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

Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 254 posts

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#211

Post by peteradio »

drusepth wrote: post #167
peteradio wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally do not believe you. I'm not saying he's an unsuccessful business man. Hes literally not a rocket scientist. What kind of silly nonsense is that?

He's talked rocket design specifics on many occasions and "built his own rocket" according to Vector Launch CEO Jim Cantrell [1]: >He borrowed all of my college texts on rocket propulsion when we first started working together in 2001. We also hired as many of my colleagues in the rocket and spacecraft business that were willing to consult with him. ... I found out later that he was talking to a bunch of other people…

So I really am not going tp be convinced here. Just cause this guy's ego is so huge that he goes and pokes his nose in places he doesn't belong doesn't make him a contributer. I don't care what his fluffer Jim says.

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#212

Post by Fuckyourself »

blueboo wrote: post #112
zmarty wrote: post #49

Bloomberg conveniently left out the reason why "Tripp has since changed lawyers". It's because he published on Twitter a trove of confidential internal Tesla documents. Once he did that his lawyer knew they had no case anymore. Tripp only deleted the documents after his lawyer was able to get in touch with him. This showed that he did in fact access internal Tesla systems and he did in fact exfiltrate this informatio…

Hah. I knew the top comment would be an Actually, In Defense of Persecuting a Whistleblower.

"Whistleblower" - The guy is a lose cannon. He's only a whistleblower if his claims were actually true. At this point I cannot see why anyone would believe his ridiculous claims because they made no sense and were contradicting.

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#213

Post by hitekker »

SilasX wrote: post #113
rayiner wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Bloomberg conveniently left out the reason why "Tripp has since changed lawyers". It's because he published on Twitter a trove of confidential internal Tesla documents. Once he did that his lawyer knew they had no case anymore. Tripp only deleted the documents after his lawyer was able to get in touch with him. This showed that he did in fact access internal Tesla systems and he did in fact exfiltrate this informat…

Agreed, and these kinds of criticisms always get me eye-rolling. "On the one hand, Megacorp committed . But on the other hand, Whistleblower stole internal documents proving them. So, you have to accept, there's wrongdoing on both sides."

A succinct description of false equivalence. Quite nice.

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#214

Post by DuskStar »

gamblor956 wrote: post #160
DuskStar wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In general, a lawyer saying something with the form "After $client did $actions without consulting us, we recommended that $client take $actions to do damage control, and they did so. We no longer represent $client" is about as far from a good sign as you can get. Now, he might still have a case. But I'm pretty sure the above is lawyerspeak for "client fucked up, and we don't want to deal with them anymore".

No, lawyers are now more willing to fire clients that do stuff without consulting them first. Trump has taught them it's not worth the hassle. It says nothing about the merit's of the clients case, but usually says volumes about what a pain in the ass it is to work with a client like that.

> It says nothing about the merit's of the clients case

Even if it doesn't say anything about the actual merit of the case, it probably says something about their chances of winning. (Since the client probably won't be able to stop their self-destructive behavior)

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#215

Post by JumpCrisscross »

FireBeyond wrote: post #171
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> he did in fact access internal Tesla systems and he did in fact exfiltrate this information Both sides can be true. He could have stolen Tesla’s data. He could have also thought he was whistleblowing while doing so. Either way, it doesn’t justify calling in a fake bomb threat.

> Either way, it doesn’t justify calling in a fake bomb threat. Police investigated (it was a shooting incident, not a bomb threat), found no credible basis, asked to interview a witness, who Tesla declined to make available. Why so sure he made a threat?

> Why so sure he made a threat?

Sorry, ambiguous wording. I don't allege he called in a threat. Tesla publicly stated he made violent threats. The police refused to corroborate that claim. Tesla's statement was unjustified.

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#216

Post by FireBeyond »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #215
FireBeyond wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Either way, it doesn’t justify calling in a fake bomb threat. Police investigated (it was a shooting incident, not a bomb threat), found no credible basis, asked to interview a witness, who Tesla declined to make available. Why so sure he made a threat?

> Why so sure he made a threat? Sorry, ambiguous wording. I don't allege he called in a threat. Tesla publicly stated he made violent threats. The police refused to corroborate that claim. Tesla's statement was unjustified.

"Tesla publicly stated he made violent threats. The police refused to corroborate that claim." ... because Tesla "declined" to make the witness/es who received those threats available to the police.

That's a bit more contextual.

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#217

Post by FireBeyond »

rjplatte wrote: post #206
stcredzero wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ever-impartial Wikileaks? Sure, let's jump right on that... I don't think such a site has to be that impartial. I'll just settle for not evil. It would be best if they had competitors.

They're indiscriminate, so I tend to "trust" them. They don't really care what they put out, AFAIK.

Unless it's material detrimental to the RNC after they've met with Donald Trump Jr, of course...

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#218

Post by raslah »

noir_lord wrote: post #182
raslah wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A site like this is going to be full of tech proselytes who still live and breathe the devine tech CEO BS from the last decade. It’s to be expected.

I was a massive admirer of Musk (though not a vocal one) but his behaviour over the last year or two has been pretty shit. The whole calling someone a paedophile without cause thing was the final straw. Now I just think he's a talented narcissistic arsehole.

Yes, I think that was kind of the beginning of the end. That one event sort of puts the subsequent behavior in the proper frame. Had that never happened, one might be forgiven for overlooking this situation.

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#219

Post by vbuwivbiu »

iamdbtoo wrote: post #207
vbuwivbiu wrote: post #196

I'm going to separate Musk from the other asshole billionairs, for now, because I truely think there's a higher purpose here that his companies are helping bring about. I think his heart's in the right place too. Something happens to people when they become that rich and are surrounded by sycophants. I wish he had respect for his staff and treated them well, same with Bezos but Tesla is more useful to the world than…

"I think his heart's in the right place too." Trying to ruin someone's life is having your heart in the right place?

ahem...apart from that...I was referring to the higher-purpose of accelerating the much-needed transition to electric vehicles - it's kind of obvious that was my meaning from the context - I'm saying, yes this is shitty, but look at the bigger picture.

Re: Elon Musk Tried to Destroy a Tesla Whistleblower

#220

Post by m463 »

joekrill wrote: post #102
rchaud wrote: post #40

"Later that day, Tripp heard from the sheriff’s department in Storey County, Nev. Tesla’s security department had passed a tip to police. An anonymous caller had contacted the company to say Tripp was planning a mass shooting at the Gigafactory." Think of how this could have played out under different circumstances. We've already had numerous "swatting" incidents where innocent bystanders were hurt or killed. The mor…

I don't understand how we're jumping to the conclusion that Musk is responsible for this. No one seems to be claiming the "anonymous call" was made up, as far as I can tell. For all we know Tripp made the call himself to make himself look like more a victim. It's no less plausible than suggesting Musk made the call himself, or had someone make it on his behalf.

I can't help but think of the "joe job"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_job

Post reply on HN