Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year • Hacker News Board

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#281

Post by wilsonnb3 » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:30 PM UTC

tomhoward wrote: post #37

But, he added, “if you have anyone who can do a better job, please let me know. They can have the job. Is there someone who can do the job better? They can have the reins right now.” I think this hits at the crux of the issue around the performance/behaviour of Musk and other leaders of hugely ambitious companies. And I think it highlights the importance of thinking about what kinds of people it will take to lead the…

> Would we rather that Musk had just never founded Tesla and SpaceX, that the world didn't have any companies doing what those companies are trying to do, and that we were left to be content with the previous status quo in the automotive and space industries?

People have a serious messiah complex when it comes to Musk. Had he never been born, the automotive industry would still be moving towards electric cars. The first Prius predates Tesla by six years, and hybrid cars have done far more than Tesla has to push the industry in the direction of electric vehicles.

SpaceX has done far more than Tesla to push the rocket industry towards reusable launch systems but even then, had SpaceX never existed another company would have developed one within 5-10 years anyways.

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#282

Post by tomp » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:30 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #265

tomp wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're so special that they both completely revolutionized their respective industries. What makes them even more special, is that neither made any big technological breakthrough. All the technology has been available for years (decades?), just not productionized. Which tells you that the "major companies" in both industries were literally sitting on their asses, enjoying their oligopolistic/monopolistic profits and…

The moralizing is unwarranted. Tesla, for example, happened when it did because of several convergent phenomena: 1) Increasingly more expensive gas and more rigorous fuel-consumption standards. 2) Massive increase in lithium ion battery production from consumer electronics; 3) A willingness of VCs to bankroll years of massive losses; 4) A federal program of offering massive subsidies to electric cars. These things di…

1) Oil was pretty expensive since 2005. 2) Everyone could capitalize on that. 3) Existing big car companies could finance R&D themselves. 4) According to Wikipedia, incentives started around 2011, way after Tesla was funded and probably before other car manufacturers started moving.

The fact remains that none of the existing car manufacturers decided to even try to compete with Tesla until it was painfully obvious that Tesla's going to "make it" (i.e. Model S) and that consumers love their electric cars.

That happened about 5 or so years ago. Not 10 years ago. Not 15 years ago. It happened because of Tesla/Musk, and would likely be very much delayed if it wasn't for him.

They had a chance to improve technology, satisfy consumer demand (Apple showed a decade ago that consumers don't know what they want) and help save the planet, but they didn't. Shame on them.

Edit: I don't want to be argumentative, I think we mostly agree. I'm just saying that the rest of the companies all missed a huge market opportunity, same as I keep saying for all computer companies that make shittier laptops than Apple...

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#283

Post by jnbiche » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:31 PM UTC

tomhoward wrote: post #131

skrebbel wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're right. But I know many people who went through burnouts and came out better - kept everything that made them great but lost a little of the obsessive edge. Musk at 95% intensity would still be a fabulous captain of industry. Maybe he'll actually change for the better because of all this.

I agree with that: it's been my own experience of enduring severe burnout and coming out the other side in much better shape. That's what underpins my point of view on this: if we were better at supporting talented-but-flawed people through personal transformation instead treating them with hatred and ridicule every time they misstep, we could have more great leaders and more great companies.

> I agree with that: it's been my own experience of enduring severe burnout and coming out the other side in much better shape.

Just for an anecdotal counterpoint, I endured severe burnout and ruined my health to the point of almost dying. I'm still struggling to regain my health 3 years later.

To be fair, it's not 100% sure that the burnout caused my health issues (multiple pancreatitis attacks and major relapse of a dormant neurological condition), but some doctors said it was likely that stress had contributed. Personally, I'm certain that the two are connected.

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#284

Post by kamaal » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:31 PM UTC

lylecubed wrote: post #196

tomhoward wrote: post #37

But, he added, “if you have anyone who can do a better job, please let me know. They can have the job. Is there someone who can do the job better? They can have the reins right now.” I think this hits at the crux of the issue around the performance/behaviour of Musk and other leaders of hugely ambitious companies. And I think it highlights the importance of thinking about what kinds of people it will take to lead the…

> Do we actually want Tesla and SpaceX to fail? There are billions of dollars invested in Tesla's demise through shorts. Yes, quite a few people need Tesla to fail. A lot of those people also own media companies. Musk isn't being hyperbolic when he says the short sellers "are desperately pushing a narrative that will possibly result in Tesla’s destruction." > what kinds of people it will take to lead the next generat…

>>So why didn't Jobs do a better job of finding and cultivating a successor?

Because people aren't exactly replaceable like spare parts. If your biggest edge is a person, and the unique value they bring through their work. Then its almost impossible to replace them.

Apple is still one thing. I think something like Amazon will be far harder to imagine without Jeff Bezos.

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#285

Post by ohitsdom » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:32 PM UTC

aws_ls wrote: post #242

Nasrudith wrote: post #186

Really Elon Musk has struck me as honestly in need of psychiatric help - not in a derogatory way but a sincere one. Between the outbursts, shortsighted impulsive decisions, and well being CEO of so many different companies at once it sort of resembles some combination of ADHD and Bipolar.

I think, the problem is just easy access to twitter. We have seen so many downfalls on Twitter, due to irresponsible tweeting, haven't we? I think, its just that. Before the "pedo" tweet, I never felt, any problem with his tweeting. But now, this is the second big gaffe. A twitter buffer feature, could have avoided both issues. But at the same time, I won't like him to delete his account. Kind of enjoy his tweets - a…

Not sure a buffer feature helps when he says he didn't regret his "funding secured" tweet. It may have prevented his tweet about the diver, but it's not clear he realized it was a problem until there was significant public backlash (which feedback wouldn't be present in some buffer).

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#286

Post by maxerickson » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:32 PM UTC

that_jojo wrote: post #241

fabizeid wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it have to be the current version of Musk to be a better version of Musk? Why can't we consider that Musk or his type was instrumental to launch Tesla but at this point a different person is better fit to grow it? Maybe skills needed to sustain a company might be different than the skills needed to launch it.

Completely just to play devil's advocate, here: When has a major innovative company ever done better after ousting a visionary but perhaps somewhat toxic founder? Maybe we could look at Uber, but it's too soon to tell. And The new management there seems earnest, but I'm not sure they're looking so hot from an actual business perspective.

I think if you want anyone to even try to answer your question you have to list all the companies that qualify as major and innovative.

Otherwise someone responds with an example and you just say that it doesn't count.

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#287

Post by rayiner » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:33 PM UTC

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #277

rayiner wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Toyota offered an electric version of its RAV4, an extremely popular crossover SUV, a decade before the Tesla roadster came out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_RAV4_EV . But in 1997, gas was cheap and the government wasn't subsidizing EVs to the tune of $7,500-$10,000. It's hard to say what would've happened in a hypothetical timeline. But Tesla didn't invent the underlying technology, the traditional car maker…

A RAV4 would not (did not) capture the public imagination like the Tesla Roadster did. Like it or not, marketing was a huge part of the EV success. And Tesla did that marketing, not the other car companies, which seem culturally incapable of celebrating an EV's performance or coolness.

If marketing EVs as "cool" was "a huge part of the EV success," you'd see other car manufacturers trying to ride that wave by engaging in similar marketing efforts. But you see the opposite. Nissan, Toyota, Chevy, BMW, are all mainly focused on "cute and practical."

People here in suburban Maryland don't give a shit about high performance, "cool," cars. But they love RAV4s, and Nissan Rogues, and Honda CR-Vs. Each of those models sells more units every year than Tesla has sold in its entire history.

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#288

Post by maeln » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:33 PM UTC

yAnonymous wrote: post #266

maeln wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you really work 120h/weeks, it means that you are left with 48h per week for sleeping/eating/doing other things. Unless he included those hours in the work hour, 48h in 7 days is just not sustainable, it's barely enough just for sleep.

Almost 7 hours of sleep per night is more than sustainable. There are people who can get along with 5 hours of sleep per night without any impact to their health.

That is assuming that he does just that: working and sleeping. So I guess, the time where he eats and tweet is included in its work hours then.

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#289

Post by e40 » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:34 PM UTC

m23khan wrote: post #261

Edison, Einstein, Steve Jobs, Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk... These guys have changed the World and they all have seriously strange, weird personalities - but they did change the world. Let's learn a lesson over here -- geniuses and industry disrupters are more often than not --- just weird and strange bunch of folks. Hence, learn to respect them and do what you can to make sure they succeed as Human innova…

There is a very good reason for this: to make such an agent of change requires intensity beyond what most humans can endure. I don't think Bezos or Musk or Jobs have/had much of a life outside of work. I think it's also clear they all are/were obsessed with their companies. Obsession and hard work, sustained over a long period of time. People capable of that are few and far between. Add in the luck factor, and it's a miniscule number of people.

Re: Elon Musk Confronts a Fateful Tweet and an ‘Excruciating’ Year

#290

Post by TangoTrotFox » Fri, Aug 17, 2018, 2:36 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #265

tomp wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're so special that they both completely revolutionized their respective industries. What makes them even more special, is that neither made any big technological breakthrough. All the technology has been available for years (decades?), just not productionized. Which tells you that the "major companies" in both industries were literally sitting on their asses, enjoying their oligopolistic/monopolistic profits and…

The moralizing is unwarranted. Tesla, for example, happened when it did because of several convergent phenomena: 1) Increasingly more expensive gas and more rigorous fuel-consumption standards. 2) Massive increase in lithium ion battery production from consumer electronics; 3) A willingness of VCs to bankroll years of massive losses; 4) A federal program of offering massive subsidies to electric cars. These things di…

Your logic does not make sense here. These exact same perks were available to the established automotive industry as well. And on top of all of that they had vastly greater economc resources, infrastructure resources, and even greater talent to draw from as well. It's not like "Musk can have these, but not you guys!" The playing field was not fair, but that's because it was heavily weighted towards established players. That these players failed to achieve anything is a very strong indicator that they were indeed just "sitting on their asses." Consider that Tesla started after, and in part as a response to, GM deciding to recall and destroy their EV1 electric vehicle. As well even your claims of subsidies and consumer price sensitivity work against your argument. Tesla was built on the Roadster. An ultra high end electric vehicle. Somebody paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for a car isn't suddenly going to be swayed by a $10k tax credit.

Finally we can even take things like the federal automotive bailouts. Ford, for instance, took a sub-inflation rate loan of $5.9 billion from the taxpayer, which they unsurprisingly have not paid back. It was supposed to be used to develop fuel efficient vehicles. A literal check for $5.9 billion just blows every point in your list out of the water. Yet, Ford not only dawdled but most recently announced they've cancelled every sedan/car in their line except the Mustang and one upcoming vehicle. That leaves them 90% of their lineup distributed towards trucks, SUVs, and commercial vehicles. And the next time gas prices spike, we can bet they'll come begging for another handout from the taxpayer. Just brilliant business acumen by these guys.