4 ms·

I'm thinking Twitter is in dire need for a little of his "abuse". It's a dysfunctional company, product and community. I think Musk's abuse should be seen in a

by fleddr 5y ago

I'm thinking Twitter is in dire need for a little of his "abuse". It's a dysfunctional company, product and community. I think Musk's abuse should be seen in a larger context. Not as an excuse, rather as an explanation. He takes on seeming impossible missions and is then ruthless in achieving them. Anything that gets in the way has to go, from employees to institutions. You can debate whether these methods are required to achieve the results or not, I wouldn't know the answer to that. But I do believe he's not intentionally abusive like some evil villain. He's autistic. His mind doesn't work like the mind of most of us. He cuts straight through politics and social rituals and doesn't read them or comply with them like the rest of us. You could say he's not good at people things, and perhaps that's why he overachieves.

Consultant32452 5y ago
It's really hard explaining to people how the brain of an autistic person works. Most people are quite happy to accommodate the special needs of a person with one leg. But you show them a person whose disability means they don't comply with your social rituals and have an abrasive personality and suddenly it's time to moralize.
tmp_anon_22 5y ago
Elon Musk is a personality that gets full credit for all successes he participates in and receives little criticism for the things he fails at. Like the time he pledged $6B to the EU to solve world hunger but then fell off the face of the Earth when it came time to collect. Please look into the history of his companies, Musk is first and foremost a financier who among other things purchases the "Founder" title when buying companies.
- fleddr 5y ago
  I feel silly to have to defend him again, but you misrepresented what happened. Grossly. The chief of the UN food program, so most definitely not the EU, claimed that 2% of Musk's wealth would solve world hunger. Musk invites them to do the math, and would agree to provide such funds if the claim were to be true. They couldn't produce a sane plan. Instead the idea was to give 40 million people free money, for one year. Which is great, but it's not a sustainable approach or way to "solve world hunger". So the UN was bluffing and the bluff was called. Musk did not bluff as immediately after, he donated 5.7B of his wealth to an undisclosed charity (on record with the SEC). I guess this shows the power of narratives. Musk is a rogue character but if there ever was a technical or economical way to solve world hunger, I'd put my money on Musk.
  - krainboltgreene 5y ago
    Just to be clear this isn't what happened and is almost a copy and paste of what Musk fans say happened, despite it being literally in the public.
    - fleddr 5y ago
      Just to be clear, you didn't say anything, so you're not clear. The actual tweets, UN claim, and donation are in the open: https://fortune.com/2022/02/15/elon-musk-5-7-billion-donation-weeks-after-asking-un-world-hunger/ https://fortune.com/2022/02/15/elon-musk-5-7-billion-donatio...
  - ModernMech 5y ago
    > I feel silly to have to defend him again "Have to"? You don't "have" to defend Elon Musk at all, and maybe you should ask yourself what compels you to do something that makes you feel silly. I mean, you do recognize that what you're doing here, defending the reputation of a billionaire, on some level is very silly. He certainly doesn't need your help, so why do you do it?
    - fleddr 5y ago
      What compels me is the truth and a sense of justice. The UN was virtue signaling and playing the greedy billionaire card to guilt trip Musk into being responsible for not solving world hunger, whilst he easily could. The UN claim was an incompetent bluff, that was called. Hollow words and zero substance. Meanwhile, Musk donated 5.7B. So yes, when somebody is doing something good for the world, billionaire or not, that truth has to prevail. Same for when said billionaire does something bad.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]

by fleddr 5y ago

Consultant32452 5y ago

It's really hard explaining to people how the brain of an autistic person works. Most people are quite happy to accommodate the special needs of a person with one leg. But you show them a person whose disability means they don't comply with your social rituals and have an abrasive personality and suddenly it's time to moralize.

tmp_anon_22 5y ago

Elon Musk is a personality that gets full credit for all successes he participates in and receives little criticism for the things he fails at. Like the time he pledged $6B to the EU to solve world hunger but then fell off the face of the Earth when it came time to collect. Please look into the history of his companies, Musk is first and foremost a financier who among other things purchases the "Founder" title when buying companies.

fleddr 5y ago
I feel silly to have to defend him again, but you misrepresented what happened. Grossly. The chief of the UN food program, so most definitely not the EU, claimed that 2% of Musk's wealth would solve world hunger. Musk invites them to do the math, and would agree to provide such funds if the claim were to be true. They couldn't produce a sane plan. Instead the idea was to give 40 million people free money, for one year. Which is great, but it's not a sustainable approach or way to "solve world hunger". So the UN was bluffing and the bluff was called. Musk did not bluff as immediately after, he donated 5.7B of his wealth to an undisclosed charity (on record with the SEC). I guess this shows the power of narratives. Musk is a rogue character but if there ever was a technical or economical way to solve world hunger, I'd put my money on Musk.
- krainboltgreene 5y ago
  Just to be clear this isn't what happened and is almost a copy and paste of what Musk fans say happened, despite it being literally in the public.
  - fleddr 5y ago
    Just to be clear, you didn't say anything, so you're not clear. The actual tweets, UN claim, and donation are in the open: https://fortune.com/2022/02/15/elon-musk-5-7-billion-donation-weeks-after-asking-un-world-hunger/ https://fortune.com/2022/02/15/elon-musk-5-7-billion-donatio...
- ModernMech 5y ago
  > I feel silly to have to defend him again "Have to"? You don't "have" to defend Elon Musk at all, and maybe you should ask yourself what compels you to do something that makes you feel silly. I mean, you do recognize that what you're doing here, defending the reputation of a billionaire, on some level is very silly. He certainly doesn't need your help, so why do you do it?
  - fleddr 5y ago
    What compels me is the truth and a sense of justice. The UN was virtue signaling and playing the greedy billionaire card to guilt trip Musk into being responsible for not solving world hunger, whilst he easily could. The UN claim was an incompetent bluff, that was called. Hollow words and zero substance. Meanwhile, Musk donated 5.7B. So yes, when somebody is doing something good for the world, billionaire or not, that truth has to prevail. Same for when said billionaire does something bad.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]