8 ms·

These articles about Elon are interesting to me because Tesla could not have become such a valuable car company in such a short time if it wasn't for Elon, and

These articles about Elon are interesting to me because Tesla could not have become such a valuable car company in such a short time if it wasn't for Elon, and that includes his personality. Yet, many couch investors would prefer to have a CEO who is stable, boring and predictable. People want to put their money in for steady long-term returns, and not worry. Tesla is doing wild things which are causing crazy growth, but also crazy panic. It seems the market really wants Tesla to slow down so they can sell more stock to an average risk-averse consumer, but Elon wants to keep running light-speed, regardless of the short-term worry that it might create. Neither is wrong, they just have different priorities.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Steel_Phoenix 8y ago
There is no shortage of boring automotive companies to invest in if that's what they want. Invest in Musk if you believe the future won't happen fast enough if you don't. A corporate board making all the decisions would have been long ago crushed by big oil or bigger manufacturers, or their patents bought and buried to continue the status-quo.
- nikofeyn 8y ago
  how is tesla the future? they are still figuring out how to reliably manufacture a very small number of stagnant models, whereas every other car manufacturer iterates on multiple models every year, and it all works like clockwork and yields very reliable and safe cars. my kia optima sxl is much less than 50% of a tesla and yet has a higher fit and finish and is more safe.
  - Clomez 8y ago
    but manufacturing entirely new type of car? somebody gotta take the hit of being the first (most of the time, failing) one to try to do it on this scale. It's the only way forward. I think old and steady auto manufacturers are too stagnant to ever try their hand at such a risky but needed move.
    - jnurmine 8y ago
      Is it really so? They are not the only one, nor were they the first either, really. Yes, in some areas they were first on the market. Many of the major ("old, boring") car manufacturers are growing on the EV segment and will overtake Tesla soon if not already there. For example, BMW i3 has sold around 100k units now, about a third of Teslas. Overall the market is dominated by the Chinese manufacturers. Tesla got where they are because of the media skills and connections of Mr. Musk and the media amplification that follows. With Mr. Musk gone I see rather dire times for Tesla as a company, regardless of whether the company is sold to someone or not. Full disclosure: have never driven a Tesla but have seen it zoom to a tiny dot in the horizon in a really short time when the traffic lights turned green.
      - dexen 8y ago
        > For example, BMW i3 has sold around 100k units now, about a third of Teslas Reminds me of the "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." wrap-up the Slashdot editors gave[1] to iPod upon release.[2] Any Tesla model is an exciting car, due to performance and handling, the sheen of EV greenness, and the otherness of experience[3], while still being a no-compromise daily driver. Even the range anxiety on longer trips is a strong emotion, count it as a long-term advantage, and yet another spark for endless discussions mentioning the brand. Contrast that with the i3 being mid-to-lower-end model among BMW offerings, and excites close to nobody. There's no trick in bringing a boring, incremental car to the market; any large company can do it. Nor is it a springboard from rags to riches; it can only work in a slow-moving, low-innovation market, which new car market used to be for decades, but apparently got hot again. The trick is to bring something that has appearance of new&fresh, that will set an industry-wide trend, will appear to push the envelope, and will make customers into excited fanboys queueing up for the goods, or preordering a year in advance. This is much harder for an established player, due to Innovator's Dilemma, and the inertia of any large organization. BMW i3 is "yeah, I save a bunch of $$$ on gas, and I can usually fit the groceries in the trunk"; Tesla is, "I GOT 10k LIKES ON MY LUDICROUS MODE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE AND MY SIGNIFICANT OTHER WAS SCREAMING ALL THE WAY ALSO SUNROOF <3 AND I CAN LET GO OF THE WHEEL". Emotions. Tesla is like the (early) fast and exciting X.com/PayPal among boring old banks with their wire transfers, rather than like umpteenth "also-ran" online payment processor we get every few months. > Many of the major car manufacturers (...) will overtake Tesla soon if not already there The IBM overtook Apple for several decades, in no small part thanks to the duopoly with Microsoft and their EEE tactics. And yet here we are, Apple > IBM. However IBM PC was effectively an open platform, while the modern passenger car is at best half-way such. In this race of Tesla against the proverbial Detroit, I bet on Tesla; and I put Elon's antics in the assets column rather than liabilities, with a "any PR is good PR" note. [1] https://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-ipod https://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-i... [2] and then there's the response Dropbox got early on on HN [3] granted it's not for everybody. Just like Mercedes and BMW fans deride each others' ergonomic&stylistic choices.
  - kirillzubovsky 8y ago
    `every other car manufacturer iterates on multiple models every year` - that's not actually true. Every other manufacturer maintains the same base for their cars and simply swaps small details around to make it look like you are getting a different car. You are not actually getting anything radically different every year; not even every decade really.
    - simonbarker87 8y ago
      Car companies work on a new model around every 7/8 years with a minor change at the halfway point. Essentially every decade most of the cars gets a complete overhaul.
    - nikofeyn 8y ago
      it is actually true. many manufacturers, say kia, have multiple models. that's a fact. then, they iterate on these models every year. that's also a fact. yes, it is true that they typically have a major design on a specific model that is then kept around for multiple years, but they are still iterating on them rather heavily. "simply swaps small details" is undercutting the improvements made to the cars, especially with fit and finish, something tesla is rather poor at in my opinion. my statement is accurate and didn't imply that they redesign the car every year. everyone knows that isn't how it works.
  - Steel_Phoenix 8y ago
    Whether Tesla itself is the future or not, I don't know. I doubt Musk really wanted to be in the business of building cars. I think he did it to change the way everyone else builds cars. Not by decree of some minor increment in emissions standards, but by showing that an electric car would be cheaper, cleaner, faster, and sexier. He did it at a time when Prius was the laughing stock of the evening news, with stories of Prius tipping, and jokes about its drivers. Does Kia really have a higher safety rating than Tesla? I agree with other comments that things like his fight with the diver was unhelpful. I don't know what was really behind the threat to take things private. Hopefully he learned something and will focus again on what he does best. Sometimes, established industry needs someone from outside to threaten do do something even if it isn't the most profitable thing to do. I remember when iphones were charging for ringtones and wallpaper. Google's decision to make an open source OS, and threat to build a phone for it if no one else would, changed the whole game. I'd rather invest time or money in Musk, despite the risk, just because he built the car, landed the rocket, and I want him to be able to do it again. I can respect an investor who just wants a safe return, but they should invest elsewhere and good riddance. He doesn't need that kind of investor always threatening to pull their money if he doesn't play it safer. Maybe instead of going public, he should start the world's largest Kickstarter.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
chipotle_coyote 8y ago
I'm going to push back against this narrative, because it seems a lot of the "let Elon be Elon" arguments are neatly encapsulated in this line: Tesla is doing wild things which are causing crazy growth, but also crazy panic. But the critics of Musk's behavior would respond, I think correctly, that there is a categorical difference between "wild things which cause crazy panic because they are high risk with high upside potential ('crazy growth')" and "wild things which cause crazy panic because they are high risk with little to no upside potential." And while perhaps sometimes it's difficult to tell whether a certain Crazy Elon Thing falls into Category A or Category B, things like "let's accuse someone who criticized me of being a pedophile, that'll teach him" or "hey, we have nothing signed and this blatantly violates SEC rules, but screw it, it'd be funny if I said we were going private at $420 a share, because 420"? Those are very clearly things that are in the "little to no upside potential" category.
- Reedx 8y ago
  Indeed, but at end of the day he's human and sometimes we say stupid things driven by emotion. You have to weigh the good and the bad, and thus far I'd say it's no contest. Elon has contributed far more upside.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- tbabb 8y ago
  I have a hard time seeing arguments against the SEC taking action-- especially here-- as anything but overcomplicated rationalizations rooted in a personal adoration of Elon Musk. Basically, "I like Elon Musk and so I don't want anything bad to happen to him." But (a) laws don't work like that (b) selectively enforcing rules (especially those designed to prevent fraud and deception) isn't justice or ethics, and (c) he genuinely did something wrong-- multiple things wrong. He deserves to face adverse consequences for those choices.
  - miemo 8y ago
    This reminds me of the heart surgeon student who avoided jail time for attacking her partner with a knife because she 'showed potential'. People are perhaps sympathetic to Elon because he shows more potential than other CEOs, no? Did the judge in the case above show leniency because 'he liked her'? For b) rather than selectively enforcing rules, this would be an example of discretionary punishment, which is absolutely a part of justice and ethics, as in the case above. Some could interpret your argument to support mandatory minimum sentencing, which many don't believe works.
ckastner 8y ago
> These articles about Elon are interesting to me because Tesla could not have become such a valuable car company in such a short time if it wasn't for Elon, and that includes his personality. > Yet, many couch investors would prefer to have a CEO who is stable, boring and predictable. People want to put their money in for steady long-term returns, and not worry A much simpler explanation, lacking the conflict, would be that early, start-up hungry investors prefer the rockstar CEO, and long-term investors would prefer a business-seasoned CEO. To which I would say: Tesla has been around for 15 years (longer than Facebook!), and as the fans frequently profess, its market capitalization has (in the recent past) already surpassed that of other established car manufacturers. Perhaps it's time to leave the startup image behind.
unethical_ban 8y ago
I can want a risk taking, belligerent CEO with huge expectations that demand results. I can also want that same person not to make unfounded, potentially illegal, and highly monitored claims regarding the company's trading status that could land them in court. And not insult rescuers as pedophiles, etc. Basically, what chipotle_coyote said.
- dnautics 8y ago
  You can want these things but the world does not have to deliver for you. A institutionalized version of that mentality is exactly the problem; organizations like the SEC fundamentally exist because 'someone has to protect' people's ability to inflation-proof their nest-egg. People should not question why their nest-egg should have to be made inflation-proof in the first place.
  - unethical_ban 8y ago
    You really think that demanding that stock prices aren't unfairly manipulated by inside players is a step too far? That insider trading should be alright?
    - antidesitter 8y ago
      > That insider trading should be alright? Not commenting on the specifics of this case, but some economists argue that insider trading should be legalized: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading#Arguments_for_legalizing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading#Arguments_for_...
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
tehlike 8y ago
Elon musk brings entropy, with entropy comes higher reward.
- ACow_Adonis 8y ago
  Except its important to get the direction of causation right. Trying to achieve higher rewards generally necessitates risk taking. Desire for the first leads to the second. High entropy events, by themselves, do not necessitate greater possibilities of higher rewards. There is no great benefit to sticking your face in a fan, as high entropy as that might be. So the question comes, has Elon lately been doing things high entropy because he's chasing higher rewards by doing them, or are they just high entropy because they're high entropy. At least for a couple of recent "Elon specials" (paedophile smears, SEC, dope smoking), it looks to me like you would be very hard pressed in arguing that this individual isn't one just partaking in "face in the fan" type entropy...
  - ajhurliman 8y ago
    I think everyone is in agreement that we'd like the good parts of Elon Musk without any of the parts that have got him into trouble recently, but that's kind of a difficult ask. It also seems a lot less rude than confronting a CEO of a declining company with the question "Why are you so good at deflecting bad media and so bad at innovating?" Please let me know if you can find any perfectly behaved geniuses with a track record of pioneering multiple world-changing companies/technologies.
- konschubert 8y ago
  No.
redthrowaway 8y ago
I don't remember Steve Jobs calling random people pedophiles or committing a little light securities fraud while high. Elon brings incredible value to his companies. He also brings incredible risk. The error his fans make is in assuming the two are inseparable--that you can't have the space visionary without the libel, or the automotive and energy revolutionary without the fraud. I think this is a mistake. You could solve most of Elon's problems by giving someone the ability to preview his tweets before he sends them. I can't see how putting a broadcast delay on his twitter feed would stop him from building cars and rockets.
- kjksf 8y ago
  Steve Jobs stole $5k from his best friend Steve Wozniak https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/steve-wozniak-cried-jobs-kept-atari-bonus-267711 https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/steve-wozniak-cried-jobs-kept-atar... He denied, for many years, that he was a father of his daughter and, while a millionaire, didn't support his daughter or her mother financially. He was investigated by SEC for, wait for it, securities fraud (stock options backdating including his 7.5 million stock options). He wasn't charged. His CFO and General Counsel weren't so lucky. https://www.cnet.com/news/how-jobs-dodged-the-stock-option-backdating-bullet/ https://www.cnet.com/news/how-jobs-dodged-the-stock-option-b... He certainly was an actual frequent drug user, not a one time marijuana puffer. And many more https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-jerk-2011-10#everything-youve-ever-done-in-your-life-is-shit-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-jerk-2011-10#ever... This is not to say that one jerk justifies another but to point the power of narrative. Musk has already achieved more than Jobs (I put creating 5 companies and dominating fricking space industry, from nothing, in less than 2 decades a bit higher than overseeing development of iPod and iPhone). But make a few mis-steps on twitter, report it nationally by click hungry press and suddenly he's irresponsible, reckless, drug addicted man child who has to be reigned in by adults.
  - mantas 8y ago
    Did Musk created his rocket all by himself? Or did he merely overseen the development? Also, Jobs did far more than iPod/iPhone. Both in Apple and in his other companies.
WalterBright 8y ago
I invested in Tesla because I couldn't buy stock in SpaceX. But I view it as buying a lottery ticket, and just to join in the fun of what Elon is doing. I didn't buy enough to engender much angst if it goes to zero. I just want to be a part of it!
JoshCole 8y ago
Yeah, the shorty meme brigade with their 'short air force' patch meme campaign convincing the New York Times to run a ridiculous story about cars parked in a parking lot is also very interesting. We live in a post-IRA revelation world.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

Steel_Phoenix 8y ago

There is no shortage of boring automotive companies to invest in if that's what they want. Invest in Musk if you believe the future won't happen fast enough if you don't. A corporate board making all the decisions would have been long ago crushed by big oil or bigger manufacturers, or their patents bought and buried to continue the status-quo.

nikofeyn 8y ago
how is tesla the future? they are still figuring out how to reliably manufacture a very small number of stagnant models, whereas every other car manufacturer iterates on multiple models every year, and it all works like clockwork and yields very reliable and safe cars. my kia optima sxl is much less than 50% of a tesla and yet has a higher fit and finish and is more safe.
- Clomez 8y ago
  but manufacturing entirely new type of car? somebody gotta take the hit of being the first (most of the time, failing) one to try to do it on this scale. It's the only way forward. I think old and steady auto manufacturers are too stagnant to ever try their hand at such a risky but needed move.
  - jnurmine 8y ago
    Is it really so? They are not the only one, nor were they the first either, really. Yes, in some areas they were first on the market. Many of the major ("old, boring") car manufacturers are growing on the EV segment and will overtake Tesla soon if not already there. For example, BMW i3 has sold around 100k units now, about a third of Teslas. Overall the market is dominated by the Chinese manufacturers. Tesla got where they are because of the media skills and connections of Mr. Musk and the media amplification that follows. With Mr. Musk gone I see rather dire times for Tesla as a company, regardless of whether the company is sold to someone or not. Full disclosure: have never driven a Tesla but have seen it zoom to a tiny dot in the horizon in a really short time when the traffic lights turned green.
    - dexen 8y ago
      > For example, BMW i3 has sold around 100k units now, about a third of Teslas Reminds me of the "No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." wrap-up the Slashdot editors gave[1] to iPod upon release.[2] Any Tesla model is an exciting car, due to performance and handling, the sheen of EV greenness, and the otherness of experience[3], while still being a no-compromise daily driver. Even the range anxiety on longer trips is a strong emotion, count it as a long-term advantage, and yet another spark for endless discussions mentioning the brand. Contrast that with the i3 being mid-to-lower-end model among BMW offerings, and excites close to nobody. There's no trick in bringing a boring, incremental car to the market; any large company can do it. Nor is it a springboard from rags to riches; it can only work in a slow-moving, low-innovation market, which new car market used to be for decades, but apparently got hot again. The trick is to bring something that has appearance of new&fresh, that will set an industry-wide trend, will appear to push the envelope, and will make customers into excited fanboys queueing up for the goods, or preordering a year in advance. This is much harder for an established player, due to Innovator's Dilemma, and the inertia of any large organization. BMW i3 is "yeah, I save a bunch of $$$ on gas, and I can usually fit the groceries in the trunk"; Tesla is, "I GOT 10k LIKES ON MY LUDICROUS MODE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE AND MY SIGNIFICANT OTHER WAS SCREAMING ALL THE WAY ALSO SUNROOF <3 AND I CAN LET GO OF THE WHEEL". Emotions. Tesla is like the (early) fast and exciting X.com/PayPal among boring old banks with their wire transfers, rather than like umpteenth "also-ran" online payment processor we get every few months. > Many of the major car manufacturers (...) will overtake Tesla soon if not already there The IBM overtook Apple for several decades, in no small part thanks to the duopoly with Microsoft and their EEE tactics. And yet here we are, Apple > IBM. However IBM PC was effectively an open platform, while the modern passenger car is at best half-way such. In this race of Tesla against the proverbial Detroit, I bet on Tesla; and I put Elon's antics in the assets column rather than liabilities, with a "any PR is good PR" note. [1] https://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-ipod https://slashdot.org/story/01/10/23/1816257/apple-releases-i... [2] and then there's the response Dropbox got early on on HN [3] granted it's not for everybody. Just like Mercedes and BMW fans deride each others' ergonomic&stylistic choices.
- kirillzubovsky 8y ago
  `every other car manufacturer iterates on multiple models every year` - that's not actually true. Every other manufacturer maintains the same base for their cars and simply swaps small details around to make it look like you are getting a different car. You are not actually getting anything radically different every year; not even every decade really.
  - simonbarker87 8y ago
    Car companies work on a new model around every 7/8 years with a minor change at the halfway point. Essentially every decade most of the cars gets a complete overhaul.
  - nikofeyn 8y ago
    it is actually true. many manufacturers, say kia, have multiple models. that's a fact. then, they iterate on these models every year. that's also a fact. yes, it is true that they typically have a major design on a specific model that is then kept around for multiple years, but they are still iterating on them rather heavily. "simply swaps small details" is undercutting the improvements made to the cars, especially with fit and finish, something tesla is rather poor at in my opinion. my statement is accurate and didn't imply that they redesign the car every year. everyone knows that isn't how it works.
- Steel_Phoenix 8y ago
  Whether Tesla itself is the future or not, I don't know. I doubt Musk really wanted to be in the business of building cars. I think he did it to change the way everyone else builds cars. Not by decree of some minor increment in emissions standards, but by showing that an electric car would be cheaper, cleaner, faster, and sexier. He did it at a time when Prius was the laughing stock of the evening news, with stories of Prius tipping, and jokes about its drivers. Does Kia really have a higher safety rating than Tesla? I agree with other comments that things like his fight with the diver was unhelpful. I don't know what was really behind the threat to take things private. Hopefully he learned something and will focus again on what he does best. Sometimes, established industry needs someone from outside to threaten do do something even if it isn't the most profitable thing to do. I remember when iphones were charging for ringtones and wallpaper. Google's decision to make an open source OS, and threat to build a phone for it if no one else would, changed the whole game. I'd rather invest time or money in Musk, despite the risk, just because he built the car, landed the rocket, and I want him to be able to do it again. I can respect an investor who just wants a safe return, but they should invest elsewhere and good riddance. He doesn't need that kind of investor always threatening to pull their money if he doesn't play it safer. Maybe instead of going public, he should start the world's largest Kickstarter.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

chipotle_coyote 8y ago

I'm going to push back against this narrative, because it seems a lot of the "let Elon be Elon" arguments are neatly encapsulated in this line: Tesla is doing wild things which are causing crazy growth, but also crazy panic. But the critics of Musk's behavior would respond, I think correctly, that there is a categorical difference between "wild things which cause crazy panic because they are high risk with high upside potential ('crazy growth')" and "wild things which cause crazy panic because they are high risk with little to no upside potential." And while perhaps sometimes it's difficult to tell whether a certain Crazy Elon Thing falls into Category A or Category B, things like "let's accuse someone who criticized me of being a pedophile, that'll teach him" or "hey, we have nothing signed and this blatantly violates SEC rules, but screw it, it'd be funny if I said we were going private at $420 a share, because 420"? Those are very clearly things that are in the "little to no upside potential" category.

Reedx 8y ago
Indeed, but at end of the day he's human and sometimes we say stupid things driven by emotion. You have to weigh the good and the bad, and thus far I'd say it's no contest. Elon has contributed far more upside.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
tbabb 8y ago
I have a hard time seeing arguments against the SEC taking action-- especially here-- as anything but overcomplicated rationalizations rooted in a personal adoration of Elon Musk. Basically, "I like Elon Musk and so I don't want anything bad to happen to him." But (a) laws don't work like that (b) selectively enforcing rules (especially those designed to prevent fraud and deception) isn't justice or ethics, and (c) he genuinely did something wrong-- multiple things wrong. He deserves to face adverse consequences for those choices.
- miemo 8y ago
  This reminds me of the heart surgeon student who avoided jail time for attacking her partner with a knife because she 'showed potential'. People are perhaps sympathetic to Elon because he shows more potential than other CEOs, no? Did the judge in the case above show leniency because 'he liked her'? For b) rather than selectively enforcing rules, this would be an example of discretionary punishment, which is absolutely a part of justice and ethics, as in the case above. Some could interpret your argument to support mandatory minimum sentencing, which many don't believe works.

ckastner 8y ago

> These articles about Elon are interesting to me because Tesla could not have become such a valuable car company in such a short time if it wasn't for Elon, and that includes his personality. > Yet, many couch investors would prefer to have a CEO who is stable, boring and predictable. People want to put their money in for steady long-term returns, and not worry A much simpler explanation, lacking the conflict, would be that early, start-up hungry investors prefer the rockstar CEO, and long-term investors would prefer a business-seasoned CEO. To which I would say: Tesla has been around for 15 years (longer than Facebook!), and as the fans frequently profess, its market capitalization has (in the recent past) already surpassed that of other established car manufacturers. Perhaps it's time to leave the startup image behind.

unethical_ban 8y ago

I can want a risk taking, belligerent CEO with huge expectations that demand results. I can also want that same person not to make unfounded, potentially illegal, and highly monitored claims regarding the company's trading status that could land them in court. And not insult rescuers as pedophiles, etc. Basically, what chipotle_coyote said.

dnautics 8y ago
You can want these things but the world does not have to deliver for you. A institutionalized version of that mentality is exactly the problem; organizations like the SEC fundamentally exist because 'someone has to protect' people's ability to inflation-proof their nest-egg. People should not question why their nest-egg should have to be made inflation-proof in the first place.
- unethical_ban 8y ago
  You really think that demanding that stock prices aren't unfairly manipulated by inside players is a step too far? That insider trading should be alright?
  - antidesitter 8y ago
    > That insider trading should be alright? Not commenting on the specifics of this case, but some economists argue that insider trading should be legalized: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading#Arguments_for_legalizing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insider_trading#Arguments_for_...
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]

tehlike 8y ago

Elon musk brings entropy, with entropy comes higher reward.

ACow_Adonis 8y ago
Except its important to get the direction of causation right. Trying to achieve higher rewards generally necessitates risk taking. Desire for the first leads to the second. High entropy events, by themselves, do not necessitate greater possibilities of higher rewards. There is no great benefit to sticking your face in a fan, as high entropy as that might be. So the question comes, has Elon lately been doing things high entropy because he's chasing higher rewards by doing them, or are they just high entropy because they're high entropy. At least for a couple of recent "Elon specials" (paedophile smears, SEC, dope smoking), it looks to me like you would be very hard pressed in arguing that this individual isn't one just partaking in "face in the fan" type entropy...
- ajhurliman 8y ago
  I think everyone is in agreement that we'd like the good parts of Elon Musk without any of the parts that have got him into trouble recently, but that's kind of a difficult ask. It also seems a lot less rude than confronting a CEO of a declining company with the question "Why are you so good at deflecting bad media and so bad at innovating?" Please let me know if you can find any perfectly behaved geniuses with a track record of pioneering multiple world-changing companies/technologies.
konschubert 8y ago
No.

redthrowaway 8y ago

I don't remember Steve Jobs calling random people pedophiles or committing a little light securities fraud while high. Elon brings incredible value to his companies. He also brings incredible risk. The error his fans make is in assuming the two are inseparable--that you can't have the space visionary without the libel, or the automotive and energy revolutionary without the fraud. I think this is a mistake. You could solve most of Elon's problems by giving someone the ability to preview his tweets before he sends them. I can't see how putting a broadcast delay on his twitter feed would stop him from building cars and rockets.

kjksf 8y ago
Steve Jobs stole $5k from his best friend Steve Wozniak https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/steve-wozniak-cried-jobs-kept-atari-bonus-267711 https://www.ibtimes.co.uk/steve-wozniak-cried-jobs-kept-atar... He denied, for many years, that he was a father of his daughter and, while a millionaire, didn't support his daughter or her mother financially. He was investigated by SEC for, wait for it, securities fraud (stock options backdating including his 7.5 million stock options). He wasn't charged. His CFO and General Counsel weren't so lucky. https://www.cnet.com/news/how-jobs-dodged-the-stock-option-backdating-bullet/ https://www.cnet.com/news/how-jobs-dodged-the-stock-option-b... He certainly was an actual frequent drug user, not a one time marijuana puffer. And many more https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-jerk-2011-10#everything-youve-ever-done-in-your-life-is-shit-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-jerk-2011-10#ever... This is not to say that one jerk justifies another but to point the power of narrative. Musk has already achieved more than Jobs (I put creating 5 companies and dominating fricking space industry, from nothing, in less than 2 decades a bit higher than overseeing development of iPod and iPhone). But make a few mis-steps on twitter, report it nationally by click hungry press and suddenly he's irresponsible, reckless, drug addicted man child who has to be reigned in by adults.
- mantas 8y ago
  Did Musk created his rocket all by himself? Or did he merely overseen the development? Also, Jobs did far more than iPod/iPhone. Both in Apple and in his other companies.

WalterBright 8y ago

I invested in Tesla because I couldn't buy stock in SpaceX. But I view it as buying a lottery ticket, and just to join in the fun of what Elon is doing. I didn't buy enough to engender much angst if it goes to zero. I just want to be a part of it!

JoshCole 8y ago

Yeah, the shorty meme brigade with their 'short air force' patch meme campaign convincing the New York Times to run a ridiculous story about cars parked in a parking lot is also very interesting. We live in a post-IRA revelation world.