~$3,500 in materials for conventional and ~$7,000 for geo), yet the cost to me was 3X! I got similar quotes from multiple subs. I questioned this price difference, and all the subs said, "Yeah, it's 3X, but there's currently a 30% tax break if you buy the geo system, so it's like it's really only $14K, or 2X". There should be an economic proficiency test that all legislators are required to pass. sigh
jsnathan 10y ago
(from the press release) > Members of the [President's Strategic and Policy Forum] will be charged with > providing their individual views to the President — informed by their unique > vantage points in the private sector — on how government policy impacts > economic growth, job creation and productivity. The Forum is designed to > provide direct input to the President from many of the best and brightest in > the business world in a frank, non-bureaucratic and non-partisan manner. There are an initial 16 members on this council, all current or former business leaders. I wonder if having both Musk and Kalanick on this council signals anything about Trump's position on driverless car regulation, or will otherwise influence it going forward.
- ZeroGravitas 10y ago
  The person he's appointed to be Transport Secretary, Elaine Chao, is very hands off (no pun intended) when it comes to regulation, which is likely to be a good sign for driverless cars.
  - pure_ambition 10y ago
    no pun intended? what's the pun?
    - twoodfin 10y ago
      She's "hands off" when it comes to regulation, which may advantage cars that can drive with "hands off" the wheel.
      - pure_ambition 10y ago
        Ah, I must be a bit dense this morning. I was wondering if she had lost her hands in an accident or something.
        r_smart 10y ago
        I missed it at first too, and started thinking: "I guess she has no hands maybe...?" Then I realized I'm an idiot.
coldcode 10y ago
I wonder if Mr. Trump will attend, he seems not terribly interested in briefings. Perhaps he will since they are business related instead of intelligence.
yoyomaforce 10y ago
SpaceX depends on government contracts and Elon's companies all seem to be intertwined somewhat financially,so it makes sense he would want to be close to the President. Uber also heavily depends on gov policy with the contractor/employee debate. Uber is also heavily lobbying governments to privatize public transit which would benefit it. I also wouldn't be surprised if they pushed for that new in-between employee/contractor designation that they've been claiming is necessary for the new economy.
- tankenmate 10y ago
  SpaceX depends on government contracts far less than say ULA; so far SpaceX has had 17 successful private commercial launches and 15 successful government paid launches, and ULA has only had 1 private commercial flight on an Atlas rocket since 2010 (WorldView-3 Digital Globe). And to top it off ULA gets USD1B a year for flight readiness regardless of how many launches it makes (although this will probably go soon). EDIT: company name fix.
  - yoyomaforce 10y ago
    He may depend less on gov contracts than ULA, but he still depends on them, so I'm not sure what point you're making. Not trying to be rude, I would just appreciate it if you would explain it to me, so I can understand what you mean.
    - karkisuni 10y ago
      I think its more of a response to the growing misconception that Elon's companies are exceptionally and fully dependent on government money in the form of contracts, loans, and tax breaks to its customers. This suggests the companies are being artificially kept afloat on the backs of the taxpayer and are not "good businesses". Reality is, of course, more complicated. SpaceX, Tesla, and SolarCity of course each benefit(ed) from the above, but not any more than their competitors and are not entirely dependent on them. Loans were paid back, contracts were competed and won fairly, tax breaks incentivize desired behavior and are common industry-wide in transportation/energy. Your original comment could imply that SpaceX is more dependent on the federal government than other launch providers, hitting a sensitive spot for those fighting the above misconception, but that's not the case. Governments have the money and motive to fly expensive satellites (or people) and are the biggest customers for nearly all launch providers.
jlebrech 10y ago
now if he tapped up Elon musk to make the next air force one a reusable rocket that would be cool.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
justinzollars 10y ago
Please no more politics! I thought we were on a one week long hiatus. If you have the ability, please down vote this article.
- jessriedel 10y ago
  Unfortunately, the experiment was ended early. Mostly the mods gave up because it's hard to define politics. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13132782 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13132782
- 0xCMP 10y ago
  Wow has it still only been a week?
- Karunamon 10y ago
  That experiment would have been over yesterday anyways.
  - justinzollars 10y ago
    It was wonderful to read about tech while it lasted.
laichzeit0 10y ago
Space travel is an almost certain reality in the near future. If anything Trump wants to be first in line to open an elite casino and Trump Tower on Mars for the ultra wealthy. Elon can make it happen.
alphonsegaston 10y ago
All these comments about Trump changing his mind or being swayed miss the obvious indicators that he's just following the Putin/Surkov strategy for creating a managed democracy. You destabilize the narrative coherency with opposing, even random, signals (meet with Al Gore, then appoint Rex Tillerson, add Kanye for good measure). As your opponents scramble for some logical imperative along the lines of received political/economic narratives, you dismantle the institutions that oppose you(both literal and civilly constructed), so you can rob and rule however you see fit.
- chasing 10y ago
  My read is that Trump doesn't have any particular plan beyond fame and feeling important. If that means holding completely opposing views one day to the next, so be it. This is dangerous, don't get me wrong. And he's absolutely going to get used as a tool in smarter people's schemes. Let's just hope the good smarter people can get control of him instead of the bad smarter people...
  - singularity2001 10y ago
    That seems pretty naïve to me. Remember he is not (solely) acting as an individual but as the front man for interest groups (Army, Exxon etc, not dissimilar to the Cheney gang)
    - alphonsegaston 10y ago
      Yes, a major part of Trump's success is convincing both his supporters and opponents that he is the sole conduit through which power will operate. To his supporters, anything untoward among his underlings will be checked by the great man himself, while simultaneously, to his opponents, his obvious character flaws will be his undoing. Both create a false of impression of the need to withhold judgement/action, which allows his agents to continue their work unabated.
  - Retric 10y ago
    He may be an incompetent businessman, but he is not an idiot. After near bankruptcy his current wealth is based on connections and an aura of competence. Basically, he puts his name up but not any wealth while getting a cut of a deal. But, his stick of saying things and then retracting them as 'not serious' statements is a very useful tool. Over time people notice they heard what they wanted to hear and his words are meaningless signals. But, there is a really long line of suckers ready to believe anyone that says what they want to hear. Making a moonshot for the presidency viable in ways where a career politician would have a long line of failures to follow though using the same approach.
lukaa 10y ago
Elon Musk explicitly said it would be disaster if Trump wins and now he is Trump advisor. Hypocrisy and love for money obviously Tr(i)umphed again.
- csallen 10y ago
  I don't see the hypocrisy. Trump never said he wouldn't be advised by Elon Musk, nor did Musk say he would never advise Trump. Agreeing to advise someone who you didn't want to win the office (but who nevertheless did) is not hypocritical.
- gberger 10y ago
  Maybe he is trying his best to minimize the disaster? That is how I read it.
- jasondigitized 10y ago
  The best and right thing for Elon ( and anyone other awesome person ) to do is try and influence Trump. Being on his advisory board is a means of doing that.
- Diederich 10y ago
  Can you explain the hypocrisy? Elon Musk has a couple of well defined, over-riding goals: to make humans a multi-planetary species and to see humanity move to sustainable power. To those ends he's fully committed. Making a lot of money is one necessary, interim step along the way. As is working with/coordinating with the US Government.
  - lukaa 10y ago
    Hypocrisy means he is bad for country but sense he is now in power I'll join him to make my business better and now Trump is not so bad. Saying one thing and doing another is definition of hypocrisy.
    - Diederich 10y ago
      > ... and now Trump is not so bad I'm pretty sure most people's basic opinions of Trump haven't changed. In fact, I think it's a pretty admirable trait to be willing to work with someone that you might personally detest in order to make the best of a bad situation. The easy but wrong thing thing is to refuse any cooperation if someone you don't like is in power. That's largely what the Republicans in the House have been doing for the past eight years. That's not a way forward, that just deepens divides and future gridlock.
sickbeard 10y ago
Hrm ok. I thought Elon was a smart man
- freyr 10y ago
  And a smart man would know he has a lot to offer society by advising someone like Trump.
jmcdiesel 10y ago
So many of the comments here have to do with "his position keeps changing" I'm not defending Trump personally - but as a concept, lets dig into this a bit. So someone gets into a position of gaining a vast amount of knowledge over a short period of time from experts and consultants... Do you expect that their perspective hasn't shifted, or that they will stick to their guns no matter what? Because that's politics as usual - ignoring new evidence an voting/acting in a manner to support your original stance... never changing (especially drastically) But isn't the way it should be just this - that new information should inform your decision and, if you're open minded, you should consider changing your stance if the new information supports it? I'd take someone who changes their mind with new information over someone who sticks their fingers in their ear when information that opposes their viewpoint comes to their attention. Even if their decisions are in disagreement with me, their ability to change their stance says that they are at least making those decisions as opposed to having those decisions decided by what party label they strap on their chest...
- thisisdallas 10y ago
  It's an odd time when someone is criticized for changing their mind based on new or changing information.
  - aetherson 10y ago
    No it's not. People have always been criticized for it.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Changing your mind based on new information is excellent. We should all strive to do this. Constantly changing your mind based on nothing in particular beyond whoever you talked to last is not the same thing, though. Trump appears to have no real opinions. He says whatever he last heard, or whatever he thinks the people he's talking to want to hear. For example, he used to be pro-choice. When he started running for President he suddenly became anti-abortion. And not just anti-abortion, but hardcore anti-abortion, talking about jailing women who obtain them. When everybody on his side recoiled from this, he instantaneously backpedaled. Or take climate change, for example. During the campaign he maintained that it was nonsense, a Chinese hoax, etc. After the election, when interviewed by the New York Times, he said "I think there is some connectivity" between human activity and climate change. And after that, he continued to build an administration utterly hostile to doing anything about it. All while explicitly citing climate change as a danger when e.g. applying for permits to build sea walls for his property. Pick just about any position Trump has expressed, and you'll see this pattern. He changes constantly, and not based on a careful evaluation of new information, but just whatever the environment happens to be at that moment.
chmaynard 10y ago
Just sent this note to Tesla Sales: Please tell your CEO that he needs to focus on one thing at a time. Delivering the Tesla Model 3 as promised should be his ONLY priority. Activities such as serving on a Trump economic advisory panel or thinking about solar shingles are a distraction and a waste of his valuable time. Thanks, Craig (Model 3 reservation number xxxxxxxx)
- te0x 10y ago
  If anyone on earth can multitask, it's him.

210 points by randomname2 10y ago

Symmetry 10y ago

The more non-sycophants advising Trump the better, I suppose. Maybe Elon can move Trump a bit on global warming?

mhurron 10y ago
Ya because a bunch of business leaders wont just say yes to whatever business friendly ideas they can exploit. We're just getting rid of the veneer that business interests don't run the country now.
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  There was a veneer?
anondon 10y ago
FWIW, Trump stated in a recent interview that he would keep an "open mind" on climate change. He was probably informed by his advisers that climate change is real.
- szul 10y ago
  His policies seem to change based on who is in the room with him, so I guess it's best to get the right people in that room.
  - nannal 10y ago
    At least his accent is static
    - ceejayoz 10y ago
      Your "which thing should I give a shit about" decision making process needs some serious calibration. Side note: Humans subconsciously adjust accents to their audience. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/7931299/Humans-subconsciously-mimic-other-accents-psychologists-claim.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/7931299...
    - nerdponx 10y ago
      The accent is the only genuine thing about him.
  - JohnJamesRambo 10y ago
    We need to get someone intelligent to follow him at all times.
    - Ericson2314 10y ago
      A toast to viziers in all ages!
  - nerdponx 10y ago
    Which makes his cabinet appointees all the more unsettling.
    - szul 10y ago
      Agreed.
  - intrasight 10y ago
    Because he has an attention span of 5 minutes (according the the ghost writer of his book) We are doomed.
    - Diederich 10y ago
      We've had worse, and we've seen worse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Removal_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_Removal_Act A President Trump very well might be a step backwards, but I'm pretty confident that it will only be a temporary setback.
      - morgante 10y ago
        That it's a "temporary setback" is small consolation to the native Americans. I'm sure the Holocaust was also just a "temporary setback" too, right?
        lucasmullens 10y ago
        Godwin's law strikes again.
        morgante 10y ago
        https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/12/14/sure-call-trump-a-nazi-just-make-sure-you-know-what-youre-talking-about/?utm_term=.7aef2e3dcdb9 https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/12/14/...
      - intrasight 10y ago
        >We've had worse, and we've seen worse While true, I'd like think things are different now.
  - skhnpnb 10y ago
    Exactly the same as Hillary.
  - vinhboy 10y ago
    Except that's not how protecting the environment works. You can't undo damage to the environment as easily as you can destroy it. So if in one minute he thinks its ok to do something destructive, in the next minute it will be too late to undo that. Please keep this in mind. This applies to other areas of life as well. If you are an undocumented child living in this country. You can't have a normal life if all you know is that Trump might change his mind. You will forever live in fear. That's not fair to anyone.
    - szul 10y ago
      Oh, I don't disagree.
- burkaman 10y ago
  Have you seen his appointments so far? They matter a lot more than an interview, and he is not surrounding himself with people who are going to tell him that climate change is real.
- yoyomaforce 10y ago
  I believe with politicians, it's better to just judge them on what they do. They make so many conflicting statements(especially now), it's hard to tell where they actually stand, and they prefer it that way. Trump has appointed an energy secretary and head of the EPA who both believe climate change is a hoax and want to gut any carbon related regulation. The questionnaire they sent to the energy department also makes it seems like they're preparing to purge climate researchers. The only silver lining is that Perry seems to be very open to renewable energy tech based on his time in Texas, and I think the economic argument for it becomes stronger each year, so it becomes harder to deny.
  - ams6110 10y ago
    Here's the reality: fossil fuels will only be replaced by something that's more economical (assuming we don't run out, which doesn't seem close to happening). If renewables get to that point, we won't need regulation to get rid of fossil fuels. It'll happen automatically.
- gns24 10y ago
  Trump doesn't necessarily need to believe in climate change; renewables are becoming competitive and make sense from an energy security standpoint. Trump just needs to be convinced that subsidising coal makes no sense. Elon may be able to convince him that the jobs that the renewable energy industry can provide are better than those the coal industry can offer.
  - tomp 10y ago
    China might help here - if they ramp up their subsidies & innovation in the green energy space, US/Trump will have a lot of motivation to follow suit!
    - rtx 10y ago
      Or by reducing regulation on lithium mines.
  - jimbokun 10y ago
    Might flip West Virginia back to the Democrats, though. Unless he can find some other way to keep them on board (and I wouldn't put it past him at this point). Don't know if anyone outside of West Virginia really cares about keeping the coal industry going.
    - venomsnake 10y ago
      It don't have to be coal - just stable blue collar jobs. Those people that drill in the mines will be as happy building and maintaining wind turbines. Or dams. Or solar. Also we may be able to use coal for other stuff - has anyone tried to make ground coal into soil with bacteria and worms - with growing soil erosion problem that could be a market too.
      - ZeroGravitas 10y ago
        If that is true then they should probably have voted for the candidate that promised $30 billion in tax breaks and re-training to lure green energy jobs to their state.
- crucialfelix 10y ago
  I think that all these politicians that deny climate change actually do know perfectly well that it's true. They just keep saying it because it turns the minds of liberals to emotional mush. That's why Trump says it - to antagonize his opponents (us) and possibly because of deals (pipelines, drilling) and unwillingness to waste profits on protecting the planet. Some of them really do think that Jesus will come back when they've completely screwed up the planet.
  - untog 10y ago
    > I think that all these politicians that deny climate change actually do know perfectly well that it's true. They just keep saying it because it turns the minds of liberals to emotional mush. No, I think they say it because climate change is very inconvenient in the short term if you represent a state that depends on fossil fuels, which many do. Why try to solve the unpopular problem when you have leave it for the next representative to deal with in 4/8 years time?
    - MaxfordAndSons 10y ago
      Yea this is the main motivator. But there's some truth to gp's theory: many of them undoubtedly love antagonizing liberals by denying their view of reality, all the more so because their denial includes a rejection of hard science, the supposed vanguard discipline of rationality and progress.
- travmatt 10y ago
  While he told you he would keep an open mind on climate change, he also sent a memo to the DoE seeking the names of every scientist who has worked on climate change related issues. Personally, I believe a persons actions much more than their rhetoric.
- ChuckMcM 10y ago
  I think the summary is the number of things that Trump has said "in an interview" which are is direct opposition of each other is high. It is unusual to find something he has said consistently in any interview and it is the basis of his appeal (everyone can find him saying something they approved of whether or not they are referring to a time when he said he was for something or when he said he was against that very same thing) As a result, what he says appears to have little relation to how he actually proceeds.
- Merad 10y ago
  Today he has an open mind, tomorrow he might be a die hard convert, and next week he'll be back to believing it's a Chinese hoax. There's literally no point in taking anything he says at face value.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- Freestyler_3 10y ago
  Or he knows it exists, knows it is an issue, but does not give it priority over all else. He is anti PC, that means he won't fit in the PC box.
- BurningFrog 10y ago
  My take is that after having won the election, he's moving from saying what wins votes to what helps govern. I'm really confused by all the Trump haters who assume he's always telling the truth when he says things they don't like. More likely he's pandering to someone else.
- thesimpsons1022 10y ago
  i wanted to believe that but then you who he appointed for secretary of state(exxon ceo), the EPA and rick perry in charge of the department he forgets the name of.

anondon 10y ago

Can Elon, Travis influence Trump's policies in any meaningful way by being part of the PAC? A lot of Trumps plans such as opening up fossil fuel reserves, not believing in climate change (though Trump said he would keep an open mind in a recent interview), going hard on immigration go directly against what Silicon Valley stands for. Will it be possible to influence Trump's plans on these issues? I remain skeptical.

joezydeco 10y ago
I have a hunch Trump is influenced by whomever is standing in front of him at any given moment. His attraction to wealth and celebrity might actually be beneficial to the tech scene here. The more he meets with people like Musk, Cook, Gates, hell even Kayne West, the better in my opinion. Honestly, I think the Democrats could actually turn Trump into a left-leaning President given enough careful attention and subtle manipulation. The GOP has been in a mode of "our way or no way" the last eight years and it's a hard habit to break. It could backfire with Trump.
- yedava 10y ago
  Given that Stephen Bannon will be the white house advisor, I don't see that happening. Trump seems to trust his advice the most.
- nolepointer 10y ago
  In what way? He's a different kind of conservative, yes, but I highly doubt he'd adopt the irresponsible fiscal and immigration policies, for example, of the left.
rtx 10y ago
I hope so, we need more libertarians like Travis close to power.
paxtonab 10y ago
It seems pretty obvious based on Trump's choices for head of EPA, DOE, etc. that even if he is "keeping an open mind" he is appointing people to positions of power that have anything but an open mind in regards to climate change and environmental stewardship. His recent interview was probably just political posturing so he doesn't get lambasted by the media while he is making these appointments.

castratikron 10y ago

Didn't see that one coming.

MIKarlsen 10y ago
Considering that Trump thinks higher of business-men than career-politicians, this is actually not that far-fetched.
geodel 10y ago
Yup. I was expecting tech elites to move to Europe or other liberal place and stick to principles.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  Most of those people only have one principle.
- jimbokun 10y ago
  Did any of the people in the article, specifically, claim they would move to Europe?
m_fayer 10y ago
Why not? We're all facing the choice of moving to Europe, or, given the troubles there, a remote cabin in Canada. Musk has apparently, and admirably, considered and rejected those options. Once he's made that call, the only thing left to do is to try your hardest to keep the ship from going too far off course. And if that's your agenda, better get as close to the ship's bridge as possible.
zamalek 10y ago
I admit I didn't, but 20/20 hindsight. Trump has been known to wax lyric about "smart guys" and how he listens to them (even though he hasn't really paid attention to the majority of 7bn people). Tesla, by Musk's own admission[1], was doomed to fail - yet he made it work. Uber faces still opposition no matter where it goes and yet still ekes it out. Pepsi took on a Goliath and succeeded. As capitalists, they align very strongly with his vision for America. Trump has shown concern about how complex the office is[2]. He knows that he needs these people. Musk is an interesting one, specifically. Trump: your harshest critic can sometimes be your greatest ally. Musk: keep your enemies close, change the status quo from the inside. After Gate's little chat with Trump, he might be warming up to climate change (especially because Gates is connected to Trump). There might be a little more to that specific position than merely a businessman who succeeded against all odds, at least I hope there is. [1]: http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-thought-tesla-would-fail-2014-3 http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-thought-tesla-would... [2]: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/14/trump-reportedly-surprised-by-scope-of-white-house-staffing-duties.html http://www.cnbc.com/2016/11/14/trump-reportedly-surprised-by...

aliaser 10y ago

I remember Elon tweeting "Anything but Trump" when someone asked about his thoughts on twitter. Seems that tweet is deleted.

beambot 10y ago
It bothers me that Twitter is frequently considered an original source, and yet comments can be deleted willy-nilly. It's too close to 1984-esque Newspeak. The HN model seems much better: You can only delete comments for some amount of time after initially posting; after that, they're fixed in stone. (But I am glad this new council is somewhat bipartisan!)
- castratikron 10y ago
  So is this when someone makes a HN post about how he's developing a block-chain based, distributed Twitter alternative?
  - aliaser 10y ago
    No need it's already here - https://steemit.com/ https://steemit.com/ . But i haven't looked how it really works under hood. Given recent events with CEO of reddit who did edit negative post about him [1] it becomes more and more actual. [1]:( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/reddit-ceo-edits-user-comments_us_5839cf32e4b000af95ee5b68 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/reddit-ceo-edits-user-co... ).
    - catwell 10y ago
      I didn't know that one, I did use http://twister.net.co/ http://twister.net.co/ some time ago (and gave up because of the chicken/egg effect).
- otalp 10y ago
  Yeah but it's usually archived immediately, especially for popular accounts so there's no chance of denying the tweets existence.

em3rgent0rdr 10y ago

Despite how cool Elon's companies are, don't forget for a moment that Elon Musk is just another crony capitalist who likes government money.

daptaq 10y ago
Any capitalist likes any money. Being crony or not doesn't change it.
tankenmate 10y ago
Let me fix that for you; "Elon Musk is just another capitalist who likes money." Minor snark aside, Musk's companies have not availed of any government money that wasn't available to others. And in many cases Musk's companies weren't even the beneficiaries of said government money, quite often that money went to the purchasers of products made by Musk's companies (Tesla, electric car subsidies go to car owners, not manufacturers; Solar City, feed in payments go to the owners of the solar equipment (and yes I realise sometimes that is to finance companies and/or to Solar City)). In other cases like SpaceX they have competed for government contracts and won those contracts. But at the end of the day Musk's companies typically attract less subsidies (Tesla / Solar vs other car companies / oil / gas / coal companies) or charge the government less for the same work than others (think ULA). So in effect they are better for the government's stated goals than a lot of other companies. And yet at the end of the day Musk's companies need money to survive and grow just like any other company; government or otherwise, and compared to many other companies in their respective arenas their revenue from government contracts can be substantially smaller pro rata. So in the end Musk's companies will use whatever influence they can (this is called hustle in start ups), and they need money (and do whatever they can to avoid being solely dependent on government cash). And to top it off they actively support competition, even when they could afford to stand still and reduce the rate of innovation.
- notdonspaulding 10y ago
  I don't disagree with the main point of your post, but I do disagree on this minor statement here: > electric car subsidies go to car owners, > not manufacturers I don't know the specifics of buying an electric car, but most tax-break subsidies like this do in fact end up going to the manufacturer, just indirectly. How? Say it costs $10K to make an electric car, and the manufacturer thinks the market will support a 50% profit margin, so they price the car at $15K. Now the government wants to induce consumers to buy this car, so they offer a $5000 tax rebate if you purchase one. The goal is to incentivize customers to think "Wow, I can get this car for 2/3 of what it would otherwise cost me." And if the only two actors in the scenario were the government and the consumer, it would work that way. But the manufacturer is not naive. If they thought consumers were willing to purchase it at $15K outright, they'll still be willing to purchase it at $20K (less the $5K tax rebate). In effect, the price of the subsidized good goes up by some amount close to the subsidy. I'm not merely theorizing here. I built a house in 2011 and was pricing out HVAC solutions. My subcontractor said conventional heat+AC would cost me $7,000. Geothermal (the energy-saving option) would cost me $21,000. The hard costs of a geothermal system are twice as much as a conventional system (it costs the HVAC subcontractor ~$3,500 in materials for conventional and ~$7,000 for geo), yet the cost to me was 3X! I got similar quotes from multiple subs. I questioned this price difference, and all the subs said, "Yeah, it's 3X, but there's currently a 30% tax break if you buy the geo system, so it's like it's really only $14K, or 2X". There should be an economic proficiency test that all legislators are required to pass. sigh

jsnathan 10y ago

(from the press release) > Members of the [President's Strategic and Policy Forum] will be charged with > providing their individual views to the President — informed by their unique > vantage points in the private sector — on how government policy impacts > economic growth, job creation and productivity. The Forum is designed to > provide direct input to the President from many of the best and brightest in > the business world in a frank, non-bureaucratic and non-partisan manner. There are an initial 16 members on this council, all current or former business leaders. I wonder if having both Musk and Kalanick on this council signals anything about Trump's position on driverless car regulation, or will otherwise influence it going forward.

ZeroGravitas 10y ago
The person he's appointed to be Transport Secretary, Elaine Chao, is very hands off (no pun intended) when it comes to regulation, which is likely to be a good sign for driverless cars.
- pure_ambition 10y ago
  no pun intended? what's the pun?
  - twoodfin 10y ago
    She's "hands off" when it comes to regulation, which may advantage cars that can drive with "hands off" the wheel.
    - pure_ambition 10y ago
      Ah, I must be a bit dense this morning. I was wondering if she had lost her hands in an accident or something.
      - r_smart 10y ago
        I missed it at first too, and started thinking: "I guess she has no hands maybe...?" Then I realized I'm an idiot.

coldcode 10y ago

I wonder if Mr. Trump will attend, he seems not terribly interested in briefings. Perhaps he will since they are business related instead of intelligence.

yoyomaforce 10y ago

SpaceX depends on government contracts and Elon's companies all seem to be intertwined somewhat financially,so it makes sense he would want to be close to the President. Uber also heavily depends on gov policy with the contractor/employee debate. Uber is also heavily lobbying governments to privatize public transit which would benefit it. I also wouldn't be surprised if they pushed for that new in-between employee/contractor designation that they've been claiming is necessary for the new economy.

tankenmate 10y ago
SpaceX depends on government contracts far less than say ULA; so far SpaceX has had 17 successful private commercial launches and 15 successful government paid launches, and ULA has only had 1 private commercial flight on an Atlas rocket since 2010 (WorldView-3 Digital Globe). And to top it off ULA gets USD1B a year for flight readiness regardless of how many launches it makes (although this will probably go soon). EDIT: company name fix.
- yoyomaforce 10y ago
  He may depend less on gov contracts than ULA, but he still depends on them, so I'm not sure what point you're making. Not trying to be rude, I would just appreciate it if you would explain it to me, so I can understand what you mean.
  - karkisuni 10y ago
    I think its more of a response to the growing misconception that Elon's companies are exceptionally and fully dependent on government money in the form of contracts, loans, and tax breaks to its customers. This suggests the companies are being artificially kept afloat on the backs of the taxpayer and are not "good businesses". Reality is, of course, more complicated. SpaceX, Tesla, and SolarCity of course each benefit(ed) from the above, but not any more than their competitors and are not entirely dependent on them. Loans were paid back, contracts were competed and won fairly, tax breaks incentivize desired behavior and are common industry-wide in transportation/energy. Your original comment could imply that SpaceX is more dependent on the federal government than other launch providers, hitting a sensitive spot for those fighting the above misconception, but that's not the case. Governments have the money and motive to fly expensive satellites (or people) and are the biggest customers for nearly all launch providers.

jlebrech 10y ago

now if he tapped up Elon musk to make the next air force one a reusable rocket that would be cool.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

justinzollars 10y ago

Please no more politics! I thought we were on a one week long hiatus. If you have the ability, please down vote this article.

jessriedel 10y ago
Unfortunately, the experiment was ended early. Mostly the mods gave up because it's hard to define politics. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13131251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13132782 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13132782
0xCMP 10y ago
Wow has it still only been a week?
Karunamon 10y ago
That experiment would have been over yesterday anyways.
- justinzollars 10y ago
  It was wonderful to read about tech while it lasted.

laichzeit0 10y ago

Space travel is an almost certain reality in the near future. If anything Trump wants to be first in line to open an elite casino and Trump Tower on Mars for the ultra wealthy. Elon can make it happen.

alphonsegaston 10y ago

All these comments about Trump changing his mind or being swayed miss the obvious indicators that he's just following the Putin/Surkov strategy for creating a managed democracy. You destabilize the narrative coherency with opposing, even random, signals (meet with Al Gore, then appoint Rex Tillerson, add Kanye for good measure). As your opponents scramble for some logical imperative along the lines of received political/economic narratives, you dismantle the institutions that oppose you(both literal and civilly constructed), so you can rob and rule however you see fit.

chasing 10y ago
My read is that Trump doesn't have any particular plan beyond fame and feeling important. If that means holding completely opposing views one day to the next, so be it. This is dangerous, don't get me wrong. And he's absolutely going to get used as a tool in smarter people's schemes. Let's just hope the good smarter people can get control of him instead of the bad smarter people...
- singularity2001 10y ago
  That seems pretty naïve to me. Remember he is not (solely) acting as an individual but as the front man for interest groups (Army, Exxon etc, not dissimilar to the Cheney gang)
  - alphonsegaston 10y ago
    Yes, a major part of Trump's success is convincing both his supporters and opponents that he is the sole conduit through which power will operate. To his supporters, anything untoward among his underlings will be checked by the great man himself, while simultaneously, to his opponents, his obvious character flaws will be his undoing. Both create a false of impression of the need to withhold judgement/action, which allows his agents to continue their work unabated.
- Retric 10y ago
  He may be an incompetent businessman, but he is not an idiot. After near bankruptcy his current wealth is based on connections and an aura of competence. Basically, he puts his name up but not any wealth while getting a cut of a deal. But, his stick of saying things and then retracting them as 'not serious' statements is a very useful tool. Over time people notice they heard what they wanted to hear and his words are meaningless signals. But, there is a really long line of suckers ready to believe anyone that says what they want to hear. Making a moonshot for the presidency viable in ways where a career politician would have a long line of failures to follow though using the same approach.

lukaa 10y ago

Elon Musk explicitly said it would be disaster if Trump wins and now he is Trump advisor. Hypocrisy and love for money obviously Tr(i)umphed again.

csallen 10y ago
I don't see the hypocrisy. Trump never said he wouldn't be advised by Elon Musk, nor did Musk say he would never advise Trump. Agreeing to advise someone who you didn't want to win the office (but who nevertheless did) is not hypocritical.
gberger 10y ago
Maybe he is trying his best to minimize the disaster? That is how I read it.
jasondigitized 10y ago
The best and right thing for Elon ( and anyone other awesome person ) to do is try and influence Trump. Being on his advisory board is a means of doing that.
Diederich 10y ago
Can you explain the hypocrisy? Elon Musk has a couple of well defined, over-riding goals: to make humans a multi-planetary species and to see humanity move to sustainable power. To those ends he's fully committed. Making a lot of money is one necessary, interim step along the way. As is working with/coordinating with the US Government.
- lukaa 10y ago
  Hypocrisy means he is bad for country but sense he is now in power I'll join him to make my business better and now Trump is not so bad. Saying one thing and doing another is definition of hypocrisy.
  - Diederich 10y ago
    > ... and now Trump is not so bad I'm pretty sure most people's basic opinions of Trump haven't changed. In fact, I think it's a pretty admirable trait to be willing to work with someone that you might personally detest in order to make the best of a bad situation. The easy but wrong thing thing is to refuse any cooperation if someone you don't like is in power. That's largely what the Republicans in the House have been doing for the past eight years. That's not a way forward, that just deepens divides and future gridlock.

sickbeard 10y ago

Hrm ok. I thought Elon was a smart man

freyr 10y ago
And a smart man would know he has a lot to offer society by advising someone like Trump.

jmcdiesel 10y ago

So many of the comments here have to do with "his position keeps changing" I'm not defending Trump personally - but as a concept, lets dig into this a bit. So someone gets into a position of gaining a vast amount of knowledge over a short period of time from experts and consultants... Do you expect that their perspective hasn't shifted, or that they will stick to their guns no matter what? Because that's politics as usual - ignoring new evidence an voting/acting in a manner to support your original stance... never changing (especially drastically) But isn't the way it should be just this - that new information should inform your decision and, if you're open minded, you should consider changing your stance if the new information supports it? I'd take someone who changes their mind with new information over someone who sticks their fingers in their ear when information that opposes their viewpoint comes to their attention. Even if their decisions are in disagreement with me, their ability to change their stance says that they are at least making those decisions as opposed to having those decisions decided by what party label they strap on their chest...

thisisdallas 10y ago
It's an odd time when someone is criticized for changing their mind based on new or changing information.
- aetherson 10y ago
  No it's not. People have always been criticized for it.
- mikeash 10y ago
  Changing your mind based on new information is excellent. We should all strive to do this. Constantly changing your mind based on nothing in particular beyond whoever you talked to last is not the same thing, though. Trump appears to have no real opinions. He says whatever he last heard, or whatever he thinks the people he's talking to want to hear. For example, he used to be pro-choice. When he started running for President he suddenly became anti-abortion. And not just anti-abortion, but hardcore anti-abortion, talking about jailing women who obtain them. When everybody on his side recoiled from this, he instantaneously backpedaled. Or take climate change, for example. During the campaign he maintained that it was nonsense, a Chinese hoax, etc. After the election, when interviewed by the New York Times, he said "I think there is some connectivity" between human activity and climate change. And after that, he continued to build an administration utterly hostile to doing anything about it. All while explicitly citing climate change as a danger when e.g. applying for permits to build sea walls for his property. Pick just about any position Trump has expressed, and you'll see this pattern. He changes constantly, and not based on a careful evaluation of new information, but just whatever the environment happens to be at that moment.

chmaynard 10y ago

Just sent this note to Tesla Sales: Please tell your CEO that he needs to focus on one thing at a time. Delivering the Tesla Model 3 as promised should be his ONLY priority. Activities such as serving on a Trump economic advisory panel or thinking about solar shingles are a distraction and a waste of his valuable time. Thanks, Craig (Model 3 reservation number xxxxxxxx)

te0x 10y ago
If anyone on earth can multitask, it's him.