Is Elon Musk a fraud?

Is Elon Musk a fraud?

  • Yes, he is a fraud

    Votes: 11 55.0%
  • No, he isn't a fraud

    Votes: 9 45.0%

  • Total voters
    20

Lexicus

Deity
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
28,547
Location
Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
If you could mindlessly pay people to create excellence, then mediocrity wouldn't exist.

Is a car that bursts into flames and traps you inside an example of mediocrity or excellence?

If you want to do something about climate change, the solution is not for soi-dissant geniuses to work 21-hour days on "inventing" electric cars. One adequately-funded public transit system is worth a lot of electric cars.

He's also either lying about self-driving cars or high on his own supply.
 

Hygro

soundcloud.com/hygro/
Joined
Dec 1, 2002
Messages
25,150
Location
California
Cool so anyway the Covid vaccine is a fraud here's a link to some people who died from it.
 

Kyriakos

Creator
Joined
Oct 15, 2003
Messages
68,843
Location
The Dream
Well, I'm really hoping his claims about a Mars colony aren't fraud. I'd love him to go to Mars. And stay there.

He isn't going anywhere. His plan is entirely scifi, with an armada of 1000 ships that along with their massive fuel parts would in total cost a multiple of anything 10 Musks can get as funding by selling everything.
If he wasn't as reckless, I'd suppose he only maintains that illusion to pre-sell more stuff so as to keep his companies afloat= ballooned.
 

PhroX

Deity
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
2,305
He isn't going anywhere. His plan is entirely scifi, with an armada of 1000 ships that along with their massive fuel parts would in total cost a multiple of anything 10 Musks can get as funding by selling everything.

Oh, of course it's nonsense. Even if you could get people there, and do so even remotely safely, there's no practical use in doing so. The costs and risks are astronomical and all this crap about "terraforming" and "not being a 1 planet species" are just that, crap. But that shouldn't stop us strapping Musk to a giant rocket and pointing it in the vague direction of Mars.
 

r16

not deity
Joined
Nov 10, 2008
Messages
9,680
thomas Edison indeed . Another guy supported by Washington DC and the media . But was quite justified in stopping more hare brained schemes from Nikola Tesla .
 

Rg339

Prince
Joined
Jun 3, 2022
Messages
300
Oh, of course it's nonsense. Even if you could get people there, and do so even remotely safely, there's no practical use in doing so. The costs and risks are astronomical and all this crap about "terraforming" and "not being a 1 planet species" are just that, crap. But that shouldn't stop us strapping Musk to a giant rocket and pointing it in the vague direction of Mars.
No practical value?

Any innovation discovered for the purpose of a hypothetical mission to Mars adds to the pool of human knowledge. But the innovation doesn’t stay there, it will almost certainly be beneficial across entire economies and sectors.

For psychological value? It’s unquantifiable. It’s the Pyramids. People look at it, and say “woah people can do that?”. They may then become more likely to solve other astonishing feats.

I don’t think Elon is gonna get to Mars either, but there is practical value even to the attempt that far outweighs costs IMO.
 

Kyriakos

Creator
Joined
Oct 15, 2003
Messages
68,843
Location
The Dream
Iirc Musk has also made the rather strange claim that the planet is underpopulated.
Although perhaps he was just trying to answer some stupid question about how many kids he has - possibly more than Boris Johnson, but at least the former can say how many (?)
This isn't WH40K, where a planet can have hundreds of billions of people in a city spanning continents ^_^
 

Gorbles

Load Balanced
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
8,788
Location
UK
No practical value?

Any innovation discovered for the purpose of a hypothetical mission to Mars adds to the pool of human knowledge. But the innovation doesn’t stay there, it will almost certainly be beneficial across entire economies and sectors.

For psychological value? It’s unquantifiable. It’s the Pyramids. People look at it, and say “woah people can do that?”. They may then become more likely to solve other astonishing feats.

I don’t think Elon is gonna get to Mars either, but there is practical value even to the attempt that far outweighs costs IMO.
Innovation in the private sector doesn't benefit the public in the same way innovation in, say, nationalised services does. Evidence for this includes: the private sector vs. nationalised services, generally everywhere.

Hey, who here remembers patents? Those super-cool and definitely not-abused things that definitely allow cross-discipline sharing of discoveries and innovation? Oh wait nevermind they protect capital's investment in the venture, and gatekeep access to said benefits. Nevermind. So yeah, colour me suspicious that "the innovation doesn't stay there".

I work in software, in the private sector, just for full disclosure. I'm sure I'm not alone.
 

Lexicus

Deity
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
28,547
Location
Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
No practical value?

Any innovation discovered for the purpose of a hypothetical mission to Mars adds to the pool of human knowledge. But the innovation doesn’t stay there, it will almost certainly be beneficial across entire economies and sectors.

For psychological value? It’s unquantifiable. It’s the Pyramids. People look at it, and say “woah people can do that?”. They may then become more likely to solve other astonishing feats.

I don’t think Elon is gonna get to Mars either, but there is practical value even to the attempt that far outweighs costs IMO.

A rat done bit my sister Nell
and Whitey's on the moon
her face and arms began to swell
and Whitey's on the moon
 

Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
49,644
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Without vision, effort and money many great things don't happen. It took 8 years to what many still think didn't happen, to happen. It doesn't matter whether or not Musk gets people to Mars soon. He will lay the foundation for others even if he fails.

On May 25, 1961, President John F. Kennedy announced before a special joint session of Congress the dramatic and ambitious goal of sending an American safely to the Moon before the end of the decade. A number of political factors affected Kennedy's decision and the timing of it. In general, Kennedy felt great pressure to have the United States "catch up to and overtake" the Soviet Union in the "space race." Four years after the Sputnik shock of 1957, the cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin had become the first human in space on April 12, 1961, greatly embarrassing the U.S. While Alan Shepard became the first American in space on May 5, he only flew on a short suborbital flight instead of orbiting the Earth, as Gagarin had done. In addition, the Bay of Pigs fiasco in mid-April put unquantifiable pressure on Kennedy. He wanted to announce a program that the U.S. had a strong chance at achieving before the Soviet Union. After consulting with Vice President Johnson, NASA Administrator James Webb, and other officials, he concluded that landing an American on the Moon would be a very challenging technological feat, but an area of space exploration in which the U.S. actually had a potential lead. Thus the cold war is the primary contextual lens through which many historians now view Kennedy's speech.
The decision involved much consideration before making it public, as well as enormous human efforts and expenditures to make what became Project Apollo a reality by 1969. Only the construction of the Panama Canal in modern peacetime and the Manhattan Project in war were comparable in scope. NASA's overall human spaceflight efforts were guided by Kennedy's speech; Projects Mercury (at least in its latter stages), Gemini, and Apollo were designed to execute Kennedy's goal. His goal was achieved on July 20, 1969, when Apollo 11 commander Neil Armstrong stepped off the Lunar Module's ladder and onto the Moon's surface.
 

Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
49,644
Location
Albuquerque, NM
A rat done bit my sister Nell
and Whitey's on the moon
her face and arms began to swell
and Whitey's on the moon
That is just priorities. You don't agree that he is spending his money wisely or how you want him to.
 

Gorbles

Load Balanced
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
8,788
Location
UK
He will lay the foundation for others even if he fails.
This is a bit tongue-in-cheek, but also a bit serious: if I said something like this about Lenin (for example), I'd be accused of being a communist :p This reads like a belief system, and not some kind of evidenced proposal.
 

Kyriakos

Creator
Joined
Oct 15, 2003
Messages
68,843
Location
The Dream

Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
49,644
Location
Albuquerque, NM
This is a bit tongue-in-cheek, but also a bit serious: if I said something like this about Lenin (for example), I'd be accused of being a communist :p This reads like a belief system, and not some kind of evidenced proposal.
It is the nature of progress across most fields of human endeavor. Someone tries to do domething that has not been done before and fails. then someone else builds on that and tries again. It applies to science, industry, civil rights, and political thinking.
 

Rg339

Prince
Joined
Jun 3, 2022
Messages
300
Innovation in the private sector doesn't benefit the public in the same way innovation in, say, nationalised services does. Evidence for this includes: the private sector vs. nationalised services, generally everywhere.
Admittedly, yeah. It’s mostly why I believe it was a mistake to ever punt space exploration to the private sector to begin with. Still, it’ll eventually get there, just slower. In contrast, there is no innovation if nobody tries.
A rat done bit my sister Nell
and Whitey's on the moon
her face and arms began to swell
and Whitey's on the moon
If there’s a benefit to transportation efficiency or fuel efficiency discovered, you lower scarcity by stretching out existing earthbound resources. You also simultaneously get closer to exploiting material resources in space.

Or in other words, you can afford a car, gas(or electric or whatever) and an exterminator all at the same time, and no rat bite occurs.
 

Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
49,644
Location
Albuquerque, NM
Prominent astronauts have spoken against Musk's plan and whether he is the person for such a move to Mars.


Then again, Aldrin wouldn't know what he is talking about, he isn't reading enough CFC ;)
Read your links before you post them. Aldrin thinks that Musk's plans are not ambitious enough.
“You have got to live in something. You have to prepare for all of that,” says Aldrin.

In September, Musk presented his most detailed plan yet about how to travel to and colonize Mars. The plan includes detailed outlines of rocket boosters and spaceships to get there, but it remains short on details as to how to build a habitable settlement when travelers arrive.

While plans for occupying Mars are still largely theoretical and being formulated, Aldrin is passionate about the mission to build cities on the red planet.

“Our purpose, I believe, is to settle the planet Mars and I think that should be our objective,” says Aldrin.
 

Gorbles

Load Balanced
Joined
Nov 24, 2014
Messages
8,788
Location
UK
It is the nature of progress across most fields of human endeavor. Someone tries to do domething that has not been done before and fails. then someone else builds on that and tries again. It applies to science, industry, civil rights, and political thinking.
There are plenty of instances of things being abandoned (both accidentally and on-purpose). This building-upon cannot be assumed to be true. You want it to be true, or you believe it to be true, that's fair. I understand that opinion. But I understand why folks would disagree. It's not a truth of the world.

Admittedly, yeah. It’s mostly why I believe it was a mistake to ever punt space exploration to the private sector to begin with. Still, it’ll eventually get there, just slower. In contrast, there is no innovation if nobody tries.
I suppose the contention is between Musk being criticised and the end result somehow becoming "nobody tries". That's likely where you're losing people (myself included). I'd argue in light of the article I found earlier that Tesla would do better with somebody else in charge, even if it remains a way of generating revenue for the private sector.
 

Birdjaguar

Hanafubuki
Super Moderator
Supporter
Joined
Dec 24, 2001
Messages
49,644
Location
Albuquerque, NM
There are plenty of instances of things being abandoned (both accidentally and on-purpose). This building-upon cannot be assumed to be true. You want it to be true, or you believe it to be true, that's fair. I understand that opinion. But I understand why folks would disagree. It's not a truth of the world.
The fact that "projects" get abandoned does not nullify that we build upon the efforts of others. Gay rights, civil rights, women's rights all built upon the efforts of those that went before. The same with industrial robots, automobiles, airplanes, medical practices, computer chips. The list is endless. It is often a crooked path with stops and starts.

The United Society of Believers in Christ's Second Appearing (Shakers) practiced socialism long before Marx. Lenin tried his version long after. How many versions of democracy have we seen? Look at the history of weaponry and firearms in particular.
 
Top Bottom