Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 542 posts

Re: Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

#301

Post by rlau26 »

Paul_S wrote: post #278
iMuzz wrote: post #2

Question/Answer I found interesting: Sama> How should someone figure out how they should be useful? Elon> Whatever this thing is you are trying to create.. What would be the utility delta compared to the current state of the art times how many people it would affect?

What about all the people working in marketing, software patent lawyers, drug dealers? You want them to quit their jobs? --- Let me make my point in a less obtuse way. Most people make decisions about their careers based on opportunity and maximising profit. No one becomes a footballer to make the world a better place. This would all be fine as long as the capitalist market rewarded choices that make the world a bett…

It's a team effort, not necessarily an individual effort.

The people in marketing are the ones helping to bring the positive utility-delta stuff to light, so the utility delta actually happens.

Re: Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

#302

Post by unexistance »

kareemsabri wrote: post #281
nichochar wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true throughout history. Publicly selfless heroes (Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Elon Musk) often have to "sacrifice" (is it conscious?) their private selves, to be able to be the incarnation of what their work is. It bothers a lot of people, personally I am fine with it and would make the same decision. I think it's a personality thing.

Elon Musk is worth $12B. He's a businessman. He lives in a giant mansion. Ghandi owned like 5 things. I'm not knocking Musk, but this is a strange interpretation of a very successful capitalist.

I'd say impactful, since apparently success only means rich to some people :D

Re: Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

#303

Post by reubenmorais »

leesalminen wrote: post #289
Paul_S wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about all the people working in marketing, software patent lawyers, drug dealers? You want them to quit their jobs? --- Let me make my point in a less obtuse way. Most people make decisions about their careers based on opportunity and maximising profit. No one becomes a footballer to make the world a better place. This would all be fine as long as the capitalist market rewarded choices that make the world a bett…

'Tis an interesting point. > Drug dealers Perhaps drug dealers (and their suppliers) can implement testing, QA and proper labeling. I'm not totally sure about software patent lawyers. But, deep down, my gut says that if software patent law wasn't to crappy, perhaps the occupation would be perceived in a better light. Maybe they could push for reform from the inside? On the whole, I think every industry can do some in…

> Maybe they could push for reform from the inside?

Here's an example, Mozilla's Open Software Patent License, trying to do some reform from the inside: https://www.mozilla.org/about/policy/patents/

Re: Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

#304

Post by lutorm »

dpc_pw wrote: post #258

Relevant: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-06/how-elon-musk-used-... According to this, the answer to "How to Build the Future" is "make the story big, and get free money from government". Note: I have not fact-checked it or anything. Just find it interesting and relevant, so don't expect me to argue about it, and don't flag me as a troll.

I literally have no idea what they're talking about.

SpaceX is providing the US government with cargo supply services at a fraction of the cost of previous alternatives and that's "free money from the government"?

Read all about it: http://www.nasa.gov/content/nasa-releases-cots-final-report

Re: Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

#305

Post by [deleted] »

Applejinx wrote: post #230
rdiddly wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are rational, non-envy-based reasons to object to all the hero-worship. For example, all the things "he" did above were actually done by big teams of people working together, but Elon gets all the credit. He deserves credit, but not all of it. And let's not forget the millions of people who worked to generate wealth that could be transferred via, and taxed by, PayPal, accruing the fortune with which to start al…

But that's the nature of network effects. Jaron Lanier's spoken eloquently about that, and Elon Musk exemplifies it. Whether he likes it or not, he is the figurehead and the focal point. Because he's willing to be that, it builds on itself. Because he's in a valuation-driven growth-only economy on which his businesses depend, it's in his interest to serve as this focal point, and because 'visionary' is an appealing s…

[deleted]

Re: Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

#306

Post by danhak »

misterbishop wrote: post #208
Applejinx wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You see, you've already lost me because nearly everything worthwhile has been funded by public sector money, notably space and the Internet. To my mind, claiming to be 'fiscally conservative' may be a good tactical claim as a CEO of rapidly expanding publically held companies, but in practical terms it's a terrible idea. If Elon is turning public money into technology, I'm enthusiastic about that. I'm sure there are…

Two points for your consideration: #1: We clearly have the resources to publicly invest in innovative technologies like electric cars, AI and space travel. So why must these investments go directly into the hands of a few individuals to make all the final decisions (and who have bad habits of not paying their workers btw)? Why can't we make these investments through democratically accountable teams, perhaps via some…

The government investments do not "go directly into the hands of a few individuals..."

The Federal tax credits for plug-in cars, for example, are available to all automakers (or more accurately, the customers of all automakers). You could start an electric car company today and your customers would be eligible for the credit. Nissan Motor Co. is the #1 beneficiary of the tax credits to date.

All automakers were eligible for the DOE's ATVM loan program. Tesla received (and paid back) about $500 million under the auspices of the program. Ford received $5.9 billion and Nissan received $1.4 billion. Neither Ford nor Nissan have paid back the loan.

The Federal government bailed out GM and Chrysler to the tune of about $20 billion.

We've spent trillions of dollars to secure our interests in the middle east, which keeps oil supplies stable to the benefit of ICE automakers.

People always complain about government subsidies when there are articles about Elon Musk, but it is hardly ever even-handed.

Re: Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

#307

Post by biofox »

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #272
mikepk wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I admit that mathematical science is a good thing. But excessive devotion to it is a bad thing. If we evolved a race of Isaac Newtons, that would not be progress. For the price Newton had to pay for being a supreme intellect was that he was incapable of friendship, love, fatherhood, and many other desirable things. As a man he was a failure; as a monster he was superb." -- Aldus Huxley

In Mark Manson's new book[0] he talks about how humans can excel at very few things, often barely one, and that "being a good person" for lack of a better phrase counts as one. It seems obvious in hindsight, but struck me because I hadn't thought of it that way before. (The book is incredible, by the way. I've already read it twice, just like Derek Sivers. Recommend it highly.) [0]: https://markmanson.net/books/subtl…

I haven't read the book, but this doesn't seem to fit with what's known about general intelligence, nor the examples of polymaths from the renaissance period.

I suspect the causes are societal, from the constraints placed on our time and freedom to explore and become well rounded.

Re: Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

#308

Post by [deleted] »

jsmthrowaway wrote: post #272
mikepk wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I admit that mathematical science is a good thing. But excessive devotion to it is a bad thing. If we evolved a race of Isaac Newtons, that would not be progress. For the price Newton had to pay for being a supreme intellect was that he was incapable of friendship, love, fatherhood, and many other desirable things. As a man he was a failure; as a monster he was superb." -- Aldus Huxley

In Mark Manson's new book[0] he talks about how humans can excel at very few things, often barely one, and that "being a good person" for lack of a better phrase counts as one. It seems obvious in hindsight, but struck me because I hadn't thought of it that way before. (The book is incredible, by the way. I've already read it twice, just like Derek Sivers. Recommend it highly.) [0]: https://markmanson.net/books/subtl…

[deleted]

Re: Elon Musk on How to Build the Future

#310

Post by muninn_ »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #297
Paul_S wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me make my point in a less obtuse way. Most people make decisions about their careers based on opportunity and maximising profit. No one becomes a footballer to make the world a better place. This would all be fine as long as the capitalist market rewarded choices that make the world a better place. Obviously it does not and it's not the fault of a footballer that we as a civilisation choose to channel our availa…

Free markets are the problem, not the solution. You're not going to get much strategic planetary intelligence out of a system designed to maximise short-term profit. The absolute best you can hope for is the occasional individual like Musk who takes a longer view. Politics - which includes economics - is a much bigger challenge than AI. We've completely transformed our understanding of science and technology, but our…

Hmm that doesn't seem to make sense. Free markets (which include the vast majority of countries on the planet) enable people to create wealth. Maybe some sort of mix of a planet-wide initiative and the normal free markets we have would make sense. Calling free markets "the problem" doesn't really do anything for anybody.
Post reply on HN