5 ms·

I believe Elon will learn the hard way that yes you can solve tech problems by throwing humans at them but you can't solve human problems by throwing tech at th

I believe Elon will learn the hard way that yes you can solve tech problems by throwing humans at them but you can't solve human problems by throwing tech at them.

kenhwang 4y ago
Advertising is a human problem. I think Elon is already feeling the blowback from immediately misunderstanding it based on this tweet[1]. It's going to be interesting to see how he intends on making up that $5b/year. [1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1588538640401018880 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1588538640401018880
- johannes1234321 4y ago
  I'd be careful about that tweet. It is clear that Tesla competitors (GM, VW) stop funding Musk, but aside from that most big advertisers likely have longer running contracts, so immediate impact is unlikely. By such a statement Musk can however argue that the RIFs are "required"
  - kenhwang 4y ago
    I work in advertising. It is very typical for big advertisers to have a change of ownership exit clause. It is also very typical for these contracts to only establish the unit rate, but without a required minimum spend amount. The bigger nail in the coffin is IPG recommending their clients pull out; they probably represent a third of F500 ad spend. I would not be surprised if the other three firms in the big four are recommending the same. It's not just car brands. edit: it'll also be interesting to see if other social media sites (primarily Facebook, Reddit, Snap, or TikTok) or advertising platforms (Google) retaliate against Tesla now that Elon owns a direct competitor. Tesla enjoys quite a lot of "free" word of mouth advertising on their platforms, and those platforms all have the means to bury positive sentiment and/or amplify negative sentiment towards Tesla.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - skizm 4y ago
    Do companies have "contracts" for ads on the internet these days? I thought most ads on social media, Twitter included, were self service with an automated bidding system that allowed each advertiser to tweak how much they're willing to pay per ad view in real-time. You can essentially just login to your account and hit the big "OFF" button whenever you want.
    - theCrowing 4y ago
      The contracts are not with the specific platform rather with a media agency these agencies on the other hand have contracts with platforms.
- deckard1 4y ago
  > Extremely messed up! They’re trying to destroy free speech in America. this reads like a Trump quote. People are free to use their speech to pressure advertisers into dropping Twitter. Or, rather, "voting" with their wallet.
  - r00fus 4y ago
    Definitely some "Trump at home" energy (to use a standard meme).
BiteCode_dev 4y ago
Creating the giga factories and making space x a success were as much a technical success as a human success. At this scale in the game, everything is. We can be critical of his actions, but at this point, assuming incompetence is foolish.
- jeffbee 4y ago
  The "gigafactory" in Nevada—built, owned, and operated by Panasonic—is similar in size to other Panasonic battery factories in Japan and around the world.
- tptacek 4y ago
  No, it's not. Essentializing incompetence, implying that he's incompetent at everything, that's foolish. But the supposition that he's incapable of being incompetent at Twitter because of his successes elsewhere has already been disproven.
  - WorldMaker 4y ago
    It's possibly not that foolish depending on how hard you believe the Peter Principle applies to billionaires. Musk didn't start Tesla, he swooped in and meddled exactly like Twitter, because he had extra money and wanted to swing it around. Is picking a good bet, one that survives your meddling, a skill or just luck? It's possible to believe the Peter Principle applies and it was entirely luck.
    - tptacek 4y ago
      I don't care how instrumental he was to Tesla, because it doesn't have anything to do with how successful he'll be with his stated plans for Twitter, a company he desperately tried to avoid acquiring but was forced by his own mistakes.
    - woooooo 4y ago
      He came in years before the first car was shipped and, like, 15? years before they got to sustained profitability with their third-gen cars. I'm not trying to dickride the guy, obviously a lot of people contributed, but this literally just happened and we all saw it. How are people rewriting it successfully?
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

I believe Elon will learn the hard way that yes you can solve tech problems by throwing humans at them but you can't solve human problems by throwing tech at them.

kenhwang 4y ago

Advertising is a human problem. I think Elon is already feeling the blowback from immediately misunderstanding it based on this tweet[1]. It's going to be interesting to see how he intends on making up that $5b/year. [1] https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1588538640401018880 https://twitter.com/elonmusk/status/1588538640401018880

johannes1234321 4y ago
I'd be careful about that tweet. It is clear that Tesla competitors (GM, VW) stop funding Musk, but aside from that most big advertisers likely have longer running contracts, so immediate impact is unlikely. By such a statement Musk can however argue that the RIFs are "required"
- kenhwang 4y ago
  I work in advertising. It is very typical for big advertisers to have a change of ownership exit clause. It is also very typical for these contracts to only establish the unit rate, but without a required minimum spend amount. The bigger nail in the coffin is IPG recommending their clients pull out; they probably represent a third of F500 ad spend. I would not be surprised if the other three firms in the big four are recommending the same. It's not just car brands. edit: it'll also be interesting to see if other social media sites (primarily Facebook, Reddit, Snap, or TikTok) or advertising platforms (Google) retaliate against Tesla now that Elon owns a direct competitor. Tesla enjoys quite a lot of "free" word of mouth advertising on their platforms, and those platforms all have the means to bury positive sentiment and/or amplify negative sentiment towards Tesla.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
- skizm 4y ago
  Do companies have "contracts" for ads on the internet these days? I thought most ads on social media, Twitter included, were self service with an automated bidding system that allowed each advertiser to tweak how much they're willing to pay per ad view in real-time. You can essentially just login to your account and hit the big "OFF" button whenever you want.
  - theCrowing 4y ago
    The contracts are not with the specific platform rather with a media agency these agencies on the other hand have contracts with platforms.
deckard1 4y ago
> Extremely messed up! They’re trying to destroy free speech in America. this reads like a Trump quote. People are free to use their speech to pressure advertisers into dropping Twitter. Or, rather, "voting" with their wallet.
- r00fus 4y ago
  Definitely some "Trump at home" energy (to use a standard meme).

BiteCode_dev 4y ago

Creating the giga factories and making space x a success were as much a technical success as a human success. At this scale in the game, everything is. We can be critical of his actions, but at this point, assuming incompetence is foolish.

jeffbee 4y ago
The "gigafactory" in Nevada—built, owned, and operated by Panasonic—is similar in size to other Panasonic battery factories in Japan and around the world.
tptacek 4y ago
No, it's not. Essentializing incompetence, implying that he's incompetent at everything, that's foolish. But the supposition that he's incapable of being incompetent at Twitter because of his successes elsewhere has already been disproven.
- WorldMaker 4y ago
  It's possibly not that foolish depending on how hard you believe the Peter Principle applies to billionaires. Musk didn't start Tesla, he swooped in and meddled exactly like Twitter, because he had extra money and wanted to swing it around. Is picking a good bet, one that survives your meddling, a skill or just luck? It's possible to believe the Peter Principle applies and it was entirely luck.
  - tptacek 4y ago
    I don't care how instrumental he was to Tesla, because it doesn't have anything to do with how successful he'll be with his stated plans for Twitter, a company he desperately tried to avoid acquiring but was forced by his own mistakes.
  - woooooo 4y ago
    He came in years before the first car was shipped and, like, 15? years before they got to sustained profitability with their third-gen cars. I'm not trying to dickride the guy, obviously a lot of people contributed, but this literally just happened and we all saw it. How are people rewriting it successfully?

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]