The Walls Are Closing in on Tesla(planetearthandbeyond.co)
planetearthandbeyond.co
The Walls Are Closing in on Tesla
https://www.planetearthandbeyond.co/p/the-walls-are-closing-in-on-tesla
104 comments
Tesla was winning because they had insight and balls to make electric cars that actually looked and worked like normal fucking cars. Everyone else who was making EVs failed to resist the temptation to reinvent the definition of the car, throwing out a century of wisdom and natural selection of features of good car design, to the point that it seemed like nobody wanted to succeed.
As soon as they forgot this, their downfall began.
As soon as they forgot this, their downfall began.
Tesla was winning because US government gave it half a billion dollars when it was struggling financially.
"Well before this tragedy, Defendant Tesla had received repeated notice that its vehicles were prone to Sudden Uncommanded Acceleration [SUA], explosive fires, whether triggered by a crash or occurring spontaneously, and that such fires were difficult and time-consuming to extinguish. Tesla also knew that its decision to prevent its AEB system from activating would allow otherwise preventable collisions to kill and maim people. Tesla knew that its reliance on electronic door systems created a serious risk of occupant entrapment after crashes. Owners, rescuers, and regulators had documented prior incidents where Tesla occupants survived crash forces but were unable to escape when power failed and fire ensued. Despite these warnings, Defendant Tesla continued to market and sell vehicles including the subject vehicle that predictably trapped survivors in foreseeable emergencies."
"The Dennises were traveling westbound on South 56th Street, toward the intersection with South Washington Street, in Tacoma, Washington, when their Tesla Model 3 suddenly and rapidly accelerated out of control, continuing to accelerate faster and faster for at least 5 seconds before crashing into a utility pole on the northwest corner of South 56th and South Washington streets shortly after 1:00 PM. 9. Video footage from a nearby business shows the Dennis Model 3 rapidly accelerating and swerving to avoid hitting other vehicles as it sped out of control. At no time did the Model 3s Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) system engage prior to it crashing into the utility pole.
Immediately upon impact the Model 3 burst into flames, in what was only the beginning of an extremely hot fire that immediately engulfed the Model 3 and would burn for many hours before responders from the fire department were able to extinguish it completely.
Several bystanders ran to the vehicle and attempted to assist Jeff and Wendy Dennis but the Model 3s door handles would not operate by design making it impossible for anyone to open the doors from the outside of the vehicle. Several good Samaritans even attempted to use a baseball bat to break the car windows to help the Dennisses out of the burning vehicle. However, the increasingly intense fire forced them to distance themselves from the rapidly growing fire. They could only watch helplessly from a distance as the severely injured Jeff and Wendy burned in the inferno. The Tesla as it struck the utility pole.
[photos]
Seconds after impact the Tesla exploded into flames."
https://ia801700.us.archive.org/25/items/gov.uscourts.wawd.3...
Italics are mine
HN commenters sometimes reply to stories about Tesla crashes by asserting that it was the driver's fault, Tesla batteries rarely catch fire, etc.
Perhaps this comment will draw some of those replies
Other cases mentioning "sudden uncommanded acceleration" include
Inkie Lee v. Tesla, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 2020)
Djemil v. Tesla Inc (W.D. Wash. 2021)
Thakrar v. Tesla, Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2022)
Leach v. Tesla, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2023)
There are hundreds of wrongful death cases involving Tesla fires
Tesla fans are entitled to their opinions
"The Dennises were traveling westbound on South 56th Street, toward the intersection with South Washington Street, in Tacoma, Washington, when their Tesla Model 3 suddenly and rapidly accelerated out of control, continuing to accelerate faster and faster for at least 5 seconds before crashing into a utility pole on the northwest corner of South 56th and South Washington streets shortly after 1:00 PM. 9. Video footage from a nearby business shows the Dennis Model 3 rapidly accelerating and swerving to avoid hitting other vehicles as it sped out of control. At no time did the Model 3s Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) system engage prior to it crashing into the utility pole.
Immediately upon impact the Model 3 burst into flames, in what was only the beginning of an extremely hot fire that immediately engulfed the Model 3 and would burn for many hours before responders from the fire department were able to extinguish it completely.
Several bystanders ran to the vehicle and attempted to assist Jeff and Wendy Dennis but the Model 3s door handles would not operate by design making it impossible for anyone to open the doors from the outside of the vehicle. Several good Samaritans even attempted to use a baseball bat to break the car windows to help the Dennisses out of the burning vehicle. However, the increasingly intense fire forced them to distance themselves from the rapidly growing fire. They could only watch helplessly from a distance as the severely injured Jeff and Wendy burned in the inferno. The Tesla as it struck the utility pole.
[photos]
Seconds after impact the Tesla exploded into flames."
https://ia801700.us.archive.org/25/items/gov.uscourts.wawd.3...
Italics are mine
HN commenters sometimes reply to stories about Tesla crashes by asserting that it was the driver's fault, Tesla batteries rarely catch fire, etc.
Perhaps this comment will draw some of those replies
Other cases mentioning "sudden uncommanded acceleration" include
Inkie Lee v. Tesla, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 2020)
Djemil v. Tesla Inc (W.D. Wash. 2021)
Thakrar v. Tesla, Inc. (N.D. Ill. 2022)
Leach v. Tesla, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2023)
There are hundreds of wrongful death cases involving Tesla fires
Tesla fans are entitled to their opinions
I mostly agree, but I would have agreed with a similar article 10 years ago, and that would have been a fairly widely held opinion (e.g. Bill Gates was famously short Tesla).
So I wouldn’t be so sure as this piece is in Tesla’s downfall, and the emotive language doesn’t help this look like an objective analysis.
I also don’t like articles that take the industry consensus or expert opinion as a priori the correct opinion. Tesla wasn’t built by consensus; even the door handle example that is here touted as a negative almost certainly helped Tesla more than its harmed by being one of many unique features.
So I wouldn’t be so sure as this piece is in Tesla’s downfall, and the emotive language doesn’t help this look like an objective analysis.
I also don’t like articles that take the industry consensus or expert opinion as a priori the correct opinion. Tesla wasn’t built by consensus; even the door handle example that is here touted as a negative almost certainly helped Tesla more than its harmed by being one of many unique features.
What about the people that were killed because they couldn't figure out how to get out of the fucking car when it caught fire with them in the back?
They could have easily avoided the accident if they ponied up for FSD?
The “cool” and unique factor of those door handles help sell more cars and increase brand valuation. Increasing it more than the cost of those lives.
At least that’s what American capitalism has shown us.
At least that’s what American capitalism has shown us.
I’ve considered Elon to be a bit of a bullshitter for almost as long as I’ve followed him. Back when he was an opportunistic Democrat, and now that he’s an ideological MAGA, his public statements always seemed to set off my bullshit detector. It seemed clear to me that his intention was more to manipulate perception rather than to disseminate factual information. While most business leaders are guilty of this to some degree, with Elon it seemed more cynically and nakedly so.
I’ve also come to consider him to be a skilled business person. He negotiated a ridiculous low price for the Fremont ex-NUMMI plant. He secured funding to enable Tesla to survive the GFC. The list goes on. I’d argue that Elon’s biggest wins were business related, not technical. Not that there weren’t technical accomplishments, it’s just that the technological accomplishments were more incremental SV type stuff whereas the business accomplishments were more heroic. I also give Tesla credit for the success of model S. But I consider that to be a function of good execution, not of technology. If that would have flopped it would have been the end. But there were many possible ways for Tesla to die back then.
One of Elon’s key business skills is his ability to sell a narrative. I guess that goes hand in hand with the “bullshitter” thing. He seems to have a magical ability to hypnotize fanboys and investors into believing that Tesla is more than it actually is.
The auto industry is not very sexy from an investor point of view. It’s a mature market, very capital intensive, high risk, low margin. Yet somehow Tesla achieves an outsized market cap.
As humorously noted in the HBO Silicon Valley “no revenue” scene, investors reward you for future promises and punish you on actual delivery. But what if you could promise a future that remains perpetually in the future? And every delivery is not an end, but only a step along the way to this utopian/distopian vision? What if you “promise the moon”, er, I mean Mars? If you did this, then maybe you could have a perpetual pure play that never expires.
So back to the article. Is this the demise of Tesla? I don’t know if Tesla necessarily has “no path forward” as “just a car company”. But I think Elon’s ability to sell the “sci-fi future” is wearing out. Tesla has delivered on some difficult business cases with incremental technology, but the track record on the “impossible future“ stuff isn’t good. Also, the mainstream EV industry will become increasingly commoditized with new Chinese entrants, eroding margins. Tariffs keep you in saturated markets and don’t help you in growing markets. So maybe a bit of a demise for all?
I’ve also come to consider him to be a skilled business person. He negotiated a ridiculous low price for the Fremont ex-NUMMI plant. He secured funding to enable Tesla to survive the GFC. The list goes on. I’d argue that Elon’s biggest wins were business related, not technical. Not that there weren’t technical accomplishments, it’s just that the technological accomplishments were more incremental SV type stuff whereas the business accomplishments were more heroic. I also give Tesla credit for the success of model S. But I consider that to be a function of good execution, not of technology. If that would have flopped it would have been the end. But there were many possible ways for Tesla to die back then.
One of Elon’s key business skills is his ability to sell a narrative. I guess that goes hand in hand with the “bullshitter” thing. He seems to have a magical ability to hypnotize fanboys and investors into believing that Tesla is more than it actually is.
The auto industry is not very sexy from an investor point of view. It’s a mature market, very capital intensive, high risk, low margin. Yet somehow Tesla achieves an outsized market cap.
As humorously noted in the HBO Silicon Valley “no revenue” scene, investors reward you for future promises and punish you on actual delivery. But what if you could promise a future that remains perpetually in the future? And every delivery is not an end, but only a step along the way to this utopian/distopian vision? What if you “promise the moon”, er, I mean Mars? If you did this, then maybe you could have a perpetual pure play that never expires.
So back to the article. Is this the demise of Tesla? I don’t know if Tesla necessarily has “no path forward” as “just a car company”. But I think Elon’s ability to sell the “sci-fi future” is wearing out. Tesla has delivered on some difficult business cases with incremental technology, but the track record on the “impossible future“ stuff isn’t good. Also, the mainstream EV industry will become increasingly commoditized with new Chinese entrants, eroding margins. Tariffs keep you in saturated markets and don’t help you in growing markets. So maybe a bit of a demise for all?
Closing in? Try all but irrelevant outside the US. It's not going to be a make you give much thought when considering an EV purchase. Vastly different situation five years ago.
Wasn't Tesla Model Y globally the most sold car in 2023 and 2024. And second most sold car in 2025 (Toyota RAV4 was the most sold model).
Given that, objectively speaking I could not call Tesla irrelevant.
Given that, objectively speaking I could not call Tesla irrelevant.
As others have noted, breakdown by model probably isn't accurate since Tesla has so few models. I did some shallow searching and it appears Tesla sales were down 8% in 2025 [0] while global EV sales were up 20% [1]. It's a crude comparison but probably more accurate than models.
0 - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/02/tesla-tsla-q4-2025-vehicle-d...
1 - https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/global...
0 - https://www.cnbc.com/2026/01/02/tesla-tsla-q4-2025-vehicle-d...
1 - https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/climate-energy/global...
Tesla might maintain its current level of sales/revenue while losing 95% of its market cap. Whether it’ll survive the market cap deflation is the question.
The market can remain irrational more than you can remain solvent. But the writing is on the wall for the valuation.
The market can remain irrational more than you can remain solvent. But the writing is on the wall for the valuation.
It's not a very good comparison as Tesla has far fewer models than other carmakers.
The number of models doesn’t seem that relevant? If anything it would make Tesla’s numbers all the more impressive being a niche market EV.
As I recall, the original Bondi blue iMac was the best selling model of personal computer at the time. This wasn't because Apple suddenly stopped being the Betamax of the home computer world, it's because there was only one model when everyone else had a full range, and the effect disappeared the moment they came out in multiple colours.
Same deal with Tesla: They have two core models (Y top, 3 next, all else a rounding error), while everyone else has a full range that sales are split across.
Same deal with Tesla: They have two core models (Y top, 3 next, all else a rounding error), while everyone else has a full range that sales are split across.
If I want to buy a four-door Toyota sedan, I could buy a Prius, Corolla, Camry, Crown, or Mirai (not even counting Lexus or Century models), diluting each model's car sales, while overall vastly outselling Tesla. Ditto for cross-overs, SUVs, etc.
It's literally the best selling car in Norway with a over 50% increase in sales YoY.
Norway is an anomaly.
Examples for Europe, 2025 vs. 2024:
Examples for Europe, 2025 vs. 2024:
Sweden: -68%
Belgium: -53%
Germany: -48%
France: -37%
Switzerland: -28%
Portugal: -22%
Italy: -18%
Norway representing a wopping 1% of EU car sales. [1]
[1] https://www.best-selling-cars.com/europe/2024-full-year-euro...
[1] https://www.best-selling-cars.com/europe/2024-full-year-euro...
The rest of the European market is a "bloodbath".
https://electrek.co/2026/01/06/tesla-full-2025-data-europe-t... https://www.reuters.com/business/tesla-registrations-slump-f...
https://electrek.co/2026/01/06/tesla-full-2025-data-europe-t... https://www.reuters.com/business/tesla-registrations-slump-f...
Is this important market?
Norway is just 5-6 million population. Does being number 1 in Norway even mean anything?
UK is near 70million. Germany 80million. What about the stats for those? How many Teslas were sold as percentage in UK?
Norway is just 5-6 million population. Does being number 1 in Norway even mean anything?
UK is near 70million. Germany 80million. What about the stats for those? How many Teslas were sold as percentage in UK?
IIRC Norway is one of the few markets where EV growth is positive rather than negative, due to their abundant electric gen and other factors
I don’t think you do recall correctly. Electrek has European EV sales at +33% in 2025 over 2024. It’s not possible for Norway to turn a negative in the rest of Europe into an overall positive. https://electrek.co/2025/12/11/global-ev-sales-jump-21-in-20...
> BYD started selling these [prismatic LFP] cells as grid-level battery packs to compete with Tesla, and they are a truly astonishing 53% cheaper per MWh than Tesla’s.
What? Wow!
What? Wow!
Tesla is still trying to transition (heh) to 4680 battery cells. Elon has made the usual statements about Tesla being doomed if they don't make this happen. But it is a serious problem. Powering cars with tiny battery cells was brilliant when Tesla began. Now it's a cost problem.
I used to really like and admire Musk. You could say I was a fanboy. I am still asking myself what the fuck happened? Was he faking his true character all this time and managed to dupe me? Did he suffer some brain damage which changed him this drastically? Was it too much social media, was it covid-related, was he poisoned? Did too much money and power get to him? I would seriously like to know. By know, knowing about his chronic tendency to lie about the most basic stuff (such as being really good in a fucking computer game), I assume he duped me, and this makes me really, really dislike him a lot. And I can't be the only one. I hope he fails in all his endeavors.
You were duped. Tesla‘s paint it black video is from 2016 and one the first obvious lies. People called Musk out on his BS 10 years ago, but he successfully managed to keep a "genius" imagine in the media up until COVID-19 hit. Media sentiment changed around 2020/2021 to adjust to reality of Musk being a massive fraudster.
Important point here: the discussion is about his character, but you’ve made it about his intellect.
I don’t think anyone can doubt that Musk is super smart. I’ve heard silly things like - he doesn’t do anything, it’s all his employees or board or assistant - but reading the history that’s obviously false.
It does seem some people can’t cope with the idea that someone is often an asshat is also brilliant. And I’m afraid it’s true with Musk.
I don’t think anyone can doubt that Musk is super smart. I’ve heard silly things like - he doesn’t do anything, it’s all his employees or board or assistant - but reading the history that’s obviously false.
It does seem some people can’t cope with the idea that someone is often an asshat is also brilliant. And I’m afraid it’s true with Musk.
> I don’t think anyone can doubt that Musk is super smart.
It's also worth keeping in mind that super smart people can say and do lots of really dumb things. Smart != wise.
It's also worth keeping in mind that super smart people can say and do lots of really dumb things. Smart != wise.
I don’t think Musk is super smart. I think he has some skills that account for how he got to his position other than privilege and luck, I think he probably works hard (or at least, harder than me), but I can’t get to “super smart”.
On the one hand he does some things that seem very smart, on the other he does many that are very stupid (cave divers ordeal). So it’s a bit more nuanced than that.
> I don’t think anyone can doubt that Musk is super smart
I doubt it. He was born into money and was lucky enough to make some excellent purchasing decisions. His various talks and arguments on the internet show him to be fairly stupid in my opinion. I've heard tell that his successful businesses are mainly successful when the staff learn how to manage Musk and prevent his dumbest ideas.
I doubt it. He was born into money and was lucky enough to make some excellent purchasing decisions. His various talks and arguments on the internet show him to be fairly stupid in my opinion. I've heard tell that his successful businesses are mainly successful when the staff learn how to manage Musk and prevent his dumbest ideas.
What objective evidence do we have that Musk is smart?
Basically: he's extremely rich
Working hard and being very good at negotiating compensation packages and picking the right companies/products to be involved with (and a bit of luck) are all sufficient for exorbitant wealth though.
E.g. there are plenty of people just as smart as Bezos who didn't hitch their wagon to the "sell something easy on the web" idea at the right time
Basically: he's extremely rich
Working hard and being very good at negotiating compensation packages and picking the right companies/products to be involved with (and a bit of luck) are all sufficient for exorbitant wealth though.
E.g. there are plenty of people just as smart as Bezos who didn't hitch their wagon to the "sell something easy on the web" idea at the right time
Thai Cave rescue happened in 2018. It should have already made obvious how completely deranged Musk was to everyone, even if they were not paying close attention before and were dazzled by self-driving cars and Mars colonization promises.
I think that marked a turning point for many. He had been known to say dumb things in the past but that was monumentally stupid own goal. Worse, he was given multiple chances to take a step back but just kept digging.
Yeah, it was mine. That's the moment I thought 'wow that guy is deranged now, he should step back and take some vacations'. Now I realize he was like this from the start, but that was the moment I questioned my hero worship.
That was certainly the first time he did something so obviously blatantly evil, and obviously his own fault, that I wasn't able to ignore it or dismiss it.
It was sufficiently awful, at first I couldn't even believe he'd done it. When I internalised that he was the kind of person to do that, it made it much easier to see his other flaws.
It was sufficiently awful, at first I couldn't even believe he'd done it. When I internalised that he was the kind of person to do that, it made it much easier to see his other flaws.
When Elon was a teenager he bullied another kid about his father’s suicide until the other kid pushed him down a flight of stairs. He has always been like this. His character was never a secret. Everything was in plain view but you didn’t want to see it.
And he's like that because his father beat the crap out of him.
He had a PR team working overtime to boost his image. Remember he had a cameo in movie Iron Man 3 back in the day.
He meticulously worked on his image for decades.
He meticulously worked on his image for decades.
The Iron Man thing… MCU Tony Stark wasn't as smart as he thought he was. He should've allowed surgeons to help with his heart immediately, rather than the entire B-plot of Iron Man 2; Iron Man 3's plot could've been averted in a whole bunch of ways if he'd been less arrogant and thoughtless, and also shows him as a loner unwilling to call for assistance despite (by this point) being allied with what passes for gods in the MCU; Ultron was his own hubris punching him in the face; the justification he gives for the Sokovia Accords was a stupid response to an act of self-defence that, sure, could've and should've been handled better, but it isn't like Stark himself was great at avoiding collateral damage during emergencies in the other films; his rage-fight against Barnes in Civil War, while understandable, was wildly unprofessional and a sign he was not a suitable person to be in possession of a one-man weapon system like the Iron Man suits have been shown to be; his tech gift to Peter Parker had wildly inadequate safety measures to be gifted to someone still in school, even if they had been to space.
Basically: yes, Musk is just like Stark. Half as smart as he thinks he is, has main-character syndrome and/or narcissism.
Basically: yes, Musk is just like Stark. Half as smart as he thinks he is, has main-character syndrome and/or narcissism.
>screenwriter Mark Fergus told New York magazine that Musk partly inspired the modern portrayal of [Iron Man]
>According to Fergus, the character was inspired by an amalgam of real people — but none so much as Elon Musk.
>According to Fergus, the character was inspired by an amalgam of real people — but none so much as Elon Musk.
I thought Musk was pretty cool when he was just the guy making EVs and reusable rockets happen. I didn't even mind his over-optimistic projections, it's hard to be mad at optimism. But then he started becoming more of a public figure. He called that rescue worker a 'pedo guy' just for turning down a bad idea. He started broadcasting his philosophies, and they were mostly gross. He bought Twitter and made it so everyone had to see his dumb tweets. He revealed himself as a big, moist wad of lies and insecurities.
I have a hypothesis that the Hedonic Treadmill[1] can cause actual harm to the human brain; I suspect that over time, in certain brains, extreme wealth erodes the reward centers such that some rich people can't help but be miserable, flailing for ever-elusive life satisfaction. It seems like a fairly serious bug in human software.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_treadmill
I have a hypothesis that the Hedonic Treadmill[1] can cause actual harm to the human brain; I suspect that over time, in certain brains, extreme wealth erodes the reward centers such that some rich people can't help but be miserable, flailing for ever-elusive life satisfaction. It seems like a fairly serious bug in human software.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_treadmill
I ran into him and the group of obsessed hangers on in 1997-8 or so. He was a nutjob then.
> Was he faking his true character all this time and managed to dupe me?
Yes.
People's true nature reveals once they stop caring about money.
To be fair, he was really good at faking.
Yes.
People's true nature reveals once they stop caring about money.
To be fair, he was really good at faking.
You were younger and more gullible, he still had a PR firm and didn't tweet his every "thought".
No. He is the same person. It just happens in a certain time, what he was selling aligned with what you were buying.
He always was an arrogant, over-privileged arsehole. But having an army of "fanboys" will have amplified his character flaws. Ditto his involvement with Trump et al.
I find it odd to completely disavow someone because you don’t agree 100% with their politics.
I mean Werner Von Braun was a Nazi party member and knowingly used slave labor. Doesn’t make his rocketry advancements any less impressive.
Or Charles Darwin’s views of superior races.
Or Gandhi’s gray area views of pedophilia.
I mean if you’re going to discounted every person with a view you find distasteful your list of people you admire is going to be blank.
You may find Musk’s views distasteful but he’s had an enormous impact on EV’s, rocketry, hell space in general. I think it’s pretty awesome.
I mean Werner Von Braun was a Nazi party member and knowingly used slave labor. Doesn’t make his rocketry advancements any less impressive.
Or Charles Darwin’s views of superior races.
Or Gandhi’s gray area views of pedophilia.
I mean if you’re going to discounted every person with a view you find distasteful your list of people you admire is going to be blank.
You may find Musk’s views distasteful but he’s had an enormous impact on EV’s, rocketry, hell space in general. I think it’s pretty awesome.
As a non-American, even the US Democratic party is waaaay to the right of my Overton Window. While the US is arguing about if the 2nd Amendment should be restricted in cases like "fully automatic weapons" or "people with felony convictions" etc., I'm from a nation where the police aren't routinely armed and don't want to be, not even with pistols.
This doesn't mean I can't admire NASA, that I have to dismiss the Hoover Dam, that I think every act by Obama or Bush was heinous.
Likewise, I can look at Falcon 9/Heavy, at the progress with Starship, and applaud.
But.
His "Paint is Black" video, and what he claimed about it, was a lie. He himself is pretty awful, and already fits amongst the others you list given the revealed preferences shown by Grok, and by his reactions to criticism of Grok's behaviour.
The bonus-target market-cap of 8 trillion only makes sense with a very optimistic view of the AI Tesla's developing for both FSD and Optimus, and by "very optimistic" I mean "FSD turns them into a monopoly supplier of cars worldwide; or both FSD and Optimus together displace a significant fraction of the US low-skill jobs market while also getting a monopoly on industrial robots and a monopoly on cars in just the USA". It's the kind of thing I expect we'll be putting into history lessons next to Enron and Dutch Tulips, with laws passed to prevent whatever investigators find out to be the key mechanism behind it.
Even with SpaceX, it's impressive, but not because it actually hits Musk's goals, rather because everyone else in space is "over optimistic" about their schedules even harder than Telsa is.
This doesn't mean I can't admire NASA, that I have to dismiss the Hoover Dam, that I think every act by Obama or Bush was heinous.
Likewise, I can look at Falcon 9/Heavy, at the progress with Starship, and applaud.
But.
His "Paint is Black" video, and what he claimed about it, was a lie. He himself is pretty awful, and already fits amongst the others you list given the revealed preferences shown by Grok, and by his reactions to criticism of Grok's behaviour.
The bonus-target market-cap of 8 trillion only makes sense with a very optimistic view of the AI Tesla's developing for both FSD and Optimus, and by "very optimistic" I mean "FSD turns them into a monopoly supplier of cars worldwide; or both FSD and Optimus together displace a significant fraction of the US low-skill jobs market while also getting a monopoly on industrial robots and a monopoly on cars in just the USA". It's the kind of thing I expect we'll be putting into history lessons next to Enron and Dutch Tulips, with laws passed to prevent whatever investigators find out to be the key mechanism behind it.
Even with SpaceX, it's impressive, but not because it actually hits Musk's goals, rather because everyone else in space is "over optimistic" about their schedules even harder than Telsa is.
>I find it odd to completely disavow someone because you don’t agree 100% with their politics.
"politics":
https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/usaid-shutdown-has-led-to-hund...
https://www.cgdev.org/blog/update-lives-lost-usaid-cuts
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
"politics":
https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/usaid-shutdown-has-led-to-hund...
https://www.cgdev.org/blog/update-lives-lost-usaid-cuts
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
Those links are all political views.
Beyond the veracity of those numbers, it is a political decision whether or not the US should be spending $150B on foreigners or Americans.
Beyond the veracity of those numbers, it is a political decision whether or not the US should be spending $150B on foreigners or Americans.
The manner in which that decision is executed is very much a reflection of moral character.
>Those links are all political views.
Yes, Harvard and The Lancet are just wildly political.
>Beyond the veracity of those numbers ...
In addition to being incompetent slouches.
Unfortunately, we can multiply any given figure by 0.01 and still get something that amounts to mass murder.
>... it is a political decision whether or not the US should be spending $150B on foreigners or Americans.
A proper political decision wouldn't have involved an abrupt rug pull on a bipartisan program that's been operating for the better part of a century.
There's this thing called continuity that's usually taken very seriously. Especially when hundreds of thousands if not millions of lives are hanging in the balance.
Yes, Harvard and The Lancet are just wildly political.
>Beyond the veracity of those numbers ...
In addition to being incompetent slouches.
Unfortunately, we can multiply any given figure by 0.01 and still get something that amounts to mass murder.
>... it is a political decision whether or not the US should be spending $150B on foreigners or Americans.
A proper political decision wouldn't have involved an abrupt rug pull on a bipartisan program that's been operating for the better part of a century.
There's this thing called continuity that's usually taken very seriously. Especially when hundreds of thousands if not millions of lives are hanging in the balance.
I'm in the market for a car right now, and on paper, a Tesla makes the most sense. I won't be buying one. I'm happy to leave a little utility on the table just to avoid being associated in any way with Musk or his companies. Some might find that "odd", but I really don't care. I don't want to look down at my steering wheel and see the Tesla logo and have to justify to myself why it's OK that I gave my hard-earned money to someone who is actively working to destroy things I hold dear.
This is the nuanced view. In todays polarized world, it is sadly completely unacceptable. At least there are two of us now! ;)
GP dislikes Must because s/he felt Musk duped them. What does that have to do with ad hominem? There's no objective argument to dislike; GP dislikes the way the objective arguments were put forth.
And Hitler painted some nice watercolours.
Purity tests are extremely common in left wing politics in the USA.
And the point of the purity test isn't to establish guilt. You're already declared guilty and the purity test is an attempt at finding or creating evidence of your guilt.
I wasn't aware that there is a left wing in USA politics. The view from an outsider is that you have extreme right-wing and a fascist right-wing.
> I am still asking myself what the fuck happened?
I think the Scott Adams piece the other day[0] described the system dynamics well:
"Once you’re sufficiently prominent, politics becomes a separating equilibrium; if you lean even slightly to one side, the other will pile on you so massively and traumatically that it will force you into their opponents’ open arms just for a shred of psychological security."
I think Biden giving credit to GM[1] and being used as a political football, prior to Musk entering politics in a big way himself, drove him away from the left and (by process of elimination) toward the right. Once you're down the rabbit hole, the rest is history.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46646475
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/gm-ceo-joe-biden-elon-musk-t...
I think the Scott Adams piece the other day[0] described the system dynamics well:
"Once you’re sufficiently prominent, politics becomes a separating equilibrium; if you lean even slightly to one side, the other will pile on you so massively and traumatically that it will force you into their opponents’ open arms just for a shred of psychological security."
I think Biden giving credit to GM[1] and being used as a political football, prior to Musk entering politics in a big way himself, drove him away from the left and (by process of elimination) toward the right. Once you're down the rabbit hole, the rest is history.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46646475
[1] https://www.businessinsider.com/gm-ceo-joe-biden-elon-musk-t...
The big event just before he announced he was now voting Republican in May 2022 was newspapers reporting on him sexually harassing an employee 6 years earlier.
[deleted]
I was always confused and intrigued what was going on behind the scenes when Tesla was so obviously and publicly rejected by the Biden administration in that manner.
Musk was even then a polarising figure, but given Tesla was arguably more “American” than even the self-proclaimed traditional American car companies, it seemed a weird, self-defeating, perhaps emotional, position for the administration to take.
Musk was even then a polarising figure, but given Tesla was arguably more “American” than even the self-proclaimed traditional American car companies, it seemed a weird, self-defeating, perhaps emotional, position for the administration to take.
Tesla not being unionized was the main guess I heard about it at the time. The legacy auto industry has a history of outsized political influence leading to many dumb decisions on politician's part from an administrative success perspective.
I don't know either really, I'm just reporting remembered second-hand sources.
I don't know either really, I'm just reporting remembered second-hand sources.
That 2021 event was very much not about EVs-in-general, but about supporting UAW as a union at a time when a lot of their jobs were about to be disrupted because Biden just signed an EO (14037) that pushed traditional automakers towards making more EVs (target being 40-50% by 2030, but it was non-binding).
So, why were Ford, GM and Stellantis there but Tesla wasn't? Because Tesla was already making EVs only, because none of its workforce is a part of UAW (due to Tesla being anti-union) and because this EO had no impact on Tesla's workforce what so ever. Elon being butthurt about it doesn't change the fact that it would've made zero sense to have Tesla there.
You don't have to take my word for it, Jen Psaki directly addressed this at a press briefing:
> Asked if Tesla being a nonunion company was the reason it wasn’t included Thursday, Psaki replied, “Well, these are the three largest employers of the United Auto Workers, so I’ll let you draw your own conclusions.”
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/05/business/tesla-snub-white...
So, why were Ford, GM and Stellantis there but Tesla wasn't? Because Tesla was already making EVs only, because none of its workforce is a part of UAW (due to Tesla being anti-union) and because this EO had no impact on Tesla's workforce what so ever. Elon being butthurt about it doesn't change the fact that it would've made zero sense to have Tesla there.
You don't have to take my word for it, Jen Psaki directly addressed this at a press briefing:
> Asked if Tesla being a nonunion company was the reason it wasn’t included Thursday, Psaki replied, “Well, these are the three largest employers of the United Auto Workers, so I’ll let you draw your own conclusions.”
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/05/business/tesla-snub-white...
Thanks; actually, your background context is a lot more informative than the quote. It makes a lot more sense that they were excluded because it didn't make sense for them to be there because it was an event targeted at the union(s) because the administration had just made things difficult for them.
(The quote sounds simply like "we excluded Tesla because they are anti-union"...)
(The quote sounds simply like "we excluded Tesla because they are anti-union"...)
[deleted]
Except there is nothing in musks history that suggest this. His actual behavior was always consistent with who he is now. He just became more aggressive as people pointed it out.
He did not leaned a little right. He had the same political opinions, but less of narcissist rage over not being admired.
He did not leaned a little right. He had the same political opinions, but less of narcissist rage over not being admired.
In the past (early Tesla - SpaceX - Boring Company - Hyperloop - crypto) he seemed apolitical and only to really care about setting up the building blocks for a new, different society on Mars. Maybe a pipe dream, maybe megalomaniac, but just very cool and very futuristic. He didn't seem very political aside from a libertarian bent.
Somewhere along the road he devolved into a petty and weird character, and then went off the deep end into full spectrum alt-right weirdness.
He is the same type of talented hype man as Jobs was, with the same sort of reality distortion field. Otherwise SpaceX reusable wouldn't have happened. And even Jensen Huang was supremely impressed how fast xAI built up data centers.
Somewhere along the road he devolved into a petty and weird character, and then went off the deep end into full spectrum alt-right weirdness.
He is the same type of talented hype man as Jobs was, with the same sort of reality distortion field. Otherwise SpaceX reusable wouldn't have happened. And even Jensen Huang was supremely impressed how fast xAI built up data centers.
He obviously always held the normie billionaire libertarian "taxes bad, regulations bad, unions bad" right positions, enjoyed "politically incorrect" jokes and had some weird preconceptions like obsession with male heirs that might not be overtly political but line up with certain more fringe right views. Maybe he chose to hide some spicier views about the apartheid era.
But there's also definitely been a change. He publicly endorsed Democrat candidates on numerous occasions, including against normie business-friendly Republicans. Think his metamorphosis in actual unfiltered views is best shifted from the "I absolutely support trans but all these pronouns are an esthetic nightmare" to his current campaigns...
But there's also definitely been a change. He publicly endorsed Democrat candidates on numerous occasions, including against normie business-friendly Republicans. Think his metamorphosis in actual unfiltered views is best shifted from the "I absolutely support trans but all these pronouns are an esthetic nightmare" to his current campaigns...
Are you implying that "moving right" necessitates lying about basic things constantly?
Also, didn't Musk publicly quit Trump's advisory councils over exiting the Paris Agreement back in 2017? Why does that rift not qualify for your "separating politics" hypothesis?
Also, didn't Musk publicly quit Trump's advisory councils over exiting the Paris Agreement back in 2017? Why does that rift not qualify for your "separating politics" hypothesis?
I think as the left has become more homogeneously college educated they are less likely to wholesale accept blatant lies and falsehoods. For someone like Musk this will naturally push them to the right because he incessantly lies/bullshits so often and has a visceral negative reaction when being called on it (the cave fiasco comes to mind).
If the right will welcome people like Musk with open arms (always a natural fit anyways, he's rich as hell) then why wouldn't he pull the mask off? Despite most Tesla customers being presumably left leaning, his heel turn doesn't seem to have had much negative impact on the things that matter to him so far, for example his net worth.
If the right will welcome people like Musk with open arms (always a natural fit anyways, he's rich as hell) then why wouldn't he pull the mask off? Despite most Tesla customers being presumably left leaning, his heel turn doesn't seem to have had much negative impact on the things that matter to him so far, for example his net worth.
> Are you implying that "moving right" necessitates lying about basic things constantly?
Not OP ... but it would be consistent with observations. It is a party that admires lying and rewards it.
Not OP ... but it would be consistent with observations. It is a party that admires lying and rewards it.
Generally, right-wing politics are about the exploitation of others and lying is typically a part of that.
Man I miss the times when Musk was known as a pioneer in EVs and reusable rockertry, and not for his Twitter hot takes.
I remember he made some disparaging comments about other tech billionaires that while they were focused on ad revenue and social media engagement, he was out there working on the important stuff...
I remember he made some disparaging comments about other tech billionaires that while they were focused on ad revenue and social media engagement, he was out there working on the important stuff...
It's childish to want to turn away and bury your head in the sand. He is what he was and looking away doesn't change that.
I mean, when you look through the site's article history and all you see is numerous negative doomer posts about every single business Musk is involved in: SpaceX, Grok, Tesla, Optimus, Musk himself, you name it, and not a single positive or even neutral post about anything, that's probably a sign that this author is not who you should be going to in order to receive objective, unbiased, rational discussion on the topic.
If you look through the site's article history and you don't see a single positive or even neutral post about Musk, it's clear that the firehose of Musk-sycophancy on his own website has broken your brain.
This is a website that took Hyperloop seriously because Musk casually threw it out there...
This is a website that took Hyperloop seriously because Musk casually threw it out there...
Elon Musk is an interesting case study in that he exposes how submissive and docile most men are around other men that they consider their superiors. He has an obsessive fan base of males who hang on to his every word, no matter he says. Even those who aren't obsessed with him tend to treat him with an odd sort of reverence. This site itself contains many of them. They consider him like a king.
Is he - or any other man - deserving of this? No. But men just can't help worshipping other men. Christianity is another good example. As is the military, showing that most men are naturally drawn to placing themselves within a hierarchy of other men, with one at the top, even if it ends in their demise.
Is he - or any other man - deserving of this? No. But men just can't help worshipping other men. Christianity is another good example. As is the military, showing that most men are naturally drawn to placing themselves within a hierarchy of other men, with one at the top, even if it ends in their demise.
This piece is so misleading that makes me feel lazy about commenting at all.
Does he need to deliver? The past few years have demonstrated that you can just lie about the next big thing.
You can do that longer than people think, but not forever.
Has SpaceX not delivered?
Falcon and Starlink certainly has but Starship could be argued is taking longer.
Did anyone catch the source for this? I hadn't heard this detail before.
EDIT: I found a source[0], but that characterization is pretty misleading. The article even say that in internal discussions, "Musk wasn’t alone in pushing for electric controls." All it says about Musk is that pushed for "virtually everything" to be electric, but it doesn't say he pushed anything about the door manual release (you know they'd include that in the article if they could).
[0] https://archive.ph/BwZTx