4 ms·

I can count plenty of incredibly ambitious announcements from them that have turned out amazing! In fact, they are an outlier in how many they have challenges t

I can count plenty of incredibly ambitious announcements from them that have turned out amazing! In fact, they are an outlier in how many they have challenges they have taken on and succeeded in. [x] Partially reusable rocket that dropped cost to orbit by an order of magnitude. And no, the space shuttle (while an amazing piece of engineering), doesn't really count. It cost a billion+ to refurbish and did nothing to make space more accessible. Now we have businesses that exist purely because the Falcon 9 exists. Heck, the entire new space industry got validated (and hence got investment) due to SpaceX's success. [x] Returning human spaceflight capability to the US at a fraction of the price, using the same reusable rocket platform after the old defense primes failed to do so. And then making it cheap enough that it has now also flown about half as many private missions as it did for NASA. [x] Global satellite constellation providing gigabit-scale internet with 10000+ satellite (once written off by "experts" as yet another "incredibly ambitious project" that will never happen). [x] Commercializing and bringing down the cost of electric cars to the point where they are actually a viable option now (unlike the compliance cars made by OEMs 10 years ago). [x] Building the largest rocket to ever exist that now has a clear path to being the first ever fully reusable launch vehicle. [x] A BCI implant that has now brought back mobility and communication ability to multiple patients with debilitating conditions. Given that each of these were things that no one had done successfully before, or had failed spectacularly - I don't really care that they took longer than initially planned. There is, in fact, a graveyard here. It is mostly filled with confident predictions that his companies would never do the things they have since done.

miltonlost 1mo ago
[flagged]
- DarmokJalad1701 1mo ago
  > And the AMAZING hyperloop Wow! Was there a Musk company dedicated to building that? Where is the press release announcing it? Surely it must have been a big deal if you are so excited about it's failure! > And FSD is coming next year now It is already here. You can hail one right now in multiple cities. And in my own car, I use it every day and have for 2+ years. For the $3k I paid in 2019, I definitely got what I paid for. It's also gotten dramatically better since then. It drives me to and from work every day without having to so much as touch the wheel. And there is no 2018/19 non-Tesla that can do what it does. So yes, by all means, keep listing the things you think prove Musk is a fraud. You're mostly just making my point for me.
  - zzrrt 1mo ago
    > Was there a Musk company dedicated to building that? The Boring Company. Are you saying if Musk or his company essentially gives up on building something he hyped for years, it's not a failure?
  - miltonlost 1mo ago
    I notice you ignored the child porn and revenge porn maker that he wanted and demanded
wat10000 1mo ago
Both things are true. Musk's companies have done quite a few remarkable things people didn't think were possible, and Musk overpromises to an absurd degree and has left a trail of abandoned projects in his wake.
- modeless 1mo ago
  People often cite Hyperloop but he explicitly said he wasn't going to build it himself. They often cite FSD but it is far from abandoned and is driving my car today. What other projects are you thinking of which are actually abandoned? The Tesla solar roof is the biggest one I can think of, I think it's fair to count it as abandoned. I guess the project to make building bricks out of Boring tunnel dirt didn't pan out either, seems pretty minor though.
  - YetAnotherNick 1mo ago
    Boring company maybe? It's not abandoned, but they likely gave up the idea of an underground system of roads under a city, and just focus on single project individually like traditional construction company.
    - modeless 1mo ago
      It's far from abandoned. They're actively building TBMs at their factory and tunneling in Vegas and it's pretty different from any other transportation project I'm aware of.
      - wat10000 1mo ago
        DC to Baltimore tunnel, LA tunnel network, Chicago airport tunnel. New Roadster, possibly Tesla Semi. Battery swap stations. “Alien dreadnaught” factory with no humans on the production line. Dragon 2 propulsive landing. Self-driving ought to qualify at least partially, because although the project continues and is doing quite well, a huge number of cars were sold with hardware that was promised to be capable of it and turned out not to be.
UltraSane 1mo ago
SpaceX is the most successful Musk company because it is the one he has the LEAST direct involvement with. Compare SpaceX to how Musk is causing Tesla to crash and burn. Gwynne Shotwell is the actual reason SpaceX is as successful as it it.
- DarmokJalad1701 1mo ago
  > SpaceX is the most successful Musk company because it is the one he has the LEAST direct involvement with. > Gwynne Shotwell is the actual reason SpaceX is as successful as it it. Weird take. If you read any of the biographies or books about SpaceX, you would know that many key personnel at SpaceX (e.g. Tom Mueller [1], Hans Koeniggsman[2], Tim Buzza [3], Jim Cantrell[4], Garrett Reisman [5]) have all mentioned his major role in the engineering decisions there. Gwynne has done an amazing job at running the company - but she doesn't make the engineering decisions. You cannot deny the achievements of the company - so you just say that he had no role in it. This sort of retconning of history just because people don't like him, is super weird. [1] https://archive.is/aitIF https://archive.is/aitIF > When we first started he didn't know a lot about propulsion. He knew quite a bit about structures and helped the structures guys a lot. Over the twenty years that we worked together, now he's practically running propulsion there because he's come up to speed and he understands how to do rocket engines, which are really one of the most complex parts of the vehicle. He's always been excellent at architecting the whole mission, but now he's a lot better at the very small details of the combustion process. Stuff I learned over a decade-and-a-half at TRW he's picked up too." [2] https://archive.is/8bcdR https://archive.is/8bcdR > Musk "didn't know a lot about rockets initially, but he learned a lot over time," Koenigsmann said. Musk picked knowledge up quickly, which was "amazing to watch," he added. "I really enjoyed working with him and learning how he sees things," Koenigsmann said. "He sees things from a different perspective." Musk provided a "unique perspective" on scenarios involving basic physics by asking what the limiting factor was, according to Koenigsmann. An example of this was when Musk pushed his engineers to shorten the time it took to fuel SpaceX's rockets. Musk said SpaceX should aim to reduce the time from 30 minutes to eight minutes — the same time it takes to empty a rocket tank, according to Koenigsmann. SpaceX uses propellant at very low temperatures to increase its density, allowing engineers to cram more into each rocket, Insider previously reported. Rockets need to be fueled quickly before launch so the propellant doesn't warm up. As a result of Musk's direction, SpaceX's rockets are fueled "in a remarkably short time," Koenigsmann said." [3] https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/buzzat-1-15-13.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/buzzat-1-15-... > Elon Musk is our chief designer. I think between himself and the technical design teams, they came up with the initial concepts of the size of the vehicle, how much propellant's on board, what the engine thrust is going to be, two stage rocket, that kind of stuff. [4] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/former-spacex-exec-explains-elon-152840164.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/former-spacex-exec-explains-e... [5] https://magazine.wharton.upenn.edu/digital/from-nasa-to-spacex-to-the-classroom/ https://magazine.wharton.upenn.edu/digital/from-nasa-to-spac... > The thing that impresses me the most is his ability to reach very, very, very deep into particular technical topics, but across an incredibly wide scope. He’s the only person I’ve ever seen that can really do it with that level of acumen. He can jump from talking to our electronic experts about the arcane details about the architectures of the processor inside the flight computer, and then talk to our structures guys about a particular type of alloy in their welding techniques. His ability to switch gears and interact at such a very high technical level with experts in each of these subjects, and not only keep up, but surpass them in many cases, is remarkable.

miltonlost 1mo ago

[flagged]

DarmokJalad1701 1mo ago
> And the AMAZING hyperloop Wow! Was there a Musk company dedicated to building that? Where is the press release announcing it? Surely it must have been a big deal if you are so excited about it's failure! > And FSD is coming next year now It is already here. You can hail one right now in multiple cities. And in my own car, I use it every day and have for 2+ years. For the $3k I paid in 2019, I definitely got what I paid for. It's also gotten dramatically better since then. It drives me to and from work every day without having to so much as touch the wheel. And there is no 2018/19 non-Tesla that can do what it does. So yes, by all means, keep listing the things you think prove Musk is a fraud. You're mostly just making my point for me.
- zzrrt 1mo ago
  > Was there a Musk company dedicated to building that? The Boring Company. Are you saying if Musk or his company essentially gives up on building something he hyped for years, it's not a failure?
- miltonlost 1mo ago
  I notice you ignored the child porn and revenge porn maker that he wanted and demanded

wat10000 1mo ago

Both things are true. Musk's companies have done quite a few remarkable things people didn't think were possible, and Musk overpromises to an absurd degree and has left a trail of abandoned projects in his wake.

modeless 1mo ago
People often cite Hyperloop but he explicitly said he wasn't going to build it himself. They often cite FSD but it is far from abandoned and is driving my car today. What other projects are you thinking of which are actually abandoned? The Tesla solar roof is the biggest one I can think of, I think it's fair to count it as abandoned. I guess the project to make building bricks out of Boring tunnel dirt didn't pan out either, seems pretty minor though.
- YetAnotherNick 1mo ago
  Boring company maybe? It's not abandoned, but they likely gave up the idea of an underground system of roads under a city, and just focus on single project individually like traditional construction company.
  - modeless 1mo ago
    It's far from abandoned. They're actively building TBMs at their factory and tunneling in Vegas and it's pretty different from any other transportation project I'm aware of.
    - wat10000 1mo ago
      DC to Baltimore tunnel, LA tunnel network, Chicago airport tunnel. New Roadster, possibly Tesla Semi. Battery swap stations. “Alien dreadnaught” factory with no humans on the production line. Dragon 2 propulsive landing. Self-driving ought to qualify at least partially, because although the project continues and is doing quite well, a huge number of cars were sold with hardware that was promised to be capable of it and turned out not to be.

UltraSane 1mo ago

SpaceX is the most successful Musk company because it is the one he has the LEAST direct involvement with. Compare SpaceX to how Musk is causing Tesla to crash and burn. Gwynne Shotwell is the actual reason SpaceX is as successful as it it.

DarmokJalad1701 1mo ago
> SpaceX is the most successful Musk company because it is the one he has the LEAST direct involvement with. > Gwynne Shotwell is the actual reason SpaceX is as successful as it it. Weird take. If you read any of the biographies or books about SpaceX, you would know that many key personnel at SpaceX (e.g. Tom Mueller [1], Hans Koeniggsman[2], Tim Buzza [3], Jim Cantrell[4], Garrett Reisman [5]) have all mentioned his major role in the engineering decisions there. Gwynne has done an amazing job at running the company - but she doesn't make the engineering decisions. You cannot deny the achievements of the company - so you just say that he had no role in it. This sort of retconning of history just because people don't like him, is super weird. [1] https://archive.is/aitIF https://archive.is/aitIF > When we first started he didn't know a lot about propulsion. He knew quite a bit about structures and helped the structures guys a lot. Over the twenty years that we worked together, now he's practically running propulsion there because he's come up to speed and he understands how to do rocket engines, which are really one of the most complex parts of the vehicle. He's always been excellent at architecting the whole mission, but now he's a lot better at the very small details of the combustion process. Stuff I learned over a decade-and-a-half at TRW he's picked up too." [2] https://archive.is/8bcdR https://archive.is/8bcdR > Musk "didn't know a lot about rockets initially, but he learned a lot over time," Koenigsmann said. Musk picked knowledge up quickly, which was "amazing to watch," he added. "I really enjoyed working with him and learning how he sees things," Koenigsmann said. "He sees things from a different perspective." Musk provided a "unique perspective" on scenarios involving basic physics by asking what the limiting factor was, according to Koenigsmann. An example of this was when Musk pushed his engineers to shorten the time it took to fuel SpaceX's rockets. Musk said SpaceX should aim to reduce the time from 30 minutes to eight minutes — the same time it takes to empty a rocket tank, according to Koenigsmann. SpaceX uses propellant at very low temperatures to increase its density, allowing engineers to cram more into each rocket, Insider previously reported. Rockets need to be fueled quickly before launch so the propellant doesn't warm up. As a result of Musk's direction, SpaceX's rockets are fueled "in a remarkably short time," Koenigsmann said." [3] https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/buzzat-1-15-13.pdf https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/buzzat-1-15-... > Elon Musk is our chief designer. I think between himself and the technical design teams, they came up with the initial concepts of the size of the vehicle, how much propellant's on board, what the engine thrust is going to be, two stage rocket, that kind of stuff. [4] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/former-spacex-exec-explains-elon-152840164.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/former-spacex-exec-explains-e... [5] https://magazine.wharton.upenn.edu/digital/from-nasa-to-spacex-to-the-classroom/ https://magazine.wharton.upenn.edu/digital/from-nasa-to-spac... > The thing that impresses me the most is his ability to reach very, very, very deep into particular technical topics, but across an incredibly wide scope. He’s the only person I’ve ever seen that can really do it with that level of acumen. He can jump from talking to our electronic experts about the arcane details about the architectures of the processor inside the flight computer, and then talk to our structures guys about a particular type of alloy in their welding techniques. His ability to switch gears and interact at such a very high technical level with experts in each of these subjects, and not only keep up, but surpass them in many cases, is remarkable.