Cont: Musk, SpaceX and future of Tesla II

[Trebuchet]

Elon Musk
@elonmusk

Moonbase Alpha will be so cool.

And we want to make it so that anyone can go to the Moon if they want.




View attachment 74484

link

Starship about two cybertrucks high...

 

[Aridas]

So the best selling EV in the world is just a dream? How about an EV charging network covering the entire US with over 37,000 chargers, 22.3 gigawatt-hours of energy storage in the first half of this year alone, rockets that land themselves and can be reused up to 35 times, or the largest most powerful space rocket ever built?

...Interesting. It sure looks like you're choosing to be an example of pretty much exactly what I called out. With this, you've attributed all those things to Musk, and not the people doing the actual science and work.

Adding relevant context here, all that would be utterly meaningless to say if you weren't trying to argue that Musk should indeed be treated as if he was an equivalent to Newton.

You say Musk 'brazenly seeks to trick people into lauding him', I say that's BS. Did Musk tell everybody that he personally designed the Cybertruck? I reckon you just dreamed that idea up and brazenly seek to trick me into lauding you for it.

If this is your response? I reckon you're kneejerk reacting and making up things to criticize because I'm not bending over backwards to shower praise upon the lying mass child murderer who is in question, then.

 

[Darat]

oh the old tried and true you’re just a hater routine lol

anyway, i dont know a lot about isaac newton. did he ever defraud investors?

By all accounts apart from his own he was a very nasty person.

 

[dirtywick]

They could become reality in the future.

NASA Provides Updates on Moon Base Cargo Landers, Tech Demonstrations


Notice who isn't mentioned there. SpaceX isn't the only aerospace company working on such ventures. Nor is America the only country working on putting a base on the Moon.

Chinese Lunar Exploration Program

When you see that, Musk's aspirations don't seem so crazy. Perhaps factories as we know them might not be commerically viable, but imagine if NASA or China needed a bunch of solar panels, and a certain company just happened to have a solar panel factory 'nearby' (ie. less than 240,000 miles away). One interesting thing about solar panel manufacture is that some processes require a hard vacuum. That comes for free on the Moon.

there's nothing there about a moon factory in any of that. you highlighted the word manufacturing when they said they are manufacturing landing pads, not pursing robot factories. and you just highlighted the word robot a few times too. leads me to believe you're just finding and highlighting the first thing you google that seems to confirm your point and not reading that close

 

[Andy_Ross]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2087822520128823438

 

[Andy_Ross]

Meanwhile

 

[Fast Eddie B]

...Interesting. It sure looks like you're choosing to be an example of pretty much exactly what I called out. With this, you've attributed all those things to Musk, and not the people doing the actual science and work…

I think the same can be said for almost all innovators and/or visionaries. Think Henry Ford, Howard Hughes, Steve Jobs, et al.

Yes, they all had “feet of clay”. Seems to go with the territory.

 

[Darat]

"If there's anything more important than my ego around, I want it caught and shot now."

 

[I Am The Scum]

They could become reality in the future.

NASA Provides Updates on Moon Base Cargo Landers, Tech Demonstrations


Notice who isn't mentioned there. SpaceX isn't the only aerospace company working on such ventures. Nor is America the only country working on putting a base on the Moon.

Chinese Lunar Exploration Program

When you see that, Musk's aspirations don't seem so crazy. Perhaps factories as we know them might not be commerically viable, but imagine if NASA or China needed a bunch of solar panels, and a certain company just happened to have a solar panel factory 'nearby' (ie. less than 240,000 miles away). One interesting thing about solar panel manufacture is that some processes require a hard vacuum. That comes for free on the Moon.

Nobody is denying that there could be some kind of permanent structure on the moon at some indeterminate point in the future. Anybody can point to some light sci-fi idea and say it will probably eventually happen.

The problem is that if Musk is the creator of anything, its broken promises. He constantly under-delivers on his grand ideas of what the future will hold (we're long overdue for landing on Mars, if you'll recall). And the investors just eat it up. We all know that if he started making realistic promises for a change, the investors would flee like they're on the Titanic.

And that's extremely disheartening. I don't think our society can prosper when dishonesty is incentivized to such a degree.

 

[jeremyp]

On a much more abstract level, I find this kind of future vision wildly, unfathomably crazy. I'm sure that there are plenty of people whose mentality loves the idea of living in a sterile environment where weeds never grow, night never falls, and you can drink and ◊◊◊◊ the day away while someone else takes out the garbage, but I'm in the same situation as when I hear those ideas of the rapture. Please o please leave me behind! Go ahead, take the car keys, take the diamonds, take the harps of gold, take the secret plans. I promise I won't tell the Romulans were you went. Just leave me here in the bee-loud glade.

Who told you that night doesn't fall on the Moon?

A lunar night lasts about 14 Earth days. You should know that during that period, the temperature drops to about -133 celsius. But if you feel that might be too chilly, don't worry. During the lunar day (also about 14 Earth days) the temperature goes up to 121 celsius - you can make a cup of tea by leaving your water outside in the sunshine.

This is how we know that Musk is talking bollocks.

 

[jeremyp]

When the stock goes up, it's 'not related to reality'.

No.

The SpaceX stock price is not related to reality. It wasn't related to reality even when it was at its low point of $107.

When it goes down, it's 'IPO fail, Elon loses $1 Trilion, SpaceX is finished!".

I've never said that. Elon Musk had already made his money before the retail investors got a look in.

That said, SpaceX probably is finished because it is losing money at a horrendous rate, largely thanks to the xAI/Twitter acquisition which saddled it with enormous liabilities.

Will the naysayers ever admit they were wrong? Of course not, they'll just wait until the next time it goes down a bit and recycle their breathless predictions.

When are you going to admit that data centres in space are no more than a fantasy and nobody has yet found a way to make AI profitable?

 

[jeremyp]

When SpaceX started out in 2002 it was written off as fantasy.

No it wasn't.

Now it sets the bar that others need to leap over. Like him or not, people like Musk are the ones who push the envelope on what is possible.

No it isn't. SpaceX is largely successful thanks to the people that Musk employed. The designer of Falcon 9 has left the company.

Musk just talks about fantasies that are complete nonsense as soon as you examine them in detail.

And humanity benefits. Much better than the naysayers who just poop-poop everything.

The only person to benefit from Musk's fantasies is Elon Musk.

 

[jeremyp]

Musk is an eccentric. It just goes with the personality. Isaac Newton gave us calculus and the three laws of motion. But he was also into a lot of kooky stuff.

Musk is definitely into the kooky stuff, but he hasn't revolutionised science, unlike Newton.

 

[jeremyp]

So the best selling EV in the world is just a dream? How about an EV charging network covering the entire US with over 37,000 chargers, 22.3 gigawatt-hours of energy storage in the first half of this year alone, rockets that land themselves and can be reused up to 35 times, or the largest most powerful space rocket ever built?

You say Musk 'brazenly seeks to trick people into lauding him', I say that's BS. Did Musk tell everybody that he personally designed the Cybertruck? I reckon you just dreamed that idea up and brazenly seek to trick me into lauding you for it.

Of course Musk designed the Cybertruck. No half way competent car designer would have come up with that pile of excrement that is talked of in the same hushed tones as the Ford Edsel.

For ◊◊◊◊◊ sake, open your ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ eyes.

 

[Aridas]

I think the same can be said for almost all innovators and/or visionaries. Think Henry Ford, Howard Hughes, Steve Jobs, et al.

Yes, they all had “feet of clay”. Seems to go with the territory.

Personally, I think that this is more of a case of stretching a truth, likely unintentionally, than actually being particularly true. There are a number of visionary investors where it could apply, yes, but there's certainly something to be said about how there are plenty (a large majority even) of independent or employed inventors, innovators, and visionaries who don't become wildly rich and famous and thus would automatically count against your "almost all," even if one supposes that they would act similarly if the opportunity presented itself. Each of the names you raised did indeed also end up very disproportionately gaining benefit off the work and inspiration of others, though, compared to the benefits gained by the people who actually did the work to make it happen. One can try to make arguments about how that's right or wrong, but there's little honest way to deny that it is indeed the case.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

...but there's certainly something to be said about how there are plenty (a large majority even) of independent or employed inventors, innovators, and visionaries who don't become wildly rich and famous and thus would automatically count against your "almost all," even if one supposes that they would act similarly if the opportunity presented itself.

Good point.

 

[Trausti]

There's apparently some controversy about how much Newton actually produced himself versus how much he effectively stole credit after seeing the work of others, though there's little cause to believe that he didn't contribute to science notably overall. He certainly had personality issues, either way, especially later in life. With that said... Musk is really, really not Newton. Musk is not actually doing the work that Trausti is trying to credit to him, unlike Newton, and has repeatedly made it perfectly clear that he's pretty crappy in that regard. Nor is Musk a scientist in any particularly notable fashion. Maybe a half-assed one, at very best, if one's generous to him. Rather, Musk's record is far more along the lines of being a boss/investor/conman who brazenly seeks to trick people into lauding him rather than the actual scientists working on the projects. Musk's main selling point is his skill at selling a dream, not his ability to fulfill such.

That really misses the point. Without Musk, there is no SpaceX. Tesla is a failed start up. There is no Neuralink. The reason all those smart engineers were able to do all that great stuff is because Musk gave them the opportunity. To say that Musk isn't smart is just stupid. But, obviously, he could not have come up with all these engineering solutions by himself. Yet, he was the driving force for it all to come together. He's the risk taker. He's the one who strived to do what other said could not be done. I think of Apple computer and the two Steves. One was a brilliant engineer. The other was a brilliant businessman. If Woz had not met Jobs, his Apple One would have just been this neat circuit board collecting dust in his garage. He'd show it to his grandkids from time to time. They'd act interested.

 

[Trausti]

Of course Musk designed the Cybertruck. No half way competent car designer would have come up with that pile of excrement that is talked of in the same hushed tones as the Ford Edsel.

For ◊◊◊◊◊ sake, open your ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ eyes.

I dunno. The Cybertruck is not for me. But the people I know who bought one fricking love them.

 

[Andy_Ross]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2087760446212522196

 

[Aridas]

That really misses the point. Without Musk, there is no SpaceX. Tesla is a failed start up. There is no Neuralink. The reason all those smart engineers were able to do all that great stuff is because Musk gave them the opportunity.

You posed Musk as if he was just like Newton. He is really, really not. You trying to move the goalposts here doesn't change that at all. To be clear, at no point have I denied Musk's actual meaningful contributions to his various companies, though I certainly object to blind hype and stealing credit from those who actually did the work and earned it and piling it onto Musk, as you seem quite intent upon doing as you belittle "all those smart engineers."

To say that Musk isn't smart is just stupid.

"Smart" lends itself to lots of conflation and subjectivity and you are certainly making use of that. Musk is certainly good at some things, yes. He's pretty crappy when it comes to various other things, though. What you had decided to invoke quite falls into that second group, despite you trying to pretend that it was in the first. That's what got called out, regardless of how you're trying to move the goalposts.