5 ms·

You might be onto something but we need a proper "evolutionary theory of bootlicking" before we get carried away. Its pretty clear that the all-too-common in s

You might be onto something but we need a proper "evolutionary theory of bootlicking" before we get carried away. Its pretty clear that the all-too-common in space and time hierarchies, oligarchies, command-and-control pyramids etc. rely on trickle-down privilege to sustain. But the feeligs of disgust and disbelief at how a person can diminish themselves in the hope of some crumbs falling their way must also have strong evolutionary basis?

refurb 2y ago
I’m not sure I understand your viewpoint. The OP said “the most successful businessman in the world”. Sure one can argue about how OP came to that conclusion, by what measure, etc, but the man produced a highly successful car company, in a field nobody has really been able to do it, under terms where everyone was counting down the days until it went bankrupt. That alone is an amazing feat. Then he went on to create a rocket company that broke barriers of space travel no one has been able to do. Then he started a satellite company that pushed the boundaries of communication for the average person. I’d say all those feats are worthy of praise and make him a person who stands out significantly from any other businessman in recent history. So saying he’s the “most successful businessman” doesn’t seem like an absurd or overly hyperbolic statement. And how you got “stroking off” or the even more absurd “bootlicking” from that statement is just bizarre. I saw zero evidence of either. I’d say your comments are the odd ones here and say more about you than the OP.
- scotty79 2y ago
  > Then he went on to create a rocket company that broke barriers of space travel no one has been able to do. Look closer into how the sausage is made. For example the Moon grant for SpaceX to the tune of about $3bln was awarded by a person who wrote it in first person singular and after she did it, she promptly quit and went to work for SpaceX. Musk is definitely successful, but a grifter not a businessman. > [...] man produced a highly successful car company Musk is claiming to posess and even selling non-existent technology to both investors and consumers (pre-orders never fullfilled) for almost a decade now. Other people (Theranos, Nikola) who tried to replicate his success in this field but didn't have pants padded with hundred bln$ are curretly serving very long prison sentences for investor fraud. While Musk got off on the grounds that what he says is widely known to be pure puffery and no-one of sound mind should expect what he says to be accurate. Funny how billions "in the bank" can change how justice percieves you. Musk is now basically so full of hot air that when he stumbles he falls up.
  - refurb 2y ago
    As the British would say the proof is in the pudding. I do know we didn’t have self-landing rockets nor a massive reduced cost of space cargo until SpaceX. Whether Musk hired the author of a Moon grant is irrelevant to that fact. Same with Tesla. We had multiple, massively funded car companies try and fail to mass produce an electric car consumers wanted Whether Musk overpromises FSD isn’t relevant to that accomplishment.
    - scotty79 2y ago
      We also used to not have have LLMs, bipedal and quadrupedal robots, ubiquitous GPS maps, cell phones, miniature cameras of insane quality, ridiculously fast mobile internet connections, residential fiber and many other useful things. Many smart people make things happen all the time. Regardless of whether there's some singular rich grifter in that specific that can latch onto them soon enough to claim credit or not.
      - refurb 2y ago
        Hence the term “businessman”, you know business, not technological advances. And regardless I made no claim that any of those other things aren’t important, so feel free to knock down your own strawman.
        scotty79 2y ago
        It's just scary that so many people that find such "businessman" something to admire. That latching onto smart people and ousting them out of their own achievements and replacing with yourself in public imagination is something to admire.
        refurb 2y ago
        People make a simple statement "Musk is the most successful businessman" and you think you know their internal thought process and are ready to condemn them. Your own bias is showing.
- openrisk 2y ago
  sorry, the burden is on you to distinguish genuine business accomplishment from what others might suspect, less charitably, is excellence in crony capitalism [1],[2]. The Economist made a feeble effort to rank countries in this respect [3] but it does not even include the tech sector in the "crony-prone" sectors (eyes rolling). [1] "situation in which businesses profit from a close relationship with state power, either through an anti-competitive regulatory environment, direct government largesse, and/or corruption. Examples given for crony capitalism include obtainment of permits, government grants, tax breaks, or other undue influence from businesses over the state's deployment of public goods, for example, mining concessions for primary commodities or contracts for public works" etc. [2] Crony Capitalism, American Style: What Are We Talking About Here? https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/15-025_c6fbbbf7-1519-4c94-8c02-4f971cf8a054.pdf https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/15-025_c6fbbbf7-... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony-capitalism_index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony-capitalism_index
  - refurb 2y ago
    sorry, the burden is on you to distinguish genuine business accomplishment from what others might suspect, less charitably, is excellence in crony capitalism No, actually the burden is on the person making that claim (you).
    - openrisk 2y ago
      If you think "ideal businessmen" can spend millions to influence political outcomes and overtly commingle public and private interests I question the integrity of your judgement and feel no burden whatsoever.
      - refurb 2y ago
        Have you stopped the “crony capitalism” and moved onto something else now? Now that you’ve brought up political money and public and private interests, I’m starting to think you don’t like his politics and that’s about it. I can think of any other business who doesn’t spend millions for politics and “commingle public and private interests” (whatever that actually means).

refurb 2y ago

I’m not sure I understand your viewpoint. The OP said “the most successful businessman in the world”. Sure one can argue about how OP came to that conclusion, by what measure, etc, but the man produced a highly successful car company, in a field nobody has really been able to do it, under terms where everyone was counting down the days until it went bankrupt. That alone is an amazing feat. Then he went on to create a rocket company that broke barriers of space travel no one has been able to do. Then he started a satellite company that pushed the boundaries of communication for the average person. I’d say all those feats are worthy of praise and make him a person who stands out significantly from any other businessman in recent history. So saying he’s the “most successful businessman” doesn’t seem like an absurd or overly hyperbolic statement. And how you got “stroking off” or the even more absurd “bootlicking” from that statement is just bizarre. I saw zero evidence of either. I’d say your comments are the odd ones here and say more about you than the OP.

scotty79 2y ago
> Then he went on to create a rocket company that broke barriers of space travel no one has been able to do. Look closer into how the sausage is made. For example the Moon grant for SpaceX to the tune of about $3bln was awarded by a person who wrote it in first person singular and after she did it, she promptly quit and went to work for SpaceX. Musk is definitely successful, but a grifter not a businessman. > [...] man produced a highly successful car company Musk is claiming to posess and even selling non-existent technology to both investors and consumers (pre-orders never fullfilled) for almost a decade now. Other people (Theranos, Nikola) who tried to replicate his success in this field but didn't have pants padded with hundred bln$ are curretly serving very long prison sentences for investor fraud. While Musk got off on the grounds that what he says is widely known to be pure puffery and no-one of sound mind should expect what he says to be accurate. Funny how billions "in the bank" can change how justice percieves you. Musk is now basically so full of hot air that when he stumbles he falls up.
- refurb 2y ago
  As the British would say the proof is in the pudding. I do know we didn’t have self-landing rockets nor a massive reduced cost of space cargo until SpaceX. Whether Musk hired the author of a Moon grant is irrelevant to that fact. Same with Tesla. We had multiple, massively funded car companies try and fail to mass produce an electric car consumers wanted Whether Musk overpromises FSD isn’t relevant to that accomplishment.
  - scotty79 2y ago
    We also used to not have have LLMs, bipedal and quadrupedal robots, ubiquitous GPS maps, cell phones, miniature cameras of insane quality, ridiculously fast mobile internet connections, residential fiber and many other useful things. Many smart people make things happen all the time. Regardless of whether there's some singular rich grifter in that specific that can latch onto them soon enough to claim credit or not.
    - refurb 2y ago
      Hence the term “businessman”, you know business, not technological advances. And regardless I made no claim that any of those other things aren’t important, so feel free to knock down your own strawman.
      - scotty79 2y ago
        It's just scary that so many people that find such "businessman" something to admire. That latching onto smart people and ousting them out of their own achievements and replacing with yourself in public imagination is something to admire.
        refurb 2y ago
        People make a simple statement "Musk is the most successful businessman" and you think you know their internal thought process and are ready to condemn them. Your own bias is showing.
openrisk 2y ago
sorry, the burden is on you to distinguish genuine business accomplishment from what others might suspect, less charitably, is excellence in crony capitalism [1],[2]. The Economist made a feeble effort to rank countries in this respect [3] but it does not even include the tech sector in the "crony-prone" sectors (eyes rolling). [1] "situation in which businesses profit from a close relationship with state power, either through an anti-competitive regulatory environment, direct government largesse, and/or corruption. Examples given for crony capitalism include obtainment of permits, government grants, tax breaks, or other undue influence from businesses over the state's deployment of public goods, for example, mining concessions for primary commodities or contracts for public works" etc. [2] Crony Capitalism, American Style: What Are We Talking About Here? https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/15-025_c6fbbbf7-1519-4c94-8c02-4f971cf8a054.pdf https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/15-025_c6fbbbf7-... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony-capitalism_index https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crony-capitalism_index
- refurb 2y ago
  sorry, the burden is on you to distinguish genuine business accomplishment from what others might suspect, less charitably, is excellence in crony capitalism No, actually the burden is on the person making that claim (you).
  - openrisk 2y ago
    If you think "ideal businessmen" can spend millions to influence political outcomes and overtly commingle public and private interests I question the integrity of your judgement and feel no burden whatsoever.
    - refurb 2y ago
      Have you stopped the “crony capitalism” and moved onto something else now? Now that you’ve brought up political money and public and private interests, I’m starting to think you don’t like his politics and that’s about it. I can think of any other business who doesn’t spend millions for politics and “commingle public and private interests” (whatever that actually means).