3 ms·

This is a pointless topic to keep talking about. It just comes down to how you define "founder", and the answer is "it depends". It's uncontroversial that he wa

by tomhow 1y ago

This is a pointless topic to keep talking about. It just comes down to how you define "founder", and the answer is "it depends". It's uncontroversial that he wasn't there at the very very beginning. It's also uncontroversial that he was involved early and it wasn't doing well until he took control. Outside that it's just a battle of definitions and egos, both of which are very boring.

breve 1y ago
No. It's factually the case that Musk didn't found Tesla. There is no semantic argument to make here. The answer is not "it depends". It's not boring to recognize how much Musk lies. He lies freely and routinely. Trying to minimize and excuse Musk's lies is corrosive and toxic.
- inemesitaffia 1y ago
  No cars until Straubel. That's definitely a founder
- tomhow 1y ago
  There's no shortage of things to criticize him for. This one is a waste of time. A court decision (sorry, settlement, whatever), ruled that he can call himself a founder. He’s not a founder by the strict definition. It doesn’t matter, it’s a waste of energy - and precious brain real estate - to worry about.
  - breve 1y ago
    > A court decision ruled that he can call himself a founder. There was no such decision. They reached a settlement. That was part of the deal. > He’s not a founder by the strict definition. He's not a founder by the fact of the matter. He can call himself what he likes but it doesn't change history. > It doesn’t matter If this bores you don't get involved. But there's no need to try to stop other people talking about it.
    - tomhow 1y ago
      I'm a moderator here and my job is to keep the standard of content and discussions high, and this is just not the kind of thing that belongs on HN. It's not new information and it's not the kind of thing that inspires interesting discussions, which is what HN is for.
aspenmayer 1y ago
Elon Musk didn't found Tesla, but he was arguably foundational to its success.

by tomhow 1y ago

breve 1y ago

No. It's factually the case that Musk didn't found Tesla. There is no semantic argument to make here. The answer is not "it depends". It's not boring to recognize how much Musk lies. He lies freely and routinely. Trying to minimize and excuse Musk's lies is corrosive and toxic.

inemesitaffia 1y ago
No cars until Straubel. That's definitely a founder
tomhow 1y ago
There's no shortage of things to criticize him for. This one is a waste of time. A court decision (sorry, settlement, whatever), ruled that he can call himself a founder. He’s not a founder by the strict definition. It doesn’t matter, it’s a waste of energy - and precious brain real estate - to worry about.
- breve 1y ago
  > A court decision ruled that he can call himself a founder. There was no such decision. They reached a settlement. That was part of the deal. > He’s not a founder by the strict definition. He's not a founder by the fact of the matter. He can call himself what he likes but it doesn't change history. > It doesn’t matter If this bores you don't get involved. But there's no need to try to stop other people talking about it.
  - tomhow 1y ago
    I'm a moderator here and my job is to keep the standard of content and discussions high, and this is just not the kind of thing that belongs on HN. It's not new information and it's not the kind of thing that inspires interesting discussions, which is what HN is for.

aspenmayer 1y ago

Elon Musk didn't found Tesla, but he was arguably foundational to its success.