Elon’s Out • Hacker News Board

Re: Elon’s Out

#751

Post by pc86 » Tue, Jul 12, 2022, 2:20 AM UTC

throwaway09223 wrote: post #400

pc86 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Assuming that a wealth tax was passed, wouldn't the cause here be proper reporting and collection of said tax? You can declare illegal income on your federal return and pay taxes on it. They're not (in this hypothetical I guess?) asking what you're doing , just how much it's made you.

The issue is that people can change how they own things so they don't have to disclose. The law is necessarily public and people can adjust the way they structure ownership accordingly. We see this all the time already. For example, Medicaid won't pay for your extremely expensive end of life care if you have assets. So, people give away their assets (to a trust, to family) before applying for Medicaid to cover their…

I don't think there's really any way around this. It just lowers the maximum amount you can extract via that tax. You have to tax at a rate low enough where it's not worth the expense to get around it in the first place. Maybe this is enough to make a wealth tax altogether not worth it federally (how much does it cost to set up a trust and transfer assets? can't be a lot), I don't know. But I think that's all part of the calculus of whether or not it's reasonable to institute the tax in the first place.

Re: Elon’s Out

#752

Post by orestarod » Tue, Jul 12, 2022, 9:29 AM UTC

maximus-decimus wrote: post #692

orestarod wrote: post #688

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You do admit it is a circus, and no official explanation holds its ground. Why do you belittle the real reason, whatever it is, by negatively branding it a conspiracy theory? The real reason for this by definition falls in the category of a "conspiracy theory", since it is not included in any official explanation.

Saying he's just bipolar and had grandiose ideas before crashing down would not count as a conspiracy theory. "Conspiracy theory" implies you're blaming it on... a conspiracy. Not any unofficial explanation count as a conspiracy theory.

I don't know if he conspired with someone or if only he himself knows of his own plan. But I do not believe he acted impulsively.

Re: Elon’s Out

#753

Post by mr90210 » Tue, Jul 12, 2022, 9:06 PM UTC

encryptluks2 wrote: post #536

mr90210 wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some people are just delusional, at this point Elon could shoot a Panda just for fun and there would be people stating that it was self-defense.

He could offer a horse and pay a 200+k settlement for sexual favors to a flight attendant, or pedo project and people would still defend him.

Exactly. Cultism in tech is real.

Re: Elon’s Out

#754

Post by snovv_crash » Wed, Jul 13, 2022, 2:34 PM UTC

maxbond wrote: post #649

snovv_crash wrote: post #584

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read any recent ArsTechnica post on him that isn't part of the rocket section, and consider based purely on the use of emotive language if maybe someone has an axe to grind.

Being critical of someone does not make you their enemy. That is a super disturbing thing to suggest. The fact that you had to eliminate part of the site to make the claim remotely plausible is something you should reflect on. I will readily admit I think Musk is a bad CEO and a worse person who goes around saying he's saving humanity, but only willing to do it if it's sexy and cool and on his terms. Meanwhile real t…

This isn't about enemies or anything else. It's about what used to be a technical news site using emotive language to describe people. News should be impartial, but I see a significant amount of opinion-building.

Musk has always been Steve Jobs -ish. He focused on rockets and electric cars instead of shiny things that go in your desk or pocket or wrist though, and against all odds succeeded where many others have failed. Yes he's an asshole, and I'd hate to work for him, but he's also pushed humanity forward by corralling a bunch of people to all pull in the same direction.

My issue is more with Ars, where all the reporting used to be like the rocket section, but since the acquisition by Condé Nast the rest of it has turned into tech tabloid. I want newsworthy information, not what some guy did in his personal time.

Re: Elon’s Out

#755

Post by Nevermark » Thu, Jul 14, 2022, 1:46 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…

Replying to you again, very late.

> Fortunately we can look to other countries that have managed to avoid political duopoly by using voting systems which don't penalize people for voting for new parties. Even better, some US states have already implemented such a system[0], and, going back to your point about constitutions, the people of Maine managed to introduce RCV not because of a constitutional requirement, but despite a narrow (state) constitutional prohibition.[1]

I think you are right, voting systems are the best place to start.

That and prohibitions on justices and congressfolk from weighing in on matters they have a personal or political interest in, such as receiving political funds or assistance.

Imagine if donating to a politician whose influence you want will make it more likely they cannot help you. That leaves donations reflecting people's assessment of who will better run the country in a more general sense. Those donations look more like "free speech" than the rampant influence purchasing that overwhelms the system today.

Re: Elon’s Out

#756

Post by maxbond » Sat, Jul 16, 2022, 5:26 AM UTC

snovv_crash wrote: post #754

maxbond wrote: post #649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being critical of someone does not make you their enemy. That is a super disturbing thing to suggest. The fact that you had to eliminate part of the site to make the claim remotely plausible is something you should reflect on. I will readily admit I think Musk is a bad CEO and a worse person who goes around saying he's saving humanity, but only willing to do it if it's sexy and cool and on his terms. Meanwhile real t…

This isn't about enemies or anything else. It's about what used to be a technical news site using emotive language to describe people. News should be impartial, but I see a significant amount of opinion-building. Musk has always been Steve Jobs -ish. He focused on rockets and electric cars instead of shiny things that go in your desk or pocket or wrist though, and against all odds succeeded where many others have fai…

This is goalpost moving. We weren't discussing the journalistic integrity of Ars Technia, we were discussing whether or not Musk's enemies are real or imagined. I didn't identify Ars as an enemy, I asked who these enemies were, and it was you who suggested it.

He is not pushing humanity forward and certainly isn't getting people to pull in the same direction. If you disagree, I would be curious to hear how Neuralink and his Twitter acquisition are related, or how his frequent scandals help to keep people to focused on the mission.

He has no real vision to be pushing humanity forward to, he has a series of smokescreens. It is plain for me to see that Musk has no strategy, and that these are a series of tactics to maintain relevance and distract from the issues he'd rather we forget about (such as the sexual harassment allegations that have recently been made public, or that FSD is not and has never been "one year away").

At best he's a distraction. But he's worse than that, he siphons energy and attention that should be directed towards actually addressing climate change and other existential challenges into a vortex that ultimately serves to empower him and feed his ego. His contribution to the success of SpaceX and Tesla is his prolific talent for charming people and attracting investment and attention. In many ways they succeed despite him, not because of him. In a world without Musk, people are still working on these problems and making the same breakthroughs, just under a different corporate entity.

It is not the unique insight of Elon Musk which makes these innovations possible. It is decades of research, mostly funded by the taxpayer, mostly taking place at universities and national labs. The engineers at SpaceX and Tesla are taking it the "last mile" to commercialization.

These are both critical contributions. But if Musk were not the one to hire these engineers, it would Bezos or Branson or somebody else - when the idea is ready to be commercialized, someone will be there to fund it. Being able to promote an idea and attract investment is a real and challenging skill, but it's not on the critical path to introducing these innovations to society. (It is absolutely on the critical path for creating and sustaining an individual company, however.)

Re: Elon’s Out

#757

Post by snovv_crash » Sat, Jul 16, 2022, 9:25 AM UTC

maxbond wrote: post #756

snovv_crash wrote: post #754

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't about enemies or anything else. It's about what used to be a technical news site using emotive language to describe people. News should be impartial, but I see a significant amount of opinion-building. Musk has always been Steve Jobs -ish. He focused on rockets and electric cars instead of shiny things that go in your desk or pocket or wrist though, and against all odds succeeded where many others have fai…

This is goalpost moving. We weren't discussing the journalistic integrity of Ars Technia, we were discussing whether or not Musk's enemies are real or imagined. I didn't identify Ars as an enemy, I asked who these enemies were, and it was you who suggested it. He is not pushing humanity forward and certainly isn't getting people to pull in the same direction. If you disagree, I would be curious to hear how Neuralink…

You severely underestimate his impact on the success of both Tesla and SpaceX, it extends beyond just a 'getting funding and charming people' perspective. Ask Bezos about combustion instabilities in turbopumps and he isn't going to give you a 20 minute lecture on the pros and cons of gas bearings and alloy design. Toyota, the world's largest auto manufacturer, is still avoiding making an electric vehicle.

Musk is eccentric, and doesn't have all of his communication go through a PR team. Show me anybody else at a similar publicity level who isn't behind 3 layers of PR firewalls. Of course there will be scandals. You just don't see all the detestable opinions the other rich and famous people have.

In addition, he has a lot of powerful enemies. Big Oil, ULA etc have been hit hard by the work he's done to bring new tech to public consciousness. Who Killed The Electric Car etc. I'm surprised there haven't been many more of the unfalsifiable type of scandals or even court cases tying up his time.

3 years ago, everybody loved him. He was saving the planet with Tesla and bringing back American access to the ISS with SpaceX. Suddenly people care more about him not being married to the celebrity he is having children with, or that he isn't happy with a corporate deal, like somehow we're all major Twitter shareholders. It's ridiculous, and I'm pointing out how the media is shaping people's opinions on frankly irrelevant details in the greater scheme of things.

I'm not a lawyer, and I haven't read the contract Musk made with Twitter. Unless you're somehow different on both of those counts, it may behoove you to consider where your strong opinions on this matter come from, and whether they are really yours.

Re: Elon’s Out

#758

Post by loceng » Sat, Jul 16, 2022, 1:51 PM UTC

tsimionescu wrote: post #626

loceng wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think there's an even better explanation, and liquidating $8.5 billion of Tesla stock may just be the icing on the cake: Elon despises the SEC and he's now has exposed that the "less than 5%" of accounts are bots, that the SEC should have verified and accepted their methods for determining that number - and it should be adequate and reasonable to give a grounded-in-reality output, and it seems like it's a total bul…

> he's now has exposed that the "less than 5%" of accounts are bots He did the opposite of that. The Twitter CEO's explanations are quite believable, and Musk has not presented a single tiny shred of evidence against them. He hasn't even presented any methodology he used to arrive at the belief that the 5% is wrong - and note that his lawyers were careful to call it a belief only, since they know full well that claim…

Does Twitter also say in their official filings that it's their belief that bots are less than 5% or is it a concrete statement that less than 5% of accounts are bots?

Re: Elon’s Out

#759

Post by loceng » Sat, Jul 16, 2022, 2:04 PM UTC

maxbond wrote: post #310

loceng wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Saying "Musk cultists are the worst" was out of line. Otherwise what GP said was correct. If it helps, I don't think you're a cultist, I'm sure you aren't a stupid person either, but you have this totally backwards. I don't presume to know how that happened, other than that it's something that happens to everyone from time to time, myself included. This is a sincere, no judgement invitation to reconsider your positio…

"People who care about free speech don't respond to criticism with left-field accusations - that's a diversionary tactic. People who make serious buyout offers aren't trying to insert weed jokes in there."

You didn't actually backup much of anything you forward as argument points.

The gish gallop you point to is his trolling, having fun - but that doesn't mean he's not serious or genuine otherwise.

I doubt you've actually balanced out or thoroughly thought through your arguments either.

Before Tesla became the scale it did, at its beginnings, you probably would have called his intentions with Tesla "vaguely futurist nonsense" - same with SpaceX's reusable rockets - "that's absurd, no one's done it before - it's impossible!"

So I wonder if you should brainstorm and/or analyze the positives regarding Elon and his companies and then see how that balances out your conclusions.

Re: Elon’s Out

#760

Post by maxbond » Sat, Jul 16, 2022, 2:42 PM UTC

snovv_crash wrote: post #757

maxbond wrote: post #756

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is goalpost moving. We weren't discussing the journalistic integrity of Ars Technia, we were discussing whether or not Musk's enemies are real or imagined. I didn't identify Ars as an enemy, I asked who these enemies were, and it was you who suggested it. He is not pushing humanity forward and certainly isn't getting people to pull in the same direction. If you disagree, I would be curious to hear how Neuralink…

You severely underestimate his impact on the success of both Tesla and SpaceX, it extends beyond just a 'getting funding and charming people' perspective. Ask Bezos about combustion instabilities in turbopumps and he isn't going to give you a 20 minute lecture on the pros and cons of gas bearings and alloy design. Toyota, the world's largest auto manufacturer, is still avoiding making an electric vehicle. Musk is ecc…

So Musk's enemies are Ars Technia. Then it wasn't about enemies. And now Musk's enemies are so plentiful and powerful, that I'm not even allowed an opinion, I'm just a dupe.

Musk's reputation was killed by Musk, and it was because he showed the world who he was. I realized his words were nonsense and formed an opinion based on his actions. You should consider doing the same.

As a final note, I think you should consider it a red flag in your own thinking when you can't even conceive that someone would disagree with you on this topic, and you need to invoke a conspiracy to explain my having a differing opinion. Regardless of how you feel about Musk, even if you're correct, that should jump out to you as a problem which deserves reflection.