Scrutable

Yeah, lots of people would prefer he was less extraordinary in order to prevent him being a bit less abrasive. I heard that Isaac Newton was a selfish c.nt too. Shakespeare was a dick, so I heard, and Da Vinci was a right git.

There's an almost cliched vision of who someone on the autism spectrum will be - nerdy and into tech, and also male and white. That's the trope that dominates the media. So it's not particularly helpful for another round of attention that reinforces it again. Ideally we'd get a story about a black sportswoman or something.

plodder wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 7:30 am Yeah, lots of people would prefer he was less extraordinary in order to prevent him being a bit less abrasive. I heard that Isaac Newton was a selfish c.nt too. Shakespeare was a dick, so I heard, and Da Vinci was a right git.

The only thing Musk is good at is b.llsh.t. Though to be fair to him, he is very good at that.

secret squirrel wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 8:19 am

plodder wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 7:30 am Yeah, lots of people would prefer he was less extraordinary in order to prevent him being a bit less abrasive. I heard that Isaac Newton was a selfish c.nt too. Shakespeare was a dick, so I heard, and Da Vinci was a right git.

The only thing Musk is good at is b.llsh.t. Though to be fair to him, he is very good at that.

Tesla are doing quite well at the moment. SpaceX too, last I heard. The man might be a tw.t, but he’s got some notable successes.

Grumble wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 8:44 am

secret squirrel wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 8:19 am

plodder wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 7:30 am Yeah, lots of people would prefer he was less extraordinary in order to prevent him being a bit less abrasive. I heard that Isaac Newton was a selfish c.nt too. Shakespeare was a dick, so I heard, and Da Vinci was a right git.

The only thing Musk is good at is b.llsh.t. Though to be fair to him, he is very good at that.

Tesla are doing quite well at the moment. SpaceX too, last I heard. The man might be a tw.t, but he’s got some notable successes.

He is associated with success, but how much of that success is attributable to him? And of that which is attributable to him, how much is due in large part to the aforementioned skills in b.llsh.t?

How many electric cars or reusable rockets would we see today without Musk?

It can be hard to tell whether someone is an arse or on the spectrum (my dad, for example. After many years, I decided: arse). Having said that, many people on the spectrum are aware of their behaviour and make an effort to counter the parts that affect other people. That's not to say that they should change all their behaviour and not expect understanding from others. But once you've been diagnosed or have come to an awareness, then continuing certain behaviours is much less excusable, especially when people have explained to you the effect of said behaviours.

plodder wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:07 am How many electric cars or reusable rockets would we see today without Musk?

Musk didn't found Tesla, he doesn't design the cars, and by all accounts is an awful manager, so his contribution to their success seems to be his ability to persuade governments to give him resalable carbon credits, and his knack for cultivating a cult of personality turning them into a meme stock. So, as I said, he is very good at b.llsh.t, but I'm not sure if that qualifies him for the position of visionary genius.

secret squirrel wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:47 am

plodder wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:07 am How many electric cars or reusable rockets would we see today without Musk?

Musk didn't found Tesla, he doesn't design the cars, and by all accounts is an awful manager, so his contribution to their success seems to be his ability to persuade governments to give him resalable carbon credits, and his knack for cultivating a cult of personality turning them into a meme stock. So, as I said, he is very good at b.llsh.t, but I'm not sure if that qualifies him for the position of visionary genius.

Yeah, that's what I reckon, and wouldn't be surprised if it all went horribly wrong at some point.

secret squirrel wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:47 am

plodder wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:07 am How many electric cars or reusable rockets would we see today without Musk?

Musk didn't found Tesla, he doesn't design the cars, and by all accounts is an awful manager, so his contribution to their success seems to be his ability to persuade governments to give him resalable carbon credits, and his knack for cultivating a cult of personality turning them into a meme stock. So, as I said, he is very good at b.llsh.t, but I'm not sure if that qualifies him for the position of visionary genius.

It could be argued without the b.llsh.t you'd have neither the rockets nor electric cars. He's also an honest to goodness real engineer, and had significant real input into both companies. eg: fixing a problem to do with a cracked engine bell for the launch of a critical falcon 1 mission. It looks to me he has the personality that is good at leading from the front in a small org, which doesn't scale well once the org gets larger.

bjn wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:58 am It could be argued without the b.llsh.t you'd have neither the rockets nor electric cars. He's also an honest to goodness real engineer, and had significant real input into both companies. eg: fixing a problem to do with a cracked engine bell for the launch of a critical falcon 1 mission. It looks to me he has the personality that is good at leading from the front in a small org, which doesn't scale well once the org gets larger.

That is perfectly reasonable. But I'm not going to let the fact that he may have his uses distract from the fact that a large proportion of his ideas are terrible, and that he enjoys a position in society far above his apparent abilities.

bjn wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:58 am

secret squirrel wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:47 am

plodder wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 10:07 am How many electric cars or reusable rockets would we see today without Musk?

Musk didn't found Tesla, he doesn't design the cars, and by all accounts is an awful manager, so his contribution to their success seems to be his ability to persuade governments to give him resalable carbon credits, and his knack for cultivating a cult of personality turning them into a meme stock. So, as I said, he is very good at b.llsh.t, but I'm not sure if that qualifies him for the position of visionary genius.

It could be argued without the b.llsh.t you'd have neither the rockets nor electric cars. He's also an honest to goodness real engineer, and had significant real input into both companies. eg: fixing a problem to do with a cracked engine bell for the launch of a critical falcon 1 mission. It looks to me he has the personality that is good at leading from the front in a small org, which doesn't scale well once the org gets larger.

It can equally be argued that Tesla would be a more successful company and have rolled out more electric cars to a wider market if it had a CEO who didn't get distracted by b.llsh.t, and who wasn't building rockets and dangerous tunnels instead of growing Tesla.

Like all counterfactual histories, you can't really tell.

We are, of course, overlooking the man's immense contribution to Doge.

secret squirrel wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 11:41 am We are, of course, overlooking the man's immense contribution to Doge.

I thought I'd mentioned it under "distracted by b.llsh.t".

Lol.

He took a tiny hobbyist car firm and has launched a new and globally recognised manufacturer - the first one to break through in, what? 40 years? More?

And it's setting the pace to the extent that the entire industry (with legislation following rapidly behind) is desperately playing catch up. Without Musk we'd still have a few weirdos driving Nissan Leafs and the Prius. We wouldn't have petrolheads wanging about in the Model S. As for rockets that land themselves...

I really find the psychology at play here fascinating. What is it? Envy? Wounded pride? Some sort of fairytale that hasn't worked out the way you want it to? Are you used to being top dogs? Is that it?

personally, i just think he's a c.nt

Stephanie wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:02 pm personally, i just think he's a c.nt

I don’t think you get to that level without being one. See also Steve Jobs and Bill Gates.

lpm wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 8:09 am There's an almost cliched vision of who someone on the autism spectrum will be - nerdy and into tech, and also male and white. That's the trope that dominates the media. So it's not particularly helpful for another round of attention that reinforces it again. Ideally we'd get a story about a black sportswoman or something.

Almost clichéd?

Grumble wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:13 pm

Stephanie wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:02 pm personally, i just think he's a c.nt

I don’t think you get to that level without being one. See also Steve Jobs and Bill Gates.

But there's being a c.nt and there's accusing someone of being a paedophile for saying that your so-called submarine (a rigid tube) would not be suitable for a cave rescue. And then saying it was just a general good-natured joke, whilst setting private investigators onto him.

Stephanie wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:02 pm personally, i just think he's a c.nt

Sure, OK. But how many c.nts have made self-landing rockets, or ushered in electric car use on a global scale?

There's loads of idiots on here claiming this would have probably happened by now anyway.

Two fundamentally different views of history: change due to great men or change due to deep technological and economic forces.

There's no doubt in this instance that change is happening due to unstoppable forces and the particular individuals are unimportant.

lpm wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 2:03 pm Two fundamentally different views of history: change due to great men or change due to deep technological and economic forces.

Though of course those 'forces' aren't supernatural, and just amount to lots of decisions made by many different individuals, which themselves tend to be influenced by people who are powerful or famous.

lpm wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 2:03 pm Two fundamentally different views of history: change due to great men or change due to deep technological and economic forces.

There's no doubt in this instance that change is happening due to unstoppable forces and the particular individuals are unimportant.

Usually it's the technological and economic forces plus a history of other people beavering away uncredited in the background. Not so much standing on the shoulders of giants as standing on the shoulders of hard-working dwarves. However, it's not uncommon for one person (man, usually) to take the credit and that's all down to PR or sometimes down to the fact they're so bl..dy rich they can give the idea the final shove needed. Plus the fact that journalists often want to keep it simple and just pick one person for a good headline and that then becomes 'history' in the public perception.

jimbob wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:22 pm

Grumble wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:13 pm

Stephanie wrote: Mon May 10, 2021 1:02 pm personally, i just think he's a c.nt

I don’t think you get to that level without being one. See also Steve Jobs and Bill Gates.

But there's being a c.nt and there's accusing someone of being a paedophile for saying that your so-called submarine (a rigid tube) would not be suitable for a cave rescue. And then saying it was just a general good-natured joke, whilst setting private investigators onto him.

Not defending the c.nt for a minute, nor the c.ntish actions of others, just observing. The casual defamation of calling someone a paedo is astonishing. For shouting at workers and summarily dismissing them plus other nasty practices though it seems to be part of the high level businessman persona.