5 ms·

An alien won't be this good at human PR.

TeMPOraL 9y ago
He really is an alien. Human PR usually involves making a slick show, and having skilled communicators express vague messages full of bullshit. Musk is an exact opposite of that.
- treecycle 9y ago
  Well, there is Hyperloop. There there is the idea (or is it a promise) 'to take all of us to mars and save from earth!' The only real things they have done are making Electric cars and Rockets popular. More PR than hard tech if you ask me...
- somesayso 9y ago
  Well, hyperloop was kind of bullshit that now appears only made up for cheap publicity aka PR stunt. Then there is the promise of taking humanity to "mars", which quite honestly, sounds a bullshit claim at this point. It wold have held more water, if they said it after making real tech breakthroughs (Ie not stunts like landing a rockets, which only guillable people finds magical because they were not tech savvy to know that it was possible with tech that is half a century old).
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    I addressed Hyperloop elsewhere, but RE Mars: > It wold have held more water, if they said it after making real tech breakthroughs Going to Mars is literally the only reason they're in the rocket business. Like everything behind their breakthroughs, which they had a few - including landing and turnaround times - is meant to enable the Mars mission. They've been explicit about this since day one. > stunts like landing a rockets This is not a stunt. It's the real, practical, working, cost-effective rocket reusability. For the first time ever. Not sure what do you expect; em-drive? Because SpaceX booster landing is exactly how a technological breakthrough looks like (as opposed to fundamental science breakthrough).
    - snrplfth 9y ago
      > Like everything behind their breakthroughs, which they had a few - including landing and turnaround times - is meant to enable the Mars mission. They've been explicit about this since day one. It's not so much a rocket company with a Mars objective, it's a Mars cult with a rocketry front operation. Somehow, people get the idea that they're "not really serious" about the one driving goal that they've never deviated from.
      - TeMPOraL 9y ago
        Whatever. Freedom of religious worship and all...
        snrplfth 9y ago
        That's not a criticism. The Mars cult is a very good thing. For forty years, most space programs have been motivated by the burning urge to...uh...send some more people to Low Earth Orbit, I guess, and eke out marginal improvements on technology that never really changes. The force of the idea of Mars keeps people focused on what really matters.
        TeMPOraL 9y ago
        Sorry. Was tired and in anticipation of Falcon Heavy launch (and wondering how I'll excuse myself from a telco to watch it). I misinterpreted your comment as another line of criticism this whole subthread was made of. I apologize. It's getting tiring, really - people seem to still believe they're bullshitting with Mars, even though it was the single constant thing about SpaceX since the very inception of the company.
        snrplfth 9y ago
        No worries! I guess I get people's reactions a little - they've heard so many vague plans about "maybe a Mars mission" that never pan out, so when the real thing arrives they're not ready to believe it's serious.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    What you refer to as a 'stunt' is not magical but a very important step in reducing costs to get a certain mass to orbit. Whether Musk gets to take humans to Mars or not remains to be seen, but in the meantime he's making a lot of progress that is going to be super useful to humanity. Whether it was possible or not is irrelevant, what matters is that someone actually went and did it. After all, the internal combustion engine could have probably been built in 1750 or so, but nobody did...
- pensivemood 9y ago
  I think hyperloop pretty well fit the "full of shit" category and I can only consider it as a PR stunt...
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    For a "full of shit" idea it had a better technical document than most of the specifications I've seen in software industry; so no, I don't agree.
    - pensivemood 9y ago
      It is possible for a "technical document" to appear rigorous enough to untrained eye, but sadly, you can fool people, you cannot fool nature. Which is why "Hyperloop", which was not even an original idea, still remain in paper...
      - TeMPOraL 9y ago
        So does the Mars trip. Until it won't. AFAIR the paper was technologically sound to the first approximation; the objections were mostly economical (I'm ignoring people who missed that Hyperloop was not a vacuum tube design and went on ranting how infeasible it is). Also, for a paper-only design, there seem to be plenty of activity involving people building actual hardware to test components. Also2, from the first day it was known that Elon is not going to pursue Hyperloop himself any time soon; he threw an idea for others to pick up, and didn't promise anything. Judging him by not having built the Hyperloop by now is... insane.

He really is an alien. Human PR usually involves making a slick show, and having skilled communicators express vague messages full of bullshit. Musk is an exact opposite of that.

treecycle 9y ago
Well, there is Hyperloop. There there is the idea (or is it a promise) 'to take all of us to mars and save from earth!' The only real things they have done are making Electric cars and Rockets popular. More PR than hard tech if you ask me...
somesayso 9y ago
Well, hyperloop was kind of bullshit that now appears only made up for cheap publicity aka PR stunt. Then there is the promise of taking humanity to "mars", which quite honestly, sounds a bullshit claim at this point. It wold have held more water, if they said it after making real tech breakthroughs (Ie not stunts like landing a rockets, which only guillable people finds magical because they were not tech savvy to know that it was possible with tech that is half a century old).
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  I addressed Hyperloop elsewhere, but RE Mars: > It wold have held more water, if they said it after making real tech breakthroughs Going to Mars is literally the only reason they're in the rocket business. Like everything behind their breakthroughs, which they had a few - including landing and turnaround times - is meant to enable the Mars mission. They've been explicit about this since day one. > stunts like landing a rockets This is not a stunt. It's the real, practical, working, cost-effective rocket reusability. For the first time ever. Not sure what do you expect; em-drive? Because SpaceX booster landing is exactly how a technological breakthrough looks like (as opposed to fundamental science breakthrough).
  - snrplfth 9y ago
    > Like everything behind their breakthroughs, which they had a few - including landing and turnaround times - is meant to enable the Mars mission. They've been explicit about this since day one. It's not so much a rocket company with a Mars objective, it's a Mars cult with a rocketry front operation. Somehow, people get the idea that they're "not really serious" about the one driving goal that they've never deviated from.
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      Whatever. Freedom of religious worship and all...
      - snrplfth 9y ago
        That's not a criticism. The Mars cult is a very good thing. For forty years, most space programs have been motivated by the burning urge to...uh...send some more people to Low Earth Orbit, I guess, and eke out marginal improvements on technology that never really changes. The force of the idea of Mars keeps people focused on what really matters.
        TeMPOraL 9y ago
        Sorry. Was tired and in anticipation of Falcon Heavy launch (and wondering how I'll excuse myself from a telco to watch it). I misinterpreted your comment as another line of criticism this whole subthread was made of. I apologize. It's getting tiring, really - people seem to still believe they're bullshitting with Mars, even though it was the single constant thing about SpaceX since the very inception of the company.
        snrplfth 9y ago
        No worries! I guess I get people's reactions a little - they've heard so many vague plans about "maybe a Mars mission" that never pan out, so when the real thing arrives they're not ready to believe it's serious.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  What you refer to as a 'stunt' is not magical but a very important step in reducing costs to get a certain mass to orbit. Whether Musk gets to take humans to Mars or not remains to be seen, but in the meantime he's making a lot of progress that is going to be super useful to humanity. Whether it was possible or not is irrelevant, what matters is that someone actually went and did it. After all, the internal combustion engine could have probably been built in 1750 or so, but nobody did...
pensivemood 9y ago
I think hyperloop pretty well fit the "full of shit" category and I can only consider it as a PR stunt...
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  For a "full of shit" idea it had a better technical document than most of the specifications I've seen in software industry; so no, I don't agree.
  - pensivemood 9y ago
    It is possible for a "technical document" to appear rigorous enough to untrained eye, but sadly, you can fool people, you cannot fool nature. Which is why "Hyperloop", which was not even an original idea, still remain in paper...
    - TeMPOraL 9y ago
      So does the Mars trip. Until it won't. AFAIR the paper was technologically sound to the first approximation; the objections were mostly economical (I'm ignoring people who missed that Hyperloop was not a vacuum tube design and went on ranting how infeasible it is). Also, for a paper-only design, there seem to be plenty of activity involving people building actual hardware to test components. Also2, from the first day it was known that Elon is not going to pursue Hyperloop himself any time soon; he threw an idea for others to pick up, and didn't promise anything. Judging him by not having built the Hyperloop by now is... insane.