Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ...
3
4
5
6
LastLast
  1. #81
    "Space travel is an exciting idea, but right now we need to focus on Earth and create a progressive tax system so that children don't go hungry, people are not homeless and all Americans have healthcare. The level of inequality in America is obscene and a threat to our democracy."
    ~Bernie Sanders


    https://mobile.twitter.com/BernieSan...99911783477253

    Responses are similar to what I see here.

  2. #82
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    "Space travel is an exciting idea, but right now we need to focus on Earth and create a progressive tax system so that children don't go hungry, people are not homeless and all Americans have healthcare. The level of inequality in America is obscene and a threat to our democracy."
    ~Bernie Sanders


    https://mobile.twitter.com/BernieSan...99911783477253

    Responses are similar to what I see here.
    Porque no los dos?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ransath View Post
    Money laundering, especially prior to his election? I couldn't give a flying fuck.

  3. #83
    Why not both? I believe there's an inference on taxing his net worth.

  4. #84
    I Don't Work Here Endus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, ON
    Posts
    67,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Kaleredar View Post
    In my mind someone who wants to describe themself as a "futurist" should be far more magnanimous in their conduct. Most of what I learn of Musk is... kind of skeeving.

    Like pulling up stakes out of California because he didn't like how they were attempting to combat a global lethal pandemic and to personally enrich himself further, and then trying to draw people out of a progressive state to a far more regressive one that lacks the intellectual infrastructure that he previously profited off of and requires to operate his business.

    I'd call Disney a futurist, but it's clear that he was a bit too starry-eyed and politically juvenile to truly service futurism. But Musk is too shrewd for that, hence why I ascribe his personality more to a sort of self-interested and cold Zuckerberg.
    If I had to compare Musk to any historical figure, the one I think comes closest is Howard Hughes. Same kind of wealth, same kind of fuck-it attitude to his business ventures, same kind of wide spread of interests, though Hughes tended more towards "weird eccentricity" where Musk leans more into "douchebro".

    He's still going to be one of the most important figures of the early 21st century, in the history books of the future. Greatness does not imply goodness.

    On this particular point, though, it's definitely "douchebro" territory. You want to convince people to move to Texas to work for you? Offer bigger bonuses/better pay/better incentives. Don't whine about it in the media. Put your money where your mouth is, Musk. As much as I hate capitalism, that's how the game is played; put up or shut up.

  5. #85
    Brewmaster Sorensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    CormLand
    Posts
    1,330
    Elon is daddy I might move down there just for funzies.
    Driving on Sunshine.

    PM for Tesla referral code.

  6. #86
    The Undying cubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    31,457
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    Because he literally is a shrewd businessman and a slick, intellectual talker. Like he tried to oust the CEO of CitySearch (and failed), he succeeded in gaining that CEO in early Confinity days. He lasted like a year and a few months, before the board ousted because his business strategy sucked.
    The board must have brought him on for reasons other than shrewd/slick. Or are you seeing evidence that was the only reason?

    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    From the very beginning he had Tom Mueller, an actual engineer, in SpaceX, and other people actually designing the rocket. He was, as far as I can tell, a Product Architect at Tesla (the equivalent of a CPO/CTO), which isn't an engineering position but a BUSINESS position, and I can't find any reference of him actually having a hand in designing the Falcon 1 or anything since. I don't dispute that he has some very talented people working at SpaceX. What I dispute is that his visionary "genius" actually translated into the actual rockets launched, instead of his business acumen, which is built on.....well, coming from a very privileged background.
    We can't have a conversation about this if you're going to ignore the objective fact that Musk is an engineer. He literally worked on the design of Falcon 1. And you dispute his business acumen as more of a product of his privileged background? Really? Like Trump's business acumen? Having the background means almost nothing when translating it to successful business ventures.
    Musk is the richest person in the world, taking or being an integral part of three separate companies all with billion dollar valuations. That's not because of his daddy. It's really bothersome when people cast aside their intellectual honesty because they just subjectively hate someone.

    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    Does he actually have that P.E. designation? Oh, and that link you cited states that the requirements are a relevant degree in engineering in some states, and where they aren't required, you're required to have relevant work engineering experience. I don't know if Elon Musk could even qualify to sit for this exam. As far as I can tell, his B.A. in Physics isn't accredited by the EAC, who determines eligiblity for the P.E. exam.
    No, but did I say he did? You said you don't think anyone can be an engineer without having an engineering degree. And the EAC disagrees with your statement. Objectively. You are flat out wrong about this. Period.

    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    I don't think I hate Musk. I just see him for what he is - an unscrupulous businessman. And not a particularly moral one at that (if such a businessman exists). He ranks, imo, in the category of the Mark Zuckerbergs of the world. That's my problem with his personality - that it translates into his morality, and his direct business interests intersect with an important, eschatological step for humanity, which he would undoubtably try and corrupt to the best of his ability. I could give a shit about Apple or Facebook because ultimately those are products which you choose to engage in or not. FB has become harmful in its ubiquitousness as an all-encompassing news source with massive reach, and Zuckerberg's moral ineptitude has directly affected the shitshow which has resulted from that, which I know you know. I see the same course for human space expansion and Musk, but to much direr consequences, because said expansion is the next step of human civilization.
    I never said you had to like the man, but you clearly do hate him, because of his personality - and that hatred has clearly affected your otherwise sound judgment. Musk is a successful engineer, businessman, and a genius as well, and now the richest man in the world. That is the very definition of successful - in anyone's book. Oh, and he didn't just make money, he bootstrapped the United States space launch program as well as all the other achievements.

    Is he a douchebag personally? By all accounts I would have to say yes.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    If I had to compare Musk to any historical figure, the one I think comes closest is Howard Hughes. Same kind of wealth, same kind of fuck-it attitude to his business ventures, same kind of wide spread of interests, though Hughes tended more towards "weird eccentricity" where Musk leans more into "douchebro".

    He's still going to be one of the most important figures of the early 21st century, in the history books of the future. Greatness does not imply goodness.

    On this particular point, though, it's definitely "douchebro" territory. You want to convince people to move to Texas to work for you? Offer bigger bonuses/better pay/better incentives. Don't whine about it in the media. Put your money where your mouth is, Musk. As much as I hate capitalism, that's how the game is played; put up or shut up.
    I could not agree more with this entire statement. And the analogy to Howard Hughes is spot on.

    The plea to move to TX is absolutely "douchbro" territory. As I've stated before, I'd love to work for SpaceX, but their hiring practices are awful - for my field, they are offering a 6-month term/temp position, with no guarantee of FTE, and you have to work in person. Fuck that.

  7. #87
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    and that hatred has clearly affected your otherwise sound judgment
    You appear to say this about everyone, and it's kinda nonsense. It basically implies that because we dislike him for X or Y reason (note even "hate", just dislike), we're irrational in our thinking about him. That's not true at all.

    Any more than we could flip the argument around and claim that because you're clearly a huge fan of Musk (very clearly), your otherwise sound judgment is affected.

    It's kinda a nonsense argument on both ends that doesn't actually engage with the content of any of the "what's and why's".

  8. #88
    The Undying cubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    31,457
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    You appear to say this about everyone, and it's kinda nonsense. It basically implies that because we dislike him for X or Y reason (note even "hate", just dislike), we're irrational in our thinking about him. That's not true at all.

    Any more than we could flip the argument around and claim that because you're clearly a huge fan of Musk (very clearly), your otherwise sound judgment is affected.

    It's kinda a nonsense argument on both ends that doesn't actually engage with the content of any of the "what's and why's".
    I don't say this about everyone. I say this about people who can't set aside their personal feelings for someone in an effort to objectively evaluate someone. People's hatred of Musk, rationally or irrationally based, clearly affects their judgment. You can look to eschatological's posts as evidence. He skips all the achievements of Musk, only mentioning the bad parts of otherwise entirely successful ventures.

    And this isn't just this topic - we can see that people's feels for something affect their evaluation of that something in every field. A good proposal for a company could be set aside by a manager because the manager doesn't like the person, regardless of the merits of the proposal. Objective evaluation is constantly clouded by subjective emotions. I'm curious why you would think otherwise.

    Am I objective about Musk? Fuck no. But I recognize and laud his achievements while at the same time acknowledging his personality issues. I'm at least being reasonable about my subjective and objective evaluations.

  9. #89
    Because his bad faith actions clearly are a detriment to an important field of human development. It is important for leaders of important industries to also be moral leaders, otherwise progress becomes plutocracy. Musk is the definition of a technocrat, but he also tends to be a plutarch. I don't deny his business acumen (especially his vertical integration of the space industry, which was a needed shake up), I just question his character, and why people hero worship him.

    It's kind of ironic, because he's acting like the Thomas Edison to the man his own company is named after, Nikolai Tesla. Edison was a huge douchebag, and created a cult of personality around him, and drove Tesla into the ground. Tesla - the far better man, and smarter too - was relegated to the history books for almost two centuries. And Edison's ego prevented true innovation past what he had personally invented (while not crediting anyone he worked with). He was not a collaborator. And that stifled cheap(er), (more) efficient power alternatives for a century and a half (obviously electricity was cheaper and more efficient than, say, coal).

  10. #90
    Merely a Setback JohnBrown1917's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Обединени социалистически щати на Америка
    Posts
    27,386
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    I don't say this about everyone. I say this about people who can't set aside their personal feelings for someone in an effort to objectively evaluate someone. People's hatred of Musk, rationally or irrationally based, clearly affects their judgment. You can look to eschatological's posts as evidence. He skips all the achievements of Musk, only mentioning the bad parts of otherwise entirely successful ventures.

    And this isn't just this topic - we can see that people's feels for something affect their evaluation of that something in every field. A good proposal for a company could be set aside by a manager because the manager doesn't like the person, regardless of the merits of the proposal. Objective evaluation is constantly clouded by subjective emotions. I'm curious why you would think otherwise.

    Am I objective about Musk? Fuck no. But I recognize and laud his achievements while at the same time acknowledging his personality issues. I'm at least being reasonable about my subjective and objective evaluations.
    Ah, yes, such classic personality issues like Union busting and treating your workers like shit.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    Because his bad faith actions clearly are a detriment to an important field of human development. It is important for leaders of important industries to also be moral leaders, otherwise progress becomes plutocracy. Musk is the definition of a technocrat, but he also tends to be a plutarch. I don't deny his business acumen (especially his vertical integration of the space industry, which was a needed shake up), I just question his character, and why people hero worship him.

    It's kind of ironic, because he's acting like the Thomas Edison to the man his own company is named after, Nikolai Tesla. Edison was a huge douchebag, and created a cult of personality around him, and drove Tesla into the ground. Tesla - the far better man, and smarter too - was relegated to the history books for almost two centuries. And Edison's ego prevented true innovation past what he had personally invented (while not crediting anyone he worked with). He was not a collaborator. And that stifled cheap(er), (more) efficient power alternatives for a century and a half (obviously electricity was cheaper and more efficient than, say, coal).
    It should be noted that unlike Edison, Musk has not actually invented anything.
    Quote Originally Posted by Milchshake View Post
    it’s mostly a syndicalist fantasy that “the workers” are going to rise up, which is disconnected from the fact that “the workers” are your racist uncle and jerk co-workers who you don’t like.
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivanstone View Post
    The election has passed and 58 million working class Americans stood up and proved that they are in fact your racist uncle and jerk co-workers.
    They really can't help but show disdain for the working class.

  11. #91
    The Undying cubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    31,457
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    Because his bad faith actions clearly are a detriment to an important field of human development. It is important for leaders of important industries to also be moral leaders, otherwise progress becomes plutocracy. Musk is the definition of a technocrat, but he also tends to be a plutarch. I don't deny his business acumen (especially his vertical integration of the space industry, which was a needed shake up), I just question his character, and why people hero worship him.

    It's kind of ironic, because he's acting like the Thomas Edison to the man his own company is named after, Nikolai Tesla. Edison was a huge douchebag, and created a cult of personality around him, and drove Tesla into the ground. Tesla - the far better man, and smarter too - was relegated to the history books for almost two centuries. And Edison's ego prevented true innovation past what he had personally invented (while not crediting anyone he worked with). He was not a collaborator. And that stifled cheap(er), (more) efficient power alternatives for a century and a half (obviously electricity was cheaper and more efficient than, say, coal).
    I hope it doesn't seem inconsistent, but I agree with everything you've said above. I shifted from hero worship to admiring fan after the pedo accusation came about.

    In your Edison/Tesla comparison, is there a Tesla right now to Musk's Edison?

  12. #92
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    I hope it doesn't seem inconsistent, but I agree with everything you've said above. I shifted from hero worship to admiring fan after the pedo accusation came about.

    In your Edison/Tesla comparison, is there a Tesla right now to Musk's Edison?
    I mean, the guys at JPL have been doing this stuff for decades? Musk brought in a business sense into building these rockets with vertical integration, and JPL is stuck working under old government models, but they've been at the forefront of space engineering since the Apollo program.

    The problem with any government project is that since no one makes a profit off it, no one is trying to maximize revenue (which results from business practices like Musk has implemented, which in turn leads to making these rockets more inexpensive). And because government has to think of public safety, they have 100 person teams to operate a launch when Musk claims (and probably does) do launch logistics with about a dozen people. Government over-engineers, in essence, to multiple redundancies. And this always leads to bloat, at least in terms of expenses. And it slows things down.

    But JPL has been doing amazing stuff for literal decades.

  13. #93
    The Unstoppable Force PACOX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    ██████
    Posts
    23,078
    Quote Originally Posted by cubby View Post
    Gotcha - and thanks for the source.


    Why did they bring Musk back as CEO if he was, according to you, such a douchebag. And Musk was still a part of the success of Paypal.

    Its literally the same line of reasoning why companies licensed the Trump name (before his presidency) even though a lot of his ventures fell flat. Imagine and name recognition do a lot when it comes to trying to bring in business/investors.

    Its okay to say he has made some good business moves while being a dick head.

    His real accomplishment to the space industry is that he is willing to take work no one else wants. And his rocket engines aren't too bad either. As far as reusable vehicles, rocket science cracked that code decades ago. There's not much use for them in the long run though. They can help with short term projects like the ISS, you can speculate on long-term uses, there's no actual long term work for reusable rockets right now and people dont want a space shuttle on their hands where you have impressive hardware that isn't used enough to justify costs.

    A nice study razer is great but if you are only shaving a few times a month disposable is better even if the price per unit is higher. But Musk is great at creating demand where there wasn't any. Even if that demand comes from himself, see Starlink.
    Last edited by PACOX; 2021-04-05 at 01:46 AM.

    Resident Cosplay Progressive

  14. #94
    The Undying cubby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    the Quiet Room
    Posts
    31,457
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    I mean, the guys at JPL have been doing this stuff for decades? Musk brought in a business sense into building these rockets with vertical integration, and JPL is stuck working under old government models, but they've been at the forefront of space engineering since the Apollo program.

    The problem with any government project is that since no one makes a profit off it, no one is trying to maximize revenue (which results from business practices like Musk has implemented, which in turn leads to making these rockets more inexpensive). And because government has to think of public safety, they have 100 person teams to operate a launch when Musk claims (and probably does) do launch logistics with about a dozen people. Government over-engineers, in essence, to multiple redundancies. And this always leads to bloat, at least in terms of expenses. And it slows things down.

    But JPL has been doing amazing stuff for literal decades.
    And I wasn't trying to take away from anything that JPL or NASA has done. They spent the hundreds of billions to perfect launch systems, get to the moon, build the space station. Musk took that industry and streamlined it to make space access inexpensive - and he was the first private entity to do it. Then, he perfect rockets landing after launch, which further reduced space access costs by an order of magnitude. And Musk is likely to beat everyone else to Mars as well. The Artimes Project rocket is just horrific, with one successful launch in 15 years - the same amount of time, interestingly, in which Musk has made all his milestones.

    I love JPL and NASA. But yeah, they certainly overengineered the shit out of everything. I read somewhere back that the reason we couldn't expand on the moon landings (i.e. build a base, etc), outside of funding issues, it because the entire Moon Landing Programs was designed around just that, landing and getting back - with nothing in the hopper for expansion. Not a criticism of course, just an observation.

    Weird but related question for you - have you read Seveneves?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by PACOX View Post
    Its literally the same line of reasoning why companies licensed the Trump name (before his presidency) even though a lot of his ventures fell flat. Imagine and name recognition do a lot when it comes to trying to bring in business/investors.

    Its okay to say he has made some good business moves while being a dick head.
    I agree in general, but of course would say that most of Musk's ventures have been wildly successful.

    Agreed as well, of course, I would say that those ventures were slightly better than "good". He might be a dickhead, but he's also the richest person in the world - and you don't get that title with just "good" ventures.

    But yeah, we're on the same page.

  15. #95
    Quote Originally Posted by eschatological View Post
    I mean, the guys at JPL have been doing this stuff for decades? Musk brought in a business sense into building these rockets with vertical integration, and JPL is stuck working under old government models, but they've been at the forefront of space engineering since the Apollo program.

    The problem with any government project is that since no one makes a profit off it, no one is trying to maximize revenue (which results from business practices like Musk has implemented, which in turn leads to making these rockets more inexpensive). And because government has to think of public safety, they have 100 person teams to operate a launch when Musk claims (and probably does) do launch logistics with about a dozen people. Government over-engineers, in essence, to multiple redundancies. And this always leads to bloat, at least in terms of expenses. And it slows things down.

    But JPL has been doing amazing stuff for literal decades.
    JPL and Caltech are two major factors why SpaceX is headquartered in Hawthorne instead of the Bay are like all of his other companies. Without JPL, SpaceX would not be where it is now.

    NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory is helping SpaceX get to Mars, here’s why that’s good for everyone

    This data was from 4 years ago. It breaks down Space X hiring for engineers and scientists. Unfortunately LinkedIn has since removed this query feature.

    California Institute of Technology: 323
    University of Southern California: 134
    University of California, Los Angeles: 97
    Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University: 85
    Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 80
    Stanford University: 70
    Purdue University: 66
    Georgia Institute of Technology: 62
    California State University-Long Beach: 61
    Cornell University: 54

  16. #96
    Titan
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    America's Hat
    Posts
    13,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Haidaes View Post
    Typical for any tech industry. The bosses always complain that they don't have enough talent and beg for more or advocate for letting more in, when in reality the talent exists and they just don't want to pay them, so they always crave more to have it easier with wage dumping.
    Pretty much every corpo scumbag CEO does the same thing. They whine about the quality of workers by paying welfare wages for high quality talent. Then they have to import that talent because only immigrants are willing to work for a lot less than what people with their skills are worth. It's just another corporate welfare scam in an attempt to enrich the pocket books of the wealthy while we can't do anything about it.

  17. #97
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorensen View Post
    Elon is daddy I might move down there just for funzies.
    Have you actually ever looked into the guy? I am not sure if it's the drugs or the lack of sleep but Elon Musk is a horrible human being, I seriously feel sorry for the people in his life but I guess its the price of wealth.

  18. #98
    Brewmaster Sorensen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    CormLand
    Posts
    1,330
    Quote Originally Posted by Draco-Onis View Post
    Have you actually ever looked into the guy? I am not sure if it's the drugs or the lack of sleep but Elon Musk is a horrible human being, I seriously feel sorry for the people in his life but I guess its the price of wealth.
    Name one human who's not horrible.

    We're all horrible ok.
    Driving on Sunshine.

    PM for Tesla referral code.

  19. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by Sorensen View Post
    Name one human who's not horrible.

    We're all horrible ok.
    ROFLMAO

    OF course you are the same kind of person as let's say a serial killer

    What kind of twisted fucked up logic do you go by? Do you see Adolf Hitler and shrug your head and say well we are all horrible smh.

  20. #100
    Titan
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    America's Hat
    Posts
    13,266
    @cubby

    I can't say I've met many engineers who actually have engineering degrees that are great at their jobs or visionaries. In fact, most of them in my sector are all a bunch of incompetent idiots as far as I am concerned. And age isn't selective when it comes to how often they suck at their jobs. And I work in automotive, which is a lot easier then aerospace engineering. I don't think that having an engineering degree automatically qualifies someone as being a capable engineer. Usually it takes years or decades of experience to hone the skills needed to become great at a job anyway. Whether people think Musk is qualified or not isn't relevant since he has so many people working for him that are just as capable and have focused knowledge of the things his companies need. To me, he is more the overseer that has a lot of the final say.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •