Split Thread Musk, SpaceX and future of Tesla

[angrysoba]

Ziggurat may have implied it, but I'll come right out and say it. Yes, it's unhealthy.

Powerful? How so?

This doesn't mean much. People with much less wealth on paper have far more actual power and influence.

How so? You mean he posts about various topics on Twitter X, and occasionally does presentations and interviews? So do many people. The internet is full of it, and many of them are getting million of likes (and a ton of money) for spreading the most insane bollocks. All you need is a free YouTube account and the World's your oyster.

What do you have against free speech? Most of the stuff that gets you so upset would never be seen by the public if people weren't constantly trolling for it. Other CEOs might not be so active on twitter X, but I bet they have plenty of opinions on all sorts of topics. Most of them only share it with their peers though, since commoners are beneath them.

Right. So why are there no ongoing threads decrying how Larry Page or Jeff Bezos intend to 'mould the future of humanity'?

Well you are publishing your views for the whole World to see too, so what you get back from that comes with the territory. Luckily you're an anonymous nobody, so the chances of receiving unhealthy attention from the MSM are very small (unless they mistake you for somebody of importance).

BTW nobody's deflecting. On the contrary, I welcome a rational discussion on how Musk intends to 'mould the future of humanity'. Just leave the unhinged rants, petty criticisms and 'hilarity' at the door.

Powerful, how so?

Musk isn't merely posting on Twitter. He owns it! So it makes a difference.

I have nothing against free speech. Free speech allows me to make criticisms of things that Musk has said publicly.

Your laughable response is to ask why I don't criticize the things that famous people say privately.

Sorry, but that's idiotic.

 

[dirtywick]

History is full of unlikable people who got essential stuff done. If we focus on personality to the detriment of results then we are to blame. The truth is, leaders need to have a bit of narcissism in them to be effective, and scientists and inventors need to be a bit autistic (my boss, a scientist, says they all are). Musk says he has Asperger's (a type of autism) and I don't doubt it. We should sympathize with the debilitating symptoms as we celebrate the genius, just like we did with the others.

but he's not a leader or a scientist. he's an investor, either a genius or lucky idk. and he appears to have moved on from EVs and space to social engineering. but those guys are pretty disposable and you don't want to start giving them free passes on being bags of ****.

 

[Dr. Keith]

I thought the ADL comparing Musk to Ford was witty, apparently it was a mistake. That saddens me.

https://m.jpost.com/diaspora/article-719178

 

[Ziggurat]

Ziggurat wants to know why Musk is singled out on this forum and not the CEOs of Boeing or other companies.

The implication is that there is something sinister or unhealthy or disreputable about this focus.

No. Rather, there is something dishonest about the explanations offered for why he’s such a focus. The real reason is pretty obvious: people here largely view him as a political enemy. And that’s ok, that’s within bounds.

Just be honest about your motives.

 

[Ziggurat]

nothing. we were talking about how you didn't think criticism and disparagement could effect his bottom line as a way of holding him accountable so i brought up a situation in which i feel it did.

Then you misunderstood my point, which wasn’t about any and all criticism, but specifically about criticism of things he does which seem to work. Do you get why that might not be so effective?

 

[Aridas]

No. Rather, there is something dishonest about the explanations offered for why he’s such a focus. The real reason is pretty obvious: people here largely view him as a political enemy. And that’s ok, that’s within bounds.

Just be honest about your motives.

I find myself completely unsurprised. "It's all politics" does seem to be the one of the main Republican go to excuses to try to hand wave away all the criticisms of the people that they view as "on their side" earn... in fair part because that's what's motivating them on the topic.

Of course, given the sheer prevalence and normalization of easily seen through and utter BS criticisms towards Democrats made by the Republican propaganda establishment and happily grasped onto by Republicans, the internalization of that part of Republican culture is honestly understandable. It's also toxic to just about everything the moment that politics becomes involved.

 

[Ziggurat]

I find myself completely unsurprised. "It's all politics" does seem to be the one of the main Republican go to excuses to try to hand wave away all the criticisms of the people that they view as "on their side" earn.

I haven't hand waved away any criticism. I've pointed out, correctly, that a lot of it is politically motivated in this case, something you aren't actually even disputing. Yes, I know that doesn't make such criticism wrong. You should have been able to figure that out, given that I explicitly stated that it's OK for criticism to be politically motivated.

But valid criticism should still be kept in perspective.

 

[angrysoba]

No. Rather, there is something dishonest about the explanations offered for why he’s such a focus. The real reason is pretty obvious: people here largely view him as a political enemy. And that’s ok, that’s within bounds.

Just be honest about your motives.

I consider him a douchebag regardless of his politics. And I have separated that behaviour from the companies he owns and their success.

Here is an example from the thread in which I expressed skepticism about the predicted demise of Tesla.

But if you are going to accuse me of personally focusing on him because of his politics, and presumably being uncharitable then could you answer for me why it seems not to bother you that much about

* calling that diver in Thailand a pedo.

* praising vilely anti-semitic tweets.

* sucking-up to Kanye and a bunch of other idiot edgelords?

* letting Alex Jones back on Twitter after initially saying he wouldn't?

Maybe your demand that he not be scrutinized about this is also to do with your politics. Which is fine, but just be honest about it.

 

[Ziggurat]

But if you are going to accuse me of personally focusing on him because of his politics, and presumably being uncharitable then could you answer for me why it seems not to bother you that much about

I don't buy into the argument that you have to express the correct opinion on a list of topics in order to speak up about something else. That kind of gate keeping is bull ****. I don't owe you my opinion about anything.

Maybe your demand that he not be scrutinized

I never made ANY such demand. Step up your reading comprehension, bro.

 

[Dr. Keith]

No. Rather, there is something dishonest about the explanations offered for why he’s such a focus. The real reason is pretty obvious: people here largely view him as a political enemy. And that’s ok, that’s within bounds.

Just be honest about your motives.

He is a focus because he makes himself a focus. Is that really in question?

 

[angrysoba]

I don't buy into the argument that you have to express the correct opinion on a list of topics in order to speak up about something else. That kind of gate keeping is bull ****. I don't owe you my opinion about anything.

I never made ANY such demand. Step up your reading comprehension, bro.

No. Rather, there is something dishonest about the explanations offered for why he’s such a focus. The real reason is pretty obvious: people here largely view him as a political enemy. And that’s ok, that’s within bounds.

Just be honest about your motives.

What are you doing then? Just babbling into the ether? What is it you even want?

You and Roger Ramjets expend a lot of energy sounding off about the bad faith of Elon Musk's critics. Do you want people to do anything differently? Do you not? There is either a point to what you are saying or there is not. There is either a charge or demand you are making or there is not.

 

[Aridas]

I haven't hand waved away any criticism. I've pointed out, correctly, that a lot of it is politically motivated in this case, something you aren't actually even disputing. Yes, I know that doesn't make such criticism wrong. You should have been able to figure that out, given that I explicitly stated that it's OK for criticism to be politically motivated.

But valid criticism should still be kept in perspective.

Some portion of the motivation is political. That's a given, of course, for any figure that's so blatantly and openly worked to tip the political scales on a national level. Politics is hardly the only thing that motivates people, though, and Musk's a prime example of someone whose decisions have make them a focus of criticism on many fronts. Few people care about all of those fronts, of course. Once people were effectively forced to pay attention to him, specifically, one or more of those fronts became much more likely to stir a more direct response.

Musk forcefully inserted himself into the national conversation and has kept himself there in fair part by going the ******* celebrity route. That has consequences. Trying to claim that the negative reaction to a ******* celebrity is just explained by "it's all politics" is a self-serving excuse in a case like this, rather than something insightful.

 

[tyr_13]

Why?

Sure. When did I say otherwise?

Right. You presume to know my mind and get it dead wrong. What a shocker.

Except, no, I was right. You answered 'why' to a question your own stated motivations would have required a 'yes' answer to. This isn't a trivial difference.

I'm just telling it like it is. But I've probably been following it for a lot longer than you have (the whole scene, not just Musk) so I have a better handle on it than you do.

You're not 'telling it like it is' and you've been consistently wrong about basic facts for much of this thread. It is clear you don't have a good handle on any of this.

 

[theprestige]

I consider him a douchebag regardless of his politics. And I have separated that behaviour from the companies he owns and their success.

Here is an example from the thread in which I expressed skepticism about the predicted demise of Tesla.

But if you are going to accuse me of personally focusing on him because of his politics, and presumably being uncharitable then could you answer for me why it seems not to bother you that much about

* calling that diver in Thailand a pedo.

* praising vilely anti-semitic tweets.

* sucking-up to Kanye and a bunch of other idiot edgelords?

* letting Alex Jones back on Twitter after initially saying he wouldn't?

Maybe your demand that he not be scrutinized about this is also to do with your politics. Which is fine, but just be honest about it.

This is more like it!

Earlier someone proposed that Musk-hate is because of his anti-competitive practices. We know this isn't true, because other equally bad or even worse anti-competitive industrialists don't come in for the same kind of hate. Even when they oversee arguably worse practices than Musk.

Now we're getting something more like the honest truth.

But it's still not convincing to me. There are lots of people saying stupid and evil things on the Internet. There are lots of people - "influencers" - with huge followings on social media, preaching anti-social and toxic ideas. Andrew Tate barely gets a mention, though.

So I think we're still missing a piece of the puzzle.

 

[Aridas]

Earlier someone proposed that Musk-hate is because of his anti-competitive practices. We know this isn't true, because other equally bad or even worse anti-competitive industrialists don't come in for the same kind of hate. Even when they oversee arguably worse practices than Musk.

No, we don't know that this isn't true, based on that reasoning. Again, Musk has forced himself into the public eye, which exposes him to more attention. That many may dislike him for the anti-competitive actions is entirely feasible. That those many might dislike others even more for worse problems, if and when they became aware of such, and speak of such if they happened to have an appropriate outlet, is something that you seem to be motivated to uncharitably assume to not be the case.

Now we're getting something more like the honest truth.

But it's still not convincing to me. There are lots of people saying stupid and evil things on the Internet. There are lots of people - "influencers" - with huge followings on social media, preaching anti-social and toxic ideas. Andrew Tate barely gets a mention, though.

So I think we're still missing a piece of the puzzle.

When you intentionally leave out important pieces of the puzzle, yes, you end up missing pieces of the puzzle.

 

[a_unique_person]

No. Rather, there is something dishonest about the explanations offered for why he’s such a focus. The real reason is pretty obvious: people here largely view him as a political enemy. And that’s ok, that’s within bounds.



Just be honest about your motives.

His politics are dangerous and insane.

I think people instinctively regard psychopaths with contempt. Same with Trump. They attack everyone and whinge the loudest when there is a counterattack.

 

[dirtywick]

the missing piece of the puzzle is if i made a thread about andrew tate here right now, it would be less than a page long because everyone would just agree he sucks and move on. musk gets so much attention because a lot of people excuse all the horrible things he says and does because, idk, they like his politics? maybe let's all be honest about our motives.

 

[angrysoba]

the missing piece of the puzzle is if i made a thread about andrew tate here right now, it would be less than a page long because everyone would just agree he sucks and move on. musk gets so much attention because a lot of people excuse all the horrible things he says and does because, idk, they like his politics? maybe let's all be honest about our motives.

It's just whataboutery.

"Oh, you criticize Elon Musk, but what about Andrew Tate?"

Of course, nothing is stopping Ziggurat, theprestige or Roger Ramjets from starting a thread about Gates, Jobs (PBUH), Iger or Tate. But they don't.

 

[theprestige]

It's just whataboutery.

"Oh, you criticize Elon Musk, but what about Andrew Tate?"

Of course, nothing is stopping Ziggurat, theprestige or Roger Ramjets from starting a thread about Gates, Jobs (PBUH), Iger or Tate. But they don't.

Whataboutism is a thing someone says when they've been special pleading.

 

[Ziggurat]

His politics are dangerous and insane.

Finally, some honesty.