6 ms·

Something can be true in one case and not true in another. Nikola looked like fraud from the start (no Silicon Valley funds invested iirc - money came from Det

Something can be true in one case and not true in another. Nikola looked like fraud from the start (no Silicon Valley funds invested iirc - money came from Detroit). Elon Musk is obviously different.

zeusk 5y ago
Silicon Valley is choke full of fraud and absurd valuations.
- fossuser 5y ago
  When you look at the actual fraud (like Theranos) silicon valley funds are nowhere near it. The people that get duped are usually outsiders that are more easily manipulated. It can be hard to tell the difference between big ideas and bullshit, they can often sound similar. Con-artists will mimic the people that actually know their shit. In order to tell the difference you need to actually look at the underlying tech for yourself.
  - rvz 5y ago
    > Con-artists will mimic the people that actually know their shit. Ah yes. A certain billionaire promises robo-taxis and full Level 5 autonomy by 2020, and then in 2021, admits self-driving is hard as FSD is still Level 2, after duping their own customers on buying ahead of their 'promises'. This billionaire in 2019, surely knew what he was talking about. /s > In order to tell the difference you need to actually look at the underlying tech for yourself. Like the deceptive advertisement of FSD (Full Self Driving) auto-pilot software in Tesla cars that has tricked many Tesla drivers into paying for a product that not only doesn't work as advertised, but puts the safety of drivers and others at risk. The worst part is that they continue to market it regardless of the missed deadlines, the safety risks and the fact that the software is still 'safe' for usage, which that is complete bullshit. The FSD feature in Tesla cars (along side the robotaxis) was deceptively advertised as 'safe' and promised as 'Level 5' with lots of customers buying into it; and some have lost their lives over the software getting confused. If FSD is not regarded as 'actual fraud' or 'deceptively advertised', then I don't know what is.
    - fossuser 5y ago
      FSD was advertised as paying for something that would come in the future - I bought it under that assumption (and so did everyone I know that has it). That was and remains true. They've continued to make progress towards it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6bOwQdCJrc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6bOwQdCJrc Autopilot is different and isn't advertised as level 5 - 'autopilot' implies fancy lane keeping not turn by turn point to point autonomy. Elon's FSD timelines were wrong - that isn't fraud. People say everything he's trying to do won't work constantly, just because they're occasionally right doesn't validate all of the times they're wrong (e.g. Model 3 is vaporware will never ship, the company is bankrupt and will close in two weeks, the Model S will never ship, gigafactory is a mistake, roadster means Musk only cares about EVs for the rich etc. etc.) If you can't tell the difference between Elon Musk and the success of Tesla and SpaceX or think it's equivalent to something like Theranos or Nikola I'm not sure what to say about that, there's just not much point in further discussion. Your pejorative use of billionaire also suggests some political element.
      - Robotbeat 5y ago
        I think Trevor was counting on people not being able to tell the difference. They named their Tesla-competing company “Nikola,” which is a bit astounding when you think of it.
        fossuser 5y ago
        And Elizabeth Holmes wore black turtle necks - subtlety is not what they’re usually going for. Trevor does have some 30+ million dollar ranch in Utah though so I guess he did a better job of it. In Holmes case I genuinely think it didn't start as a fraud, but became one when they started lying. Not sure about Nikola.
        cat199 5y ago
        > In Holmes case I genuinely think it didn't start as a fraud Anyone thinking you can do statistically accurate blood testing from one drop of dirty fingertip capillary blood without having already made a major scientific breakthrough is certainly not thinking straight, if not outright being fraudulent
  - cat199 5y ago
    > When you look at the actual fraud (like Theranos) silicon valley funds are nowhere near it. The people that get duped are usually outsiders that are more easily manipulated. might not have been valley insiders, but if you look at theranos bizarre board selection, they were certainly not just random joes and certainly had the wherewithal to know they needed do proper due diligence before attaching themselves to the fraud, unless of course they were also party to it...
xkjkls 5y ago
Why do you think Elon Musk is obviously different? He's definitely had many events where he has lied about aspects of his business. You could argue that it doesn't matter now that he has built something real, but that's down to a lot of luck, not ethical backbone.
- electriclove 5y ago
  Musk has built many things over the past Many years. Though he may talk about even more, bringing EVs to the masses and creating reusable rockets is something he deserves full credit for. It has nothing to do with ethics. A rational person would not equate Musk with Milton.
  - xkjkls 5y ago
    Not equate, realize that they are both part of a pattern. We also should not let Elon Musk's actions only be evaluated in their totality. We can argue about the net sum of his contributions, but it should be fundamentally irrelevant to evaluating any individual one. He shouldn't lie or allow fraud. His actions with the Solar Roof launch, Boring Company, Self Driving, and funding tweets all cross ethical lines that we as a country need to make clear are not what we want from our business leaders.
  - tsimionescu 5y ago
    The fact that Tesla is not entirely vapourware doesn't mean that Musk hasn't lied or even committed fraud to get here. Lying to investors to fund a billion dollar company that is actually worth a few hundred million is not that different from funding one that is worth 0 dollars.

Something can be true in one case and not true in another. Nikola looked like fraud from the start (no Silicon Valley funds invested iirc - money came from Detroit). Elon Musk is obviously different.

zeusk 5y ago

Silicon Valley is choke full of fraud and absurd valuations.

fossuser 5y ago
When you look at the actual fraud (like Theranos) silicon valley funds are nowhere near it. The people that get duped are usually outsiders that are more easily manipulated. It can be hard to tell the difference between big ideas and bullshit, they can often sound similar. Con-artists will mimic the people that actually know their shit. In order to tell the difference you need to actually look at the underlying tech for yourself.
- rvz 5y ago
  > Con-artists will mimic the people that actually know their shit. Ah yes. A certain billionaire promises robo-taxis and full Level 5 autonomy by 2020, and then in 2021, admits self-driving is hard as FSD is still Level 2, after duping their own customers on buying ahead of their 'promises'. This billionaire in 2019, surely knew what he was talking about. /s > In order to tell the difference you need to actually look at the underlying tech for yourself. Like the deceptive advertisement of FSD (Full Self Driving) auto-pilot software in Tesla cars that has tricked many Tesla drivers into paying for a product that not only doesn't work as advertised, but puts the safety of drivers and others at risk. The worst part is that they continue to market it regardless of the missed deadlines, the safety risks and the fact that the software is still 'safe' for usage, which that is complete bullshit. The FSD feature in Tesla cars (along side the robotaxis) was deceptively advertised as 'safe' and promised as 'Level 5' with lots of customers buying into it; and some have lost their lives over the software getting confused. If FSD is not regarded as 'actual fraud' or 'deceptively advertised', then I don't know what is.
  - fossuser 5y ago
    FSD was advertised as paying for something that would come in the future - I bought it under that assumption (and so did everyone I know that has it). That was and remains true. They've continued to make progress towards it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6bOwQdCJrc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6bOwQdCJrc Autopilot is different and isn't advertised as level 5 - 'autopilot' implies fancy lane keeping not turn by turn point to point autonomy. Elon's FSD timelines were wrong - that isn't fraud. People say everything he's trying to do won't work constantly, just because they're occasionally right doesn't validate all of the times they're wrong (e.g. Model 3 is vaporware will never ship, the company is bankrupt and will close in two weeks, the Model S will never ship, gigafactory is a mistake, roadster means Musk only cares about EVs for the rich etc. etc.) If you can't tell the difference between Elon Musk and the success of Tesla and SpaceX or think it's equivalent to something like Theranos or Nikola I'm not sure what to say about that, there's just not much point in further discussion. Your pejorative use of billionaire also suggests some political element.
    - Robotbeat 5y ago
      I think Trevor was counting on people not being able to tell the difference. They named their Tesla-competing company “Nikola,” which is a bit astounding when you think of it.
      - fossuser 5y ago
        And Elizabeth Holmes wore black turtle necks - subtlety is not what they’re usually going for. Trevor does have some 30+ million dollar ranch in Utah though so I guess he did a better job of it. In Holmes case I genuinely think it didn't start as a fraud, but became one when they started lying. Not sure about Nikola.
        cat199 5y ago
        > In Holmes case I genuinely think it didn't start as a fraud Anyone thinking you can do statistically accurate blood testing from one drop of dirty fingertip capillary blood without having already made a major scientific breakthrough is certainly not thinking straight, if not outright being fraudulent
- cat199 5y ago
  > When you look at the actual fraud (like Theranos) silicon valley funds are nowhere near it. The people that get duped are usually outsiders that are more easily manipulated. might not have been valley insiders, but if you look at theranos bizarre board selection, they were certainly not just random joes and certainly had the wherewithal to know they needed do proper due diligence before attaching themselves to the fraud, unless of course they were also party to it...

xkjkls 5y ago

Why do you think Elon Musk is obviously different? He's definitely had many events where he has lied about aspects of his business. You could argue that it doesn't matter now that he has built something real, but that's down to a lot of luck, not ethical backbone.

electriclove 5y ago
Musk has built many things over the past Many years. Though he may talk about even more, bringing EVs to the masses and creating reusable rockets is something he deserves full credit for. It has nothing to do with ethics. A rational person would not equate Musk with Milton.
- xkjkls 5y ago
  Not equate, realize that they are both part of a pattern. We also should not let Elon Musk's actions only be evaluated in their totality. We can argue about the net sum of his contributions, but it should be fundamentally irrelevant to evaluating any individual one. He shouldn't lie or allow fraud. His actions with the Solar Roof launch, Boring Company, Self Driving, and funding tweets all cross ethical lines that we as a country need to make clear are not what we want from our business leaders.
- tsimionescu 5y ago
  The fact that Tesla is not entirely vapourware doesn't mean that Musk hasn't lied or even committed fraud to get here. Lying to investors to fund a billion dollar company that is actually worth a few hundred million is not that different from funding one that is worth 0 dollars.