Elon’s Out • Hacker News Board

Re: Elon’s Out

#631

Post by HanaShiratori » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 6:55 AM UTC

thesumofall wrote: post #625

tsimionescu wrote: post #619

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be perhaps plausible for Tesla to be worth more than any other single car company. But it is patently absurd for them to be higher than all other car companies combined. By any possible measure, they are far far smaller, and have far smaller prospects for growth, than the rest of the card industry put together. The only place where Tesla has a lead is in sales of BEVs, where indeed they are selling more than…

Even their sales leadership is eroding (at least looking at global figures). The next biggest three combined (VW, Hyundai-Kia, Stellantis) have sold as many BEV cars as Tesla in 2021. And there are many big players on the following ranks that clearly have the money and willingness to grow https://www.jato.com/the-global-electric-car-sales-2021-in-n... // Edit: Added BEV

> The next biggest three combined (VW, Hyundai-Kia, Stellantis) have sold as many *BEV* cars as Tesla in 2021

ftfy

Re: Elon’s Out

#632

Post by uxcolumbo » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 6:55 AM UTC

nightski wrote: post #106

bmitc wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it's ironic as much as it is either not paying attention or not being honest with the situation. One party being extreme does not make the other party the good party. It just means that one party is extreme, which is a fact. The Democrats are not a paragon of a political party. They are as inefficient, middle of the road moderate, corrupt, etc. as any political party. But the Republicans, or at least a p…

I just do not agree that one party is more extreme than the other, sorry. I also don't believe you are being honest with yourself over the situation either. It's clear you have dug your heels into a particular set of beliefs and have no interest in discussing real solutions (instead just want to play the blame game). Frankly it is just not interesting discussion.

How about these, enabled by Republicans

- womens rights have been thrown back 50 years

- a legitimately won election was almost overturned by a violent mob incited by Trump at the time

Have the Democrats ever incited a mob to violently overturn an election?

The fact that people like Trump, Greene, Boebert and others with extremist and narcissistic values can rise to power / influence points to major systemic failures, which eventually destroys democracy if not stopped.

How do you avoid those destructive people rise to power?

Re: Elon’s Out

#633

Post by sterlind » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 6:56 AM UTC

CSMastermind wrote: post #617

remarkEon wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain this?

Without knowing how much background you have a simple summary would be: A Straddle is a strategy that allows you to bet that a stock's price will change by x% by a certain date. To make money on a straddle you want the stock to go up or down by more than that percentage, the more it changes the better. So if you believe that the matter will be resolved one way or the other by whatever date then you'd want to buy a St…

how do you actually trade complex options like this? E-Trade or Robinhood or something? I'm sure I could get myself in a whole heap of trouble trading options, but it looks fun..

Re: Elon’s Out

#634

Post by inglor_cz » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 7:02 AM UTC

jp57 wrote: post #183

Another hypothesis: Triggering a legal battle in the courts is a delaying technique to push out the acquisition until the economy rebounds (and Tesla and Twitter valuations with it), or until after the 2024 election, because Elon realized that he doesn't actually want to let Trump back onto the platform. (Perhaps because he perfers DeSantis)

What about interim inflation? The US isn't used to high inflation, so inflation is often not baked into contracts. But we are possibly facing a period of high inflation.

Those 44 billion USD may be worth a lot less in 2024 or 2025.

Re: Elon’s Out

#635

Post by uxcolumbo » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 7:04 AM UTC

ethagknight wrote: post #276

I find it amazing that not one of the top comments gives Elon ANY consideration that maybe, just maybe, he has a legitimate case against Twitter. We don’t know what he’s found, what he was told, what he was promised, what changed on Twitter’s side. Some very top level people bailed or were fired shortly after Elon’s acquisition proposal was announced. It sure appears that Elons is just balking, but what is far more l…

Do you have examples of Elon being extremely intelligent?

Re: Elon’s Out

#636

Post by xiphias2 » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 7:15 AM UTC

shalmanese wrote: post #66

xiphias2 wrote: post #11

I don’t understand why we need to make things personal: a multibillionaire with practically unlimited resources is negotiating with a multibillion dollar corporation with practically unlimited resources. It’s clear that the offer Elon got stuck with has an unrealistic price at this point (and Elon just want a reason to get out of the deal), just like it’s clear that Twitter’s management is incompetent in the last few…

Contracts matter. The ability for two parties to create a contract and to have reasonably secure knowledge that the state will still in and enforce the terms of the contract, using violence if necessary, is a massive foundational element to free market capitalism. We see in states where such an expectation is not present, that it becomes an enormous invisible drag on all business activity and degrades the civic funct…

You are right, and Twitter has the upper hand here.

But there are always exceptions written in the contracts and Elon would be foolish not to spend a few million to try to trigger an exception to renegotiate the contract. It just makes business sense.

Re: Elon’s Out

#637

Post by Nevermark » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 7:21 AM UTC

dane-pgp wrote: post #268

Nevermark wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would mitigate the problem if institutions could be strengthened by design to be less sensitive to corruption or special treatment. There are lots of successful examples - constitutions, voting, term limits, separate judiciary, non-political commuters, etc The big problem I see in the design of egalitarian systems, is explicitly addressing the need for continuous response to new forms of centralization. I don’t kn…

> But the constitution is silent on any guidance or requirement on addressing new power centralization problems. The federal constitution says that voting is left up to the states, so arguably the centralization problem is ~50 different experiments which have all gone wrong in the exact same way. You could say that the federal constitution should have put some guidance in place to stop exactly this correlated failure…

> The federal constitution says that voting is left up to the states, so arguably the centralization problem is ~50 different experiments which have all gone wrong in the exact same way

If the constitution forbid parties from operating across state lines, or operating in more than 20 states, or holding more than 20% of seats in either Federal legislative body, … there would never be single party rule at the Federal level which is where it would matter most.

> If both major parties split into 50 different organizations that all happened to endorse the same candidate for president (but for nominally different state-specific reasons), should the SCOTUS have the power to ban those political organizations (and perhaps ban one and not the other)?

While collusion (meaning surreptitious coordination, in this case) between 50 state level parties would certainly be possible, it would be substantially more difficult than coordinating 50 state offices of a single political party as it is today.

Today, all senate campaigns are basically running for one shared constituency: big money from anywhere in the US, and political support from the same party, across the US.

The tight link that should exist between a politicians power base and the politicians electorate has been broken, for state level elections of Federal positions.

Re: Elon’s Out

#638

Post by BoorishBears » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 7:23 AM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #609

BoorishBears wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It means the Russian billionaires will be forced to spend more of their money in Russia and have a great reason to bear a grudge against the more Western powers. Any Russian billionaires that don't realize that this is more of Putin's incompetence than western antagonism deserve a random punitive gesture. In reality the majority of them will see this as a great reason to bear a grudge against Putin.

I'm still not following. How do you think this has helped the situation? What do you expect to happen differently in the future that will be to our benefit? Maybe I've missed out on some life experiences, but I've never seen petty theft help defuse a tense situation. It is not going to be beneficial to achieving a sane outcome. > In reality the majority of them will see this as a great reason to bear a grudge against…

Why would you expect your day to day interactions to act as framework for how members of a warring nation displacing millions and killing innocents under the guise of "nazi hunting" should react to things?

And you're vehemently argue against points that have been known for months, the oligarchs are deeply unhappy with Putin over what has happened: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/04/29/russia-oliga...

Putin may have them under his thumb, but that doesn't mean they should be left to their comfort rather than forced to face the direct consequences of Putin's actions.

Re: Elon’s Out

#639

Post by parineum » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 7:23 AM UTC

zerocrates wrote: post #279

parineum wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Supreme Court just changed the law of the land based on a right-wing political campaign. You think a billionare, let alone the richest billionare is going to be subject to any serious consequences? It's absurd to even entertain this. You know who has the authority to overturn that decision? Our democratically elected legislature.

I wouldn't be so sure a hypothetical federal law enshrining a Roe-ish right to abortion would itself survive the inevitable challenge to its own constitutionality.

I very much doubt it but even if I thought that would happen, I'd like to make them actually do it.

Re: Elon’s Out

#640

Post by parineum » Sun, Jul 10, 2022, 7:30 AM UTC

kibwen wrote: post #390

parineum wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The Supreme Court just changed the law of the land based on a right-wing political campaign. You think a billionare, let alone the richest billionare is going to be subject to any serious consequences? It's absurd to even entertain this. You know who has the authority to overturn that decision? Our democratically elected legislature.

Are you referring to the legislature where one house is deliberately unrepresentative of the people, and where the other house has been gerrymandered into unrepresentative oblivion, and whose bills are signed by an executive position who has preposterously lost the popular vote in two out of the last six election cycles?

Yeah, the one completely controlled by the party that says it's pro-choice.

> executive position who has preposterously lost the popular vote

What does the popular vote have to do with the presidency? Neither party strategizes to win the popular vote because the popular vote is meaningless. Therefore, the outcome if the popular vote has no value in determining who would win a popular vote should that be the metric by which the president is elected.