He does at least seem to be doing things net useful for the human species as he goes. So there are all sorts of cigarette, soda and so on CEOs who're doing just as bad and more besides.
He does at least seem to be doing things net useful for the human species as he goes. So there are all sorts of cigarette, soda and so on CEOs who're doing just as bad and more besides.
He got rich from a payment system well known for abusing its users, which he invested in with a million dollar loan from his father - money gained from legalized slavery of which his family was...
He got rich from a payment system well known for abusing its users, which he invested in with a million dollar loan from his father - money gained from legalized slavery of which his family was complicit.
He went on to start a company he claims will colonize mars, but has yet to do much aside from siphon off billions of public funding into private enterprise.
Tell me more about how he's one of the good ones though, I hear it announced quite a lot and haven't heard much - other than his almost eerie ability to cultivate one hell of a cult of personality.
Edit: to make the point a bit more clear, what the fuck is union busting and putting employees at risk for the a e s t h e t i c doing for humanity in the slightest?
It seems rather pointless to discuss this with you since his achievements in EVs and reducing cost to orbit are so widely known I struggle to see how you could be unaware of them. Please note I...
It seems rather pointless to discuss this with you since his achievements in EVs and reducing cost to orbit are so widely known I struggle to see how you could be unaware of them.
Please note I didn't say he was "one of the good guys". I said that in comparison with people making billions from poisoning their customers he wasn't as bad.
This is completely unnecessary and adding nothing to the quality of discussion, dyyyl. I say this as a left-leaning citizen in a country far more liberal than the USA and someone who doesn't...
It isn't like the thing that got your horrible country into space in the first place was to prove you collectively had a bigger dick than Yuri Gagarin.
Edit: lick his boots a bit more and Space Jesus might even send you to die on Mars, as if he'd ever even consider his service for anyone but the ultra-rich.
This is completely unnecessary and adding nothing to the quality of discussion, dyyyl. I say this as a left-leaning citizen in a country far more liberal than the USA and someone who doesn't follow Musk at all.
Nor was this:
The dude is a fucking pig.
Or this:
Let's have a neoliberal chant
More 👏🏼 Female 👏🏼 Union👏🏼 Busters 👏🏼
or this:
Neither? Lmfao as if your imagination is so fucking stunted as to think those are our only options here.
Particularly insightful commentary. Can you please make your points without resorting to personal attacks and bile? We shouldn't need @Deimos to constantly police us to maintain polite discussion.
I am not an American, my countries space program was publicly funded ICBMs. After our democratically elected reps were happy our publicly funded scientists had mastered building tools to wipe out...
I am not an American, my countries space program was publicly funded ICBMs. After our democratically elected reps were happy our publicly funded scientists had mastered building tools to wipe out a few cities on the other side of the planet we got bored and stopped.
We're now in ESA so are at least helping with the ISS through that. Certainly nothing is going to interrupt that next March.
I'm a big believer in reality over ideology these days.
First of all, it's not siphoning "billions" into private enterprise. I'm going to guess that the "billions" you're referring to is actually about the NASA ISS cargo resupply contracts. These were...
but has yet to do much aside from siphon off billions of public funding into private enterprise
First of all, it's not siphoning "billions" into private enterprise. I'm going to guess that the "billions" you're referring to is actually about the NASA ISS cargo resupply contracts. These were awarded to both SpaceX and Orbital ATK, and if NASA had not done this, they'd be forced to pay Russia exorbitant amounts of money to launch US cargo to the ISS.
SpaceX's first CRS contract was awarded in 2008. They won 12 flights valued at about $1.6 billion under a fixed-price contract (meaning SpaceX will provide 12 flights for $1.6 billion no matter how much it ends up costing SpaceX.) This works out to about $133 million per flight. This includes the development of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle and the Dragon cargo spacecraft.
The Space Shuttle's last flight was in 2011. Without the commercial resupply missions, NASA would have been forced to either dramatically downscale the US presence on the ISS or pay Russia exorbitant amounts of money to launch US cargo (because Russia, as the only other major ISS partner with reliable upmass capacity, could charge whatever they wanted to.)
are there any billionaires who have appeared on TV and don't have a cult of personality? i think that once you reach the 100mil mark, you stand in a public place and media stooges start licking...
are there any billionaires who have appeared on TV and don't have a cult of personality? i think that once you reach the 100mil mark, you stand in a public place and media stooges start licking your feet like inbred dogs
In the case of union busting at SpaceX specifically. Those workers are very qualified and very skilled and work very hard. Because of their qualifications I have no doubt they could easily find a...
In the case of union busting at SpaceX specifically. Those workers are very qualified and very skilled and work very hard. Because of their qualifications I have no doubt they could easily find a better job. They stay because they believe that the company is doing good for humanity. Unions are good for employees but bad for companies, and if a company is working to save humanity by diversifying our habitable space, then it is unethical to unionize as it would hurt that goal. If the non unionized workers didn't have the options that they do I would be all for unionization and better hours and better pay. But again they are highly qualified and highly sought after. They are willingly subjecting themselves to difficult work conditions because they believe in the goals of the company, and they are plenty educated enough to know if and when the company no longer deserves their devotion.
To date, SpaceX has launched 61 Falcon 9 vehicles. Fourteen of those launched on a recovered first stage. Out of 15 resupplies to the International Space Station under a NASA contract (awarded to...
To date, SpaceX has launched 61 Falcon 9 vehicles. Fourteen of those launched on a recovered first stage. Out of 15 resupplies to the International Space Station under a NASA contract (awarded to SpaceX and Orbital ATK), they've reflown four Dragon capsules.
He put a car (that costs more than most people make in their lives) into space, as a publicity stunt - using capital he's scrapped from many, many other harder working people. Capitalism sure...
He put a car (that costs more than most people make in their lives) into space, as a publicity stunt - using capital he's scrapped from many, many other harder working people.
Capitalism sure fucking knows how to allocate resources tho lol
The rocket was going to space either way. They had to test a payload somehow. They weren’t going to cancel it because some people hate wealthy people.
The rocket was going to space either way. They had to test a payload somehow. They weren’t going to cancel it because some people hate wealthy people.
TSLA dropped almost 9% today after that interview came out (the largest drop in nearly 2 years for the most shorted stock out there) and we're talking about how women might be penalized more. Can...
TSLA dropped almost 9% today after that interview came out (the largest drop in nearly 2 years for the most shorted stock out there) and we're talking about how women might be penalized more. Can anyone name a female CEO who caused their company to lose $5.5 billion in value in one day because of what they said in an interview?
I kinda get the article takes a different direction—and this might be an overly cynical take—but isn't Elon just a male Elizabeth Holmes (of Theranos)? He's Silicon Valley elite, makes lofty...
I kinda get the article takes a different direction—and this might be an overly cynical take—but isn't Elon just a male Elizabeth Holmes (of Theranos)? He's Silicon Valley elite, makes lofty promises, and has all sorts of drama surrounding him; he's just had the right luck/team/drive/magic/etc in being able to deliver on his promises. (I know my question is intentionally ignorant of the timeline, but if you look at it in this light they're kinda similar.)
Well Theranos delivered absolutely nothing. While Musk led the creation of 3-4 models of groundbreaking EV's available for purchase. He also started a company that was able to land an...
Well Theranos delivered absolutely nothing. While Musk led the creation of 3-4 models of groundbreaking EV's available for purchase. He also started a company that was able to land an orbital-class rocket booster, which no one had previously done outside of science fiction.
Yeah, I can appreciate your point, as I've addressed in my (as of yet unedited) comment: There's really a lot that goes into what's made Elon successful, and I didn't want to minimize it nor make...
Yeah, I can appreciate your point, as I've addressed in my (as of yet unedited) comment:
he's just had the right luck/team/drive/magic/etc in being able to deliver on his promises.
There's really a lot that goes into what's made Elon successful, and I didn't want to minimize it nor make it only him. Many of the right things happened for Elon, and many things didn't go right for Elizabeth. They both publicly set quite lofty goals, and as a result they've had extreme scrutiny for those goals. I didn't mean to make Elon's success sound random, nor did I want to make it sound like I'm dunking on Elon for not delivering. (Not that my personal economic perspective is relevant, but I think I like Elon, and I do love my Model 3.)
It just seemed to me, as a thought exercise, they're similar enough in some ways that I thought the comparison would spawn an interesting discussion. After all, this is talking about behavior of CEOs, and both have previously made loud public pronouncements which beget similar reactions from the public.
I remember reading a theory explaining why Musk is preoccupied with a sentient AI doing terrible things to the human race. Something how it's a projection of the fears of what would happen if...
I remember reading a theory explaining why Musk is preoccupied with a sentient AI doing terrible things to the human race. Something how it's a projection of the fears of what would happen if someone like him but more powerful where to come into power. All the hallmarks of a strong business person are reflected in this fear of an all powerful and ruthless AI with little regard for individual human life even if it might be trying to maximise happiness or some other seemingly altruistic goal.
In psychology, the term “insight” is used to describe a recognition of one’s own condition, such as when a person with mental illness is aware of their illness. More broadly, it describes the ability to recognize patterns in one’s own behavior. It’s an example of metacognition, or thinking about one’s own thinking, and it’s something most humans are capable of but animals are not. And I believe the best test of whether an AI is really engaging in human-level cognition would be for it to demonstrate insight of this kind.
Insight is precisely what Musk’s strawberry-picking AI lacks, as do all the other AIs that destroy humanity in similar doomsday scenarios. I used to find it odd that these hypothetical AIs were supposed to be smart enough to solve problems that no human could, yet they were incapable of doing something most every adult has done: taking a step back and asking whether their current course of action is really a good idea. Then I realized that we are already surrounded by machines that demonstrate a complete lack of insight, we just call them corporations. Corporations don’t operate autonomously, of course, and the humans in charge of them are presumably capable of insight, but capitalism doesn’t reward them for using it. On the contrary, capitalism actively erodes this capacity in people by demanding that they replace their own judgment of what “good” means with “whatever the market decides.”
Billionaires like Bill Gates and Elon Musk assume that a superintelligent AI will stop at nothing to achieve its goals because that’s the attitude they adopted. (Of course, they saw nothing wrong with this strategy when they were the ones engaging in it; it’s only the possibility that someone else might be better at it than they were that gives them cause for concern.)
Am I wrong to think that this title reeks of how can I take a big public event that everyone is commenting on and twist it into a hypothetical gender issue? This is probably the largest public...
Am I wrong to think that this title reeks of how can I take a big public event that everyone is commenting on and twist it into a hypothetical gender issue?
This is probably the largest public meltdown of any CEO in recent memory. He broke the law. There is a very real possibility he is going to jail. At the very least he will be removed as CEO. It is possible that he will be barred from being the CEO of a publicly traded company again. He will be sued by everyone who lost money because of his twitter antics, which will be, Longs ($TSLA stock holders), Shorts, bond holders etc.
I say this to say this is a binary event, one not likely to be repeated, ever. No easy comparison exist to other situations. All this article servers to do is divide and agitate without providing any thing new to discuss.
I have no sympathy for Elon Musk. He's a billionaire and all of his problems are self-inflicted.
Further, he actively profits while harming and exploiting workers. The dude is a fucking pig.
He does at least seem to be doing things net useful for the human species as he goes. So there are all sorts of cigarette, soda and so on CEOs who're doing just as bad and more besides.
He got rich from a payment system well known for abusing its users, which he invested in with a million dollar loan from his father - money gained from legalized slavery of which his family was complicit.
He went on to start a company he claims will colonize mars, but has yet to do much aside from siphon off billions of public funding into private enterprise.
Tell me more about how he's one of the good ones though, I hear it announced quite a lot and haven't heard much - other than his almost eerie ability to cultivate one hell of a cult of personality.
Edit: to make the point a bit more clear, what the fuck is union busting and putting employees at risk for the a e s t h e t i c doing for humanity in the slightest?
It seems rather pointless to discuss this with you since his achievements in EVs and reducing cost to orbit are so widely known I struggle to see how you could be unaware of them.
Please note I didn't say he was "one of the good guys". I said that in comparison with people making billions from poisoning their customers he wasn't as bad.
This is completely unnecessary and adding nothing to the quality of discussion, dyyyl. I say this as a left-leaning citizen in a country far more liberal than the USA and someone who doesn't follow Musk at all.
Nor was this:
Or this:
or this:
Particularly insightful commentary. Can you please make your points without resorting to personal attacks and bile? We shouldn't need @Deimos to constantly police us to maintain polite discussion.
I am not an American, my countries space program was publicly funded ICBMs. After our democratically elected reps were happy our publicly funded scientists had mastered building tools to wipe out a few cities on the other side of the planet we got bored and stopped.
We're now in ESA so are at least helping with the ISS through that. Certainly nothing is going to interrupt that next March.
I'm a big believer in reality over ideology these days.
First of all, it's not siphoning "billions" into private enterprise. I'm going to guess that the "billions" you're referring to is actually about the NASA ISS cargo resupply contracts. These were awarded to both SpaceX and Orbital ATK, and if NASA had not done this, they'd be forced to pay Russia exorbitant amounts of money to launch US cargo to the ISS.
SpaceX's first CRS contract was awarded in 2008. They won 12 flights valued at about $1.6 billion under a fixed-price contract (meaning SpaceX will provide 12 flights for $1.6 billion no matter how much it ends up costing SpaceX.) This works out to about $133 million per flight. This includes the development of the Falcon 9 launch vehicle and the Dragon cargo spacecraft.
The Space Shuttle's last flight was in 2011. Without the commercial resupply missions, NASA would have been forced to either dramatically downscale the US presence on the ISS or pay Russia exorbitant amounts of money to launch US cargo (because Russia, as the only other major ISS partner with reliable upmass capacity, could charge whatever they wanted to.)
Thank you for taking the time to write that up.
If you think you hate him now, wait until he owns half of all the internet's bandwidth capacity.
are there any billionaires who have appeared on TV and don't have a cult of personality? i think that once you reach the 100mil mark, you stand in a public place and media stooges start licking your feet like inbred dogs
In the case of union busting at SpaceX specifically. Those workers are very qualified and very skilled and work very hard. Because of their qualifications I have no doubt they could easily find a better job. They stay because they believe that the company is doing good for humanity. Unions are good for employees but bad for companies, and if a company is working to save humanity by diversifying our habitable space, then it is unethical to unionize as it would hurt that goal. If the non unionized workers didn't have the options that they do I would be all for unionization and better hours and better pay. But again they are highly qualified and highly sought after. They are willingly subjecting themselves to difficult work conditions because they believe in the goals of the company, and they are plenty educated enough to know if and when the company no longer deserves their devotion.
To date, SpaceX has launched 61 Falcon 9 vehicles. Fourteen of those launched on a recovered first stage. Out of 15 resupplies to the International Space Station under a NASA contract (awarded to SpaceX and Orbital ATK), they've reflown four Dragon capsules.
He put a car (that costs more than most people make in their lives) into space, as a publicity stunt - using capital he's scrapped from many, many other harder working people.
Capitalism sure fucking knows how to allocate resources tho lol
He literally shot a advertise into space. It's horrible.
The rocket was going to space either way. They had to test a payload somehow. They weren’t going to cancel it because some people hate wealthy people.
Thank Palantir for this.
The same can be said about the credit industry.
TSLA dropped almost 9% today after that interview came out (the largest drop in nearly 2 years for the most shorted stock out there) and we're talking about how women might be penalized more. Can anyone name a female CEO who caused their company to lose $5.5 billion in value in one day because of what they said in an interview?
Have any had a protracted, public meltdown?
Not that I can think of. Which makes this article more ridiculous and unnecessary clickbait.
Shorts made 1B from that article. Dude needs an intervention by his board and friends. I am pretty sure this will happen.
I kinda get the article takes a different direction—and this might be an overly cynical take—but isn't Elon just a male Elizabeth Holmes (of Theranos)? He's Silicon Valley elite, makes lofty promises, and has all sorts of drama surrounding him; he's just had the right luck/team/drive/magic/etc in being able to deliver on his promises. (I know my question is intentionally ignorant of the timeline, but if you look at it in this light they're kinda similar.)
Well Theranos delivered absolutely nothing. While Musk led the creation of 3-4 models of groundbreaking EV's available for purchase. He also started a company that was able to land an orbital-class rocket booster, which no one had previously done outside of science fiction.
Yeah, I can appreciate your point, as I've addressed in my (as of yet unedited) comment:
There's really a lot that goes into what's made Elon successful, and I didn't want to minimize it nor make it only him. Many of the right things happened for Elon, and many things didn't go right for Elizabeth. They both publicly set quite lofty goals, and as a result they've had extreme scrutiny for those goals. I didn't mean to make Elon's success sound random, nor did I want to make it sound like I'm dunking on Elon for not delivering. (Not that my personal economic perspective is relevant, but I think I like Elon, and I do love my Model 3.)
It just seemed to me, as a thought exercise, they're similar enough in some ways that I thought the comparison would spawn an interesting discussion. After all, this is talking about behavior of CEOs, and both have previously made loud public pronouncements which beget similar reactions from the public.
I think the commonality is that many successful CEOs have psychopathic traits.
Also, thanks for clarifying!
I remember reading a theory explaining why Musk is preoccupied with a sentient AI doing terrible things to the human race. Something how it's a projection of the fears of what would happen if someone like him but more powerful where to come into power. All the hallmarks of a strong business person are reflected in this fear of an all powerful and ruthless AI with little regard for individual human life even if it might be trying to maximise happiness or some other seemingly altruistic goal.
Corporations are already like ruthless AI, just with lots of human parts. (Ted Chiang writing for Buzzfeed).
This is a very good article that I've never seen. Thanks for bringing it to the conversation.
It’s not hard to find that person. Imagine if someone who seems basically misanthropic, like Peter Thiel, had control of an all powerful General AI.
Am I wrong to think that this title reeks of how can I take a big public event that everyone is commenting on and twist it into a hypothetical gender issue?
This is probably the largest public meltdown of any CEO in recent memory. He broke the law. There is a very real possibility he is going to jail. At the very least he will be removed as CEO. It is possible that he will be barred from being the CEO of a publicly traded company again. He will be sued by everyone who lost money because of his twitter antics, which will be, Longs ($TSLA stock holders), Shorts, bond holders etc.
I say this to say this is a binary event, one not likely to be repeated, ever. No easy comparison exist to other situations. All this article servers to do is divide and agitate without providing any thing new to discuss.