7 ms·

- I believe he can launch rockets into space and land them on their own footprint. - I believe he can revolutionize auto manufacturing and disrupt a 100 year o

by lowkey 2y ago

- I believe he can launch rockets into space and land them on their own footprint. - I believe he can revolutionize auto manufacturing and disrupt a 100 year old industry replacing fossil-fuel burning dinosaurs with clean electric vehicles that outperform them and that appeal to the general public - I believe he can allow quadrapelegics to interact with the world in ways never thought possible - I believe he can, to a great degree, restore free speech on social media even if it is messy and imperfect at times - I believe that innovation is hard and just because he boldly claims he is going to Mars or make cars drive themselves - and hasn’t done it yet, is no reason to discount the possibility that he might actually pull it off one day

specialist 2y ago
Ya, 3.5 out of 5 ain't bad.
forgot-im-old 2y ago
[flagged]
- ben_w 2y ago
  Nobody else did, though. That's the reason he was able to get this rich with SpaceX and not stall sooner — most of the other space companies were (and in the west, still are) busy scratching backs rather than developing successful products.
- horns4lyfe 2y ago
  You honestly believe that DARPA would have given us the Tesla model Y?
  - fragmede 2y ago
    It's possible that Tesla, which Musk didn't found, would have given us an EV by another name. Rivan also got us an electric truck before the cybertruck came out. Fisker's not doing so well though.
    - lowkey 2y ago
      Possible sure - just as it is possible my next startup could be the next Tesla. In reality, when Elon joined Tesla they had nothing but early concept prototypes of a high-end sports car with the name Roadster. Elon took it from concept, to launch, to production. Then he did the same with the Model S/X/3, sold 5 million electric vehicles, made them so compelling that it completely disrupted the ICE vehicle market and sparked a gold rush of elecrification in the car industry resulting in a Trillion-dollar company. It's possible "which Musk didn't found" is doing some heavy lifting in your statement above.
  - red-iron-pine 2y ago
    DARPA doesn't give us anything, it just runs with ideas and develops them enough to push to others to build and run. ARPA gave us TCP/IP, but MS, Google, telcos, etc. gave us the modern internet and the tools to use it
- mensetmanusman 2y ago
  Someone like Boeing. The administrative class has taken over and they have zero risk appetite. Nothing new will come of them.
porbelm 2y ago
[flagged]
- ben_w 2y ago
  > HE can do nothing of the sort because he is an idiot with very few real skills. Management is a real skill. Salesmanship is also a real skill. I may not approve of the showboating, but drumming up enthusiasm for a future that most consider to be fantasy, was a necessary (though not sufficient) part of building an electric car company in an era when most people thought hydrogen was the future and that "electric car" meant "a milk float" and, if they had memories of any real personal electric vehicle, those memories would have been of the failure of the Sinclair C5: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_float https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_float https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_C5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_C5
  - dsr_ 2y ago
    Pretty sure nobody except Toyota thought hydrogen was going to be a useful intermediate fuel: handling is ridiculously difficult compared to room-temperature liquids, energy density is ridiculously low. It would have made more sense to sell Fischer-Tropsch synthesized carbon fuel from purpose-grown crops, at a mere 3x the current production price of fossil carbon fuels, using the existing infrastructure for distribution into existing vehicles.
    - nytesky 2y ago
      I wonder if Honda and Toyota are still backing on a carbon neutral fuel replacement. They have been slow to electrify.
- ETH_start 2y ago
  If you can't recognize his contributions I think you're too emotionally attached to the question.
  - Fricken 2y ago
dom96 2y ago
You’re a fool tricked by another fool who shouts loudly that they support free speech while they ban speech left and right. For goodness sake, ElonJet was banned and you can’t even say the word “cisgender” on the platform. How delusional are you?
- pavlov 2y ago
  Also Musk has banned mentions of his own transgender daughter, who now posts on Meta’s Threads app instead. X is like a textbook case of why total autocracy isn’t actually good management practice. Musk has become the Henry VIII of social media.
- ETH_start 2y ago
  ElonJet was a live geotracking site for private jets. You can post cisgender, it just comes with a warning. Before, people were being banned for using "him" instead of "her" to describe biological males who self-identified as women. People were secretly de-amplified for criticizing the government policy of lockdowns. It was censorship on a whole different magnitude.
  - dom96 2y ago
    So your response is “it was worse in the past”? Two wrongs don’t make a right. Either you’re a “free speech absolutist” or you’re just a lying charlatan. Elon is clearly the latter, the evidence is right in front of your eyes and you choose to make excuses. ElonJet is posting publicly available information and isn’t banned on other platforms. Something coming with a warning is the same as restricting speech.
    - andsoitis 2y ago
      > Something coming with a warning is the same as restricting speech. Placing a warning is generally not considered a restriction on free speech but rather a tool to inform or protect audiences. In contrast, restricting free speech involves preventing someone from expressing their views or censoring content outright. Warnings are typically seen as a way to balance free expression with the responsibility to inform audiences.
ben_w 2y ago
Mostly I agree, modulo "he knows how to make teams to do XYZ", which I'm happy to count for the same reason I'm happy to blame him personally when those teams he's ordering around do something I don't like: > I believe he can, to a great degree, restore free speech on social media even if it is messy and imperfect at times I strongly disagree with this. Even if I ignore the proxy of all the investors writing off their buy-out loans by 75%, even if I ignore that when people link me to random threads I can only see the specific one linked and not any reply because of an invisible paywall^w account-wall, even if I ignore that loading a random tweet now often takes 26 seconds or more (yes, I did just record my screen to get that number), even if I ignore that undesirable stories can be buried by an avalanche of alternative narratives and not just by censoring the truth… There's still the problem of Musk intervening politically in ways that, although totally legal, are exactly the kind of thing he was complaining about before the takeover: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_suspensions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_suspensions
- specialist 2y ago
  Yes and: I'd like someone, eg Musk, to define "free speech". Start with some of those "first principles" he likes so much. Then, per "theory vs reality" cliché, I'd like someone, eg Musk, to explain or demonstrate or larp or interpretative dance what "free speech" looks like in practice. Maybe even point to an existing example. For bonus credit: - explain relationship between "free speech" and news feeds (algorithmic hate machines) - explain operation of "free speech" multinationally - explain how to balance "free speech" and moderation - enumerate the tradeoffs of, downsides due to, and consequences of "free speech"
baxtr 2y ago
I really wonder if he is not focused enough

by lowkey 2y ago

specialist 2y ago

Ya, 3.5 out of 5 ain't bad.

forgot-im-old 2y ago

[flagged]

ben_w 2y ago
Nobody else did, though. That's the reason he was able to get this rich with SpaceX and not stall sooner — most of the other space companies were (and in the west, still are) busy scratching backs rather than developing successful products.
horns4lyfe 2y ago
You honestly believe that DARPA would have given us the Tesla model Y?
- fragmede 2y ago
  It's possible that Tesla, which Musk didn't found, would have given us an EV by another name. Rivan also got us an electric truck before the cybertruck came out. Fisker's not doing so well though.
  - lowkey 2y ago
    Possible sure - just as it is possible my next startup could be the next Tesla. In reality, when Elon joined Tesla they had nothing but early concept prototypes of a high-end sports car with the name Roadster. Elon took it from concept, to launch, to production. Then he did the same with the Model S/X/3, sold 5 million electric vehicles, made them so compelling that it completely disrupted the ICE vehicle market and sparked a gold rush of elecrification in the car industry resulting in a Trillion-dollar company. It's possible "which Musk didn't found" is doing some heavy lifting in your statement above.
- red-iron-pine 2y ago
  DARPA doesn't give us anything, it just runs with ideas and develops them enough to push to others to build and run. ARPA gave us TCP/IP, but MS, Google, telcos, etc. gave us the modern internet and the tools to use it
mensetmanusman 2y ago
Someone like Boeing. The administrative class has taken over and they have zero risk appetite. Nothing new will come of them.

porbelm 2y ago

[flagged]

ben_w 2y ago
> HE can do nothing of the sort because he is an idiot with very few real skills. Management is a real skill. Salesmanship is also a real skill. I may not approve of the showboating, but drumming up enthusiasm for a future that most consider to be fantasy, was a necessary (though not sufficient) part of building an electric car company in an era when most people thought hydrogen was the future and that "electric car" meant "a milk float" and, if they had memories of any real personal electric vehicle, those memories would have been of the failure of the Sinclair C5: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_float https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milk_float https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_C5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_C5
- dsr_ 2y ago
  Pretty sure nobody except Toyota thought hydrogen was going to be a useful intermediate fuel: handling is ridiculously difficult compared to room-temperature liquids, energy density is ridiculously low. It would have made more sense to sell Fischer-Tropsch synthesized carbon fuel from purpose-grown crops, at a mere 3x the current production price of fossil carbon fuels, using the existing infrastructure for distribution into existing vehicles.
  - nytesky 2y ago
    I wonder if Honda and Toyota are still backing on a carbon neutral fuel replacement. They have been slow to electrify.
ETH_start 2y ago
If you can't recognize his contributions I think you're too emotionally attached to the question.
- Fricken 2y ago

dom96 2y ago

You’re a fool tricked by another fool who shouts loudly that they support free speech while they ban speech left and right. For goodness sake, ElonJet was banned and you can’t even say the word “cisgender” on the platform. How delusional are you?

pavlov 2y ago
Also Musk has banned mentions of his own transgender daughter, who now posts on Meta’s Threads app instead. X is like a textbook case of why total autocracy isn’t actually good management practice. Musk has become the Henry VIII of social media.
ETH_start 2y ago
ElonJet was a live geotracking site for private jets. You can post cisgender, it just comes with a warning. Before, people were being banned for using "him" instead of "her" to describe biological males who self-identified as women. People were secretly de-amplified for criticizing the government policy of lockdowns. It was censorship on a whole different magnitude.
- dom96 2y ago
  So your response is “it was worse in the past”? Two wrongs don’t make a right. Either you’re a “free speech absolutist” or you’re just a lying charlatan. Elon is clearly the latter, the evidence is right in front of your eyes and you choose to make excuses. ElonJet is posting publicly available information and isn’t banned on other platforms. Something coming with a warning is the same as restricting speech.
  - andsoitis 2y ago
    > Something coming with a warning is the same as restricting speech. Placing a warning is generally not considered a restriction on free speech but rather a tool to inform or protect audiences. In contrast, restricting free speech involves preventing someone from expressing their views or censoring content outright. Warnings are typically seen as a way to balance free expression with the responsibility to inform audiences.

ben_w 2y ago

Mostly I agree, modulo "he knows how to make teams to do XYZ", which I'm happy to count for the same reason I'm happy to blame him personally when those teams he's ordering around do something I don't like: > I believe he can, to a great degree, restore free speech on social media even if it is messy and imperfect at times I strongly disagree with this. Even if I ignore the proxy of all the investors writing off their buy-out loans by 75%, even if I ignore that when people link me to random threads I can only see the specific one linked and not any reply because of an invisible paywall^w account-wall, even if I ignore that loading a random tweet now often takes 26 seconds or more (yes, I did just record my screen to get that number), even if I ignore that undesirable stories can be buried by an avalanche of alternative narratives and not just by censoring the truth… There's still the problem of Musk intervening politically in ways that, although totally legal, are exactly the kind of thing he was complaining about before the takeover: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_suspensions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_suspensions

specialist 2y ago
Yes and: I'd like someone, eg Musk, to define "free speech". Start with some of those "first principles" he likes so much. Then, per "theory vs reality" cliché, I'd like someone, eg Musk, to explain or demonstrate or larp or interpretative dance what "free speech" looks like in practice. Maybe even point to an existing example. For bonus credit: - explain relationship between "free speech" and news feeds (algorithmic hate machines) - explain operation of "free speech" multinationally - explain how to balance "free speech" and moderation - enumerate the tradeoffs of, downsides due to, and consequences of "free speech"

baxtr 2y ago

I really wonder if he is not focused enough