Mark Cuban, Reed Hastings to name a few
Elon Musk | Doer of things on X and complete loser
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
Mark Cuban, Reed Hastings to name a few
That democracy well end if Trump is elected?
You do realize there are quotes from Trump about that, not just baseless accusations?
Why comment without actual reply?
And the whole "trying to overturn the election" bit.
Have you interacted with Suedesi before?
No one said that, it was more getting an EV start up company built up and then to take the technology forward.
Know. I’d blocked him and didn’t know why. Shouldn’t have engaged.
wtf is this crap.
Elon "might say stupid stuff", Netanyahu might not be particularly fond of Palestinians, Trump might use a tiny bit of makeup, etc.
Complete fanboy delusion.wtf is this crap.
If only radical left didn't look into specific stuff they said or did, those visionnaires would get their rightful recognition.
Elon owns a company who make electric cars so that balances out his attempt to toxify social media, platform nazis, general racism, sexism, employee abuse, calling people paedophiles, crushing unions, sexual harassment, transphobia, promotion of conspiracy theories, etc... and he does more good for the world than people researching & developing life saving vaccines and cures for diseases.
Yeah, but @Solius his cars are so good man! Like so good! Damn I love them. I'd like to put my pen..i... Nevermind.
You gotta laugh sometimes at how hatred can make some people this blind. “Elon’s businesses are doing bad”. SpaceX speaks for itself. On to Tesla:
For feck's sakes, even his harshest critics begrudgingly admit that Musk is a brilliant visionary entrepreneur with unparalleled business acuity, gifted at recognizing and harnessing transformative technologies. He has a remarkable talent for turning seemingly impossible ideas into thriving ventures—Tesla and SpaceX being prime examples.
As for Twitter, let’s not get too carried away with a few temporary hiccups. It’s worth remembering that Tesla faced endless skepticism in its early years before becoming a juggernaut, and SpaceX endured its share of early stumbles before revolutionizing space exploration. If history has taught us anything, it’s that Musk’s ventures—while occasionally messy at first—have a way of proving doubters wrong. Twitter, or rather X, is likely on the same trajectory toward long-term success.
Except for BYD (who is statebacked, and makes nowhere near the profit pr car as Tesla), Tesla sells the most EVs on the planet. Most sold car in 2023? Tesla Model Y. Most sold car so far in 2024? Tesla Model Y. Plus Tesla’s solar energy earning like crazy these years.
Then you got the Cybertruck, which is currently selling more than any truck in the states … combined that is. At a more premium price.
The revamped and bettered Model 3 also now has a (proven) range of 700 km.
And this is achieved with decent profits in an environment where legacy automakers struggle even to make a profit.
As If we’re not already seeing trouble in Germany, within 1-3 years some of the biggest german automakers will be royally fecked as they dont live up to EU regulations for transforming themselves fully into EV companies. They’re lightyears behind serious companies Toyota with their hybrids and Tesla.
We can all discredit Elon Musk for his doings on X and rightly so, but let’s have all the details and both sides, else we’re just defining Elon only as a bad guy. That would never be fair, even if he platforms hatespeech.
I wasn't aware somewhat successfully running a company rules you out from being a bad guy
Investment guys that think they know everything are such great entertainment.
Don’t you know the tale of world wide known good guy Henry Ford?
What both sides? He's a bad guy. Like Bond villain level bad. He's also a massive cnut, a shite father and an unfunny arsehole with the saddest cult of personality of all time surrounding him. He's also the very rich owner of some companies, which is no counterweight to the former in any way shape or form.
Having money doesn't actually makes you a good person, it just makes you a rich person.
As for his contribution to his companies. I doubt Tesla and SpaceX would sink if he died tomorrow. Too bad we won't find out.
Not saying I hope he dies of course, that would be awful.
And I have now engaged with a WUM in the Elon Musk thread. New low.
As a fan of his business ventures, you might want to read this article for a more balanced view:
In basically all of my posts I’ve being critical of Elon Musk the person, as owner of X. Maybe 95% of my posts says that I don’t agree with Elon with his doings on X.
Gotta say this is pretty shameless and a useless disrespectful post, when I try and be nice and nuanced to people like you and list both the bad and good sides about Elon. Imagine I argued and talked the same way about you?
My posts are even mostly just factual posts about what numbers Tesla put out - and what Elon does good on the innovation side. But hey, if namecalling and labeling is more important to you, then there’s not even any point trying to have a nuanced discussions about it all. It’s pretty easy to just hate Elon Musk and be blind to the good stuff he does too for the planet.
Again, disingenuous to keep stating that this is the only reason people dislike him. It's also simultaneously incredibly dismissive about how damaging some of his "doings on X" have been and can be.
That’s the thing. His companies does good stuff. They save the planet from CO2 emission on an extreme scale. Tesla’s made it visible to big players like China that electric vehicles and solar energy is both a great business for states and for the environment compared to dirty energy. But you can’t “feel” this as you can with a post on X that makes you rage.
This all gets lost though, as we’re all just supposed to throw away the fantastic innovations of a man because he’s a cnut in real life. (He sure sounds like it). You can’t say his companies (X excepted) don’t benefit the planet.
And I see such strange arguments from other posters too like “he just sells cars” - if you truly looked and considered what selling cars and solar packs does for the planet, you’d hate him a little bit less. + all the things he’ll do in the future.
I’m arguing with a wall here it seems, so not gonna waste more time today nuancing what this so called evil man does.
Please don't tell me that you're legitimately giving him credit for popularisation of solar energy too. This is beyond absurd.
The guy is scum. I hope everything he touches crashes and burns.
No one is supposed to throw away innovations. The point is that he invented none of these innovations. He's not an omnipotent genius who invented solar energy. He's a rich dude who invested in the right companies.
He's not trying to save the planet, he's in it to get rich and now that he is rich, being a bond villain is apparently what he wants to do.
Please read the article in @Cheimoon 's post if you are seriously looking for a balanced view.
They don't. First, you use plural, but his only possibly environmentally conscious company is Tesla. Space travel is extremely polluting, actually. Second, there is no sign Musk cares about the environment; if he did, surely he would mention it sometimes while cozying up with the Republicans. And third, for the longest time, Tesla's main source of income were ZEVs, which allow other companies to pollute.
He's definitely a good businessman, in that terrible self-centred capitalist sort of way, and he obviously likes the innovation sector. But he's not an inventor or innovator himself, and there is no sign he's in it for the good of humanity.
This, nothing more needs to be said about him really.
I hope not, last thing I need is Tesla's crashing everywhere and giant rockets falling on my house
But if his companies went tits up that's a different matter
Musk is basically a modern Wernher von Braun but without the major contributions to engineering and rocket architecture.
Cheers! I actually do listen to the criticisms around him as I tend to agree with a lot about him as a person. Long read that and I’d agree Isacsson’s biography of him was very technical instead of being critical at some events and missing to dive into tragic events more. I so think Isacsson touches on the most vital part - Elon Musks lack of empathy.
The article clearly however is completely against everything Elon Musk does. It mostly just disregards anything he has done or will do, like popularizing the EV or making space travel more possible. It’s a bit like most posts in here just written more eloquent.
This to me is completely biased.
“Elon Musk has not changed the world. He is not a great innovator. He is not a genius. He is not taking the human species anywhere in particular. He’s boring. Even his faults are boring! Musk is a very ordinary man. A con man; a fraudster. Worst of all, a government contractor.”
I could probably argue against everything in that sentence, but it seems there’s little point in wasting the time here. When the level is “Elon is like a Nazi” from many posters, it’s a waste of time.
I'm sorry - but that article isn't really that good, it's as much about how crap the biography is than anything. There are a ton of criticisms to be made about Musk and his ventures but this article isn't it. The writer spends the first 1,000 words and the last 1,000 words on a complete tangent. He makes well known observations about Musks bizarre family life (and yes, he's from a toxic family and is clearly an awful human being). On the SpaceX side he condemns it for what it hasn't done - put something on Mars - and ignores what it has done (upend the entire space business) - and while the Mars stuff hasn't happened, the Mars goal is what has driven the focus on getting launch costs down to the point where we have a massive innovation like Starship coming into view - and Musk has been a key instigator of that process. He obfuscates the point about what differentiates SpaceX from say Rockwell, which is that SpaceX designs their rockets according to its own spec, while the Rockwell built the space shuttle to NASA's spec. He gives a good shoeing to Tesla's build quality which isn't anything new, and criticises Tesla for making hay on the ZEV scheme, the entire purpose of which was to encourage the growth of electric vehicles and the reduction of ICE cars.
So, not a very good article about a not very good biography.
I'm going to be kind and keep it jovial because we are having some fun here. I'll attribute this to your own ignorance rather than malice.
But please make an effort to familiarise yourself with Elon's history:
This is but one example.
No matter how well his companies perform, he will always be a bad person, because of his actions and words.
It does kind of hit home the fact that Musk is barely anyone. He's just some sort of bizarre image with no one behind it.
Granted, there are more detailed articles about the history and origin of Tesla than this one.
Oh, You mean giving Tesla credit for being the current biggest most praised private company on the solar and energy-side? Yeah that would be really absurd.
The guy is a narcissistic clown who takes credit for other people's work.
Unfortunately now because of his brainwashing platform X, he doesn't even need to take credit for it before his stinky acolytes do it for him.
Holy feck. I can't wait for him to sell a pen and you to jump in with giving him credit for the entire written history of mankind.
This is what is such a misunderstanding of the purpose of ZEVs. They’re there to transform the industry from fossil to EV.
Then Tesla comes along and makes a fortune of those because they actually make an EV and few others want to move away from fossil fuels, and then it’s all of a sudden a bad thing. They were dependent on them for a good amount of time, but those ZEVs have actually helped making the model 3 and Y which now is the best selling cars on the planet - without having the need for ZEVs now. They’re still great to have mind you, but fossil manufacturers gets a lot of subsidies too, so it’s not like it’s onesided.
What most people miss is, that in the end, the ZEVs given to Tesla will possibly make the polluting manufacturers go bankrupt in the long run as they dont transform their company to EV. The argument is that ZEVs allow old manufacturers to pollute, but while that’s partly true in the short run, it’ll also end their business if they don’t turn into profitable EV companies. Some of them even tried, but none have the technical engineering of Tesla who both can make the World’s best selling car and have a profit on it at the same time. Currently many fossil fuel manufacturers don’t even make a profit on their cars.
What a terrible thing those ZEVs are, eh?