How long before E Musk goes bankrupt.

[ZenRaiden]

So lots of E Musks predictions were over optimistic.

How long can you guys guess before his whole thing comes crashing down.

Will Tesla last??>??? I doubt even Tesla will last long.

Maybe he was not that good at all?

I was actually wishing he at least gets to Mars since NASA gave up.

 

[Daddy]

Tesla will last because the government funds it and will continue to fund it as along as we care about climate change.

Spacex is a success in its own right and will also continue to get government funding as long as it stays ahead of the competition.

Why do you think he will go bankrupt?

 

[ZenRaiden]

Tesla will last because the government funds it and will continue to fund it as along as we care about climate change.

Spacex is a success in its own right and will also continue to get government funding as long as it stays ahead of the competition.

Why do you think he will go bankrupt?

Its just a hunch. Plus too big to fail does not mean fail.

Tesla is an expensive car and provides nothing outside of what cars already do.

Space X has done everything as much as NASA only lot less.

Other projects he announced never made it.

See my point?

By now NASA could have landed on Mars with its first astronaut, no joke, no meme, just hard fact. They decided Musk will make space travel easier and cheaper.

No such thing has happened yet.

Plus low orbit flights are the low hanging fruit of previous century.

Its 2021 now, some 60 years since this was achieved.

I admit Tesla looks cool, but companies like BMW or Toyota could make such cars in a jiffy if they really thought it possible to bring revenue. They already do though.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

If you want to interpret him selling off shares of his company under a guise of taxation and such and such, it may possible that he's predicting difficult times with his waning hype train. He's clearly cultivated a large anti-Musk movement that has slowed down the momentum of his largest revenue stream, the stock market.

I think he understands people and understands how people might need technology. Look at PayPal, which for it's time was somewhat radically different from the way things were before. He's trying to do the same thing with cars. Turns out it's not profitable in the long run, as it's a very hard thing to do when most American roads are poorly maintained. (Don't understand how a "genius" wouldn't see that coming, but I guess he simply misplaced his faith?)

But yeah, it turns out it's very hard to participate in market where all the major car manufactures already cater to multiple socioeconomic classes and you just want to cater to the most snobbish iPhone types. His biggest hope is tapping into the commercial sector and getting large shipping deals with companies. I mean, at this point remote driving where drivers can stay at home should in theory be possible with AI assited driving. So, I mean he just actually has to be creative, which he's not. He's a marketer who can sale you sci-fi fantasy.

 

[ZenRaiden]

If you want to interpret him selling off shares of his company under a guise of taxation and such and such, it may possible that he's predicting difficult times with his waning hype train. He's clearly cultivated a large anti-Musk movement that has slowed down the momentum of his largest revenue stream, the stock market.

I think he understands people and understands how people might need technology. Look at PayPal, which for it's time was somewhat radically different from the way things were before. He's trying to do the same thing with cars. Turns out it's not profitable in the long run, as it's a very hard thing to do when most American roads are poorly maintained. (Don't understand how a "genius" wouldn't see that coming, but I guess he simply misplaced his faith?)

But yeah, it turns out it's very hard to participate in market where all the major car manufactures already cater to multiple socioeconomic classes and you just want to cater to the most snobbish iPhone types. His biggest hope is tapping into the commercial sector and getting large shipping deals with companies. I mean, at this point remote driving where drivers can stay at home should in theory be possible with AI assited driving. So, I mean he just actually has to be creative, which he's not. He's a marketer who can sale you sci-fi fantasy.

Believe me I want him to be successful. Trouble is he claims things that even to lay person don't add up. These claims are clear see through hype just like Theranos had.

For example self driving cars are possible, but producing them on commercial scale is a different animal. Sensors alone would hike up the cost of such cars by big margin.
Just so the car can detect obstacles in its ways and understand the terrain.
You cannot just have a vehicle that follows a line. You have to have something that can make full drivers decisions. We aren't even talking about hard moral or dangerous abnormal situations. We are just talking about reaction time to be capable of adjusting your driving to normal traffic, cross sections, crossing etc.
Even that is far cry from what we can do.

I would love to see him land a 200 people spaceship on mars with catering service on Mars, but the hype he is trying to sell is clearly a bad strategy.
Its only matter of few years before people catch up with his game and get tired of it.
How many miracles do you have to envision before someone pegs you as snakes oil salesman. Not that many especially since they are so outrageous and easy to verify.

Now if he said something like we can get 4 astronauts on mars by 2030 I might believe him. He is a lose cannon, and confuses imagination and vision with fairy tale.

He clearly has zero tech knowledge form what I can tell.

Paypal is great service, but that is IT tech. Its hardly the same ball park as space travel and car manufacturing. He has the money, but no brains for this.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

If you want to interpret him selling off shares of his company under a guise of taxation and such and such, it may possible that he's predicting difficult times with his waning hype train. He's clearly cultivated a large anti-Musk movement that has slowed down the momentum of his largest revenue stream, the stock market.

I think he understands people and understands how people might need technology. Look at PayPal, which for it's time was somewhat radically different from the way things were before. He's trying to do the same thing with cars. Turns out it's not profitable in the long run, as it's a very hard thing to do when most American roads are poorly maintained. (Don't understand how a "genius" wouldn't see that coming, but I guess he simply misplaced his faith?)

But yeah, it turns out it's very hard to participate in market where all the major car manufactures already cater to multiple socioeconomic classes and you just want to cater to the most snobbish iPhone types. His biggest hope is tapping into the commercial sector and getting large shipping deals with companies. I mean, at this point remote driving where drivers can stay at home should in theory be possible with AI assited driving. So, I mean he just actually has to be creative, which he's not. He's a marketer who can sale you sci-fi fantasy.

Believe me I want him to be successful. Trouble is he claims things that even to lay person don't add up. These claims are clear see through hype just like Theranos had.

For example self driving cars are possible, but producing them on commercial scale is a different animal. Sensors alone would hike up the cost of such cars by big margin.
Just so the car can detect obstacles in its ways and understand the terrain.
You cannot just have a vehicle that follows a line. You have to have something that can make full drivers decisions. We aren't even talking about hard moral or dangerous abnormal situations. We are just talking about reaction time to be capable of adjusting your driving to normal traffic, cross sections, crossing etc.
Even that is far cry from what we can do.

I would love to see him land a 200 people spaceship on mars with catering service on Mars, but the hype he is trying to sell is clearly a bad strategy.
Its only matter of few years before people catch up with his game and get tired of it.
How many miracles do you have to envision before someone pegs you as snakes oil salesman. Not that many especially since they are so outrageous and easy to verify.

Now if he said something like we can get 4 astronauts on mars by 2030 I might believe him. He is a lose cannon, and confuses imagination and vision with fairy tale.

He clearly has zero tech knowledge form what I can tell.

Paypal is great service, but that is IT tech. Its hardly the same ball park as space travel and car manufacturing. He has the money, but no brains for this.

Oh definitely, if he makes the market sellers more desperate to cater to consumers I'm all for it. It seems like he sees that unviable with his value proposition and the cost of it now.

On the commercial market side, say with long haul trucking, drivers are very well payed for every mile (km) they drive because it means they have to spend an absorbent amount of time on the road. Remote driving I think has always been avoided due to latency issues that would crash the 18-wheeler trucks in an instant. I can see AI assisted driving supplementing that and allowing operators to stay in one fixed location more convenient for them, thus allowing them to be payed less and benefits shipping companies like Amazon.

Yeah, his big promises are going to come back to frame him as a swindler later, even his "hero" astronaut see it what it is.

It's going to have regressive cultural implications if you ask me. It's cool to think that humanity is capable of these amazing feats, it's an ideal he leans into. But it's kinda bizzarly distopian when you realize that from a class perspective, its just the aristocracy expanding their domain.

Not to shit on anyone's parade, I too want to see us living on Mars

 

[Daddy]

Well, just some devil's advocate points. It's true, the other car makers didn't transition to electric because it wasn't profitable. Hence why Tesla is and was basically government funded to stay afloat.

But because Tesla was a government funded startup, Tesla was actually able to invest a lot into improving their manufacturing setup versus the other automakers - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giga_Press. So they are actually ahead of the other automakers now in terms of manufacturing technology, which will make them incredibly competitive, especially since battery costs is coming down and is supposed to get a lot cheaper in the coming years, making their business much more competitive with gas cars. Their focus on self-driving cars is also more on the cheaper AI side of things, so if they can figure it out well enough, their self-driving will be cheaper than the other automakers expensive LIDAR self-driving, which can make mistakes too - . It will also mean less overall costs over the lifetime of a Tesla vs a regular gas car (which is already the case with police departments buying and using them) and has the potential to let people rent self-driving cars and save money by not needing to own and maintain a vehicle anymore. Not to mention, insurance costs could potentially go down a lot. It has a lot of potential, but some people are skeptical that our computing can achieve human-like self-driving. It may never amount to anything.

As far as SpaceX not doing as much as Nasa. You are probably right, but the whole point of SpaceX was to replace Nasa with something cheaper. That's going to come at the cost of resources, manpower, and time, which means less goal-reaching progress over time, but smarter cost-saving technological advancement/buildup along the way. If the government wanted to go to Mars quickly, it could put enough money into its goal and get it done as quickly and inefficiently as possible, but the goal is ways to make spaceflight cheaper; and that's what SpaceX is contracted for. Mars is Elon's goal and reason for starting SpaceX, but that's more a long-term goal after succeeding at the short-term cost-saving technological goals.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Let us not forget that if batteries get cheaper, they get cheaper for everyone.

Also too many battery cars, means you need a shit ton of more batteries and more lithium.

So the cost of these cars might actually go up.

Automakers with relatively short timetables to be electric-only include Volvo, Jaguar, Volkswagen (in Europe), Bentley, Lotus, Cadillac, and, as an aspiration, all of General Motors. GM has said it will have 30 EVs on the market by 2025, 20 of them for sale in North America. Startups ready to deploy EVs include Rivian, Lucid, Bollinger, and Fisker. That’s a lot of electric cars, and that means a lot of batteries. Will the packs and cells be ready to slot into the vehicles? An impressive array of experts say maybe not.

Could We Be Heading into an EV Battery Shortage?

A lot of electric cars have been promised. Some experts are warning there may not be enough batteries for them all.

www.autoweek.com

Not to mention we still have to make sure the carbon footprint of these cars, its life cycle is actually better than regular gas guzzlers and that is still not proven to be true.

So all this battery hype might go as fast as it came.

 

[ZenRaiden]

This got me in stiches.

 

[TheScornedReflex]

As far as SpaceX not doing as much as Nasa. You are probably right, but the whole point of SpaceX was to replace Nasa with something cheaper. That's going to come at the cost of resources, manpower, and time, which means less goal-reaching progress over time, but smarter cost-saving technological advancement/buildup along the way. If the government wanted to go to Mars quickly, it could put enough money into its goal and get it done as quickly and inefficiently as possible, but the goal is ways to make spaceflight cheaper; and that's what SpaceX is contracted for. Mars is Elon's goal and reason for starting SpaceX, but that's more a long-term goal after succeeding at the short-term cost-saving technological goals.

I know this will be a slight derail so by all means ignore it but I'd like to point out one glaring fact that has SpaceX on top of the space race by a huge margin:

Reusable rockets.

People say Nasa this and Nasa that but they've been running competitions to get technology from the private sector because their own innovations have slowed to a crawl. SpaceX is still pumping out world firsts on the space scene and I know it's easy to say "oh he hasn't gotten to Mars yet" and yeah because he's trying to get to fucking Mars lol.

Unashamedly biased Elon fan.

/derail lol

 

[dr froyd]

eventually competition from all the other auto manufacturers will start eating into Tesla's market share. As has been pointed out in this thread, Tesla got a major head-start via state subsidies. That head-start will not last for ever.

in terms of tesla share prices, these will most definitely collapse eventually, as its been trading at beyond-insane valuations due to the liquidity tsunami provided by the US central bank since the onset of covid 19. It's simply a classical market bubble; too much cash and credit in society and too much hype surrounding elon musk. When interest rates rise and fed asset purchaces end, I assume tesla shares will either plummet or enter a long and painful decline.

but of course, musk will have sold most of his holdings before then

 

[ZenRaiden]

eventually competition from all the other auto manufacturers will start eating into Tesla's market share. As has been pointed out in this thread, Tesla got a major head-start via state subsidies. That head-start will not last for ever.

in terms of tesla share prices, these will most definitely collapse eventually, as its been trading at beyond-insane valuations due to the liquidity tsunami provided by the US central bank since the onset of covid 19. It's simply a classical market bubble; too much cash and credit in society and too much hype surrounding elon musk. When interest rates rise and fed asset purchaces end, I assume tesla shares will either plummet or enter a long and painful decline.

but of course, musk will have sold most of his holdings before then

My guess is this will happen next year.

 

[Puffy]

I'm inclined towards a similar position OP. Musk strikes me as being a narcissist whose built a cult of personality around himself in order to attract investors and talented people into his companies. He's smart but it's unlikely he has much technological or engineering skill and just takes credit for the ideas and work of others he invests into or employs.

This channel does a good job of debunking him. My intuition obviously leans me towards accepting this narrative over Musk's one, but it makes sense to me:

 

[scorpiomover]

So lots of E Musks predictions were over optimistic.

I used to think that was a bad thing.

But then I was looking up Musk's type and looking at quotes of his, and saw this:

"I'd rather be optimistic and wrong than pessimistic and right." - Elon Musk.

So I think that even if he knew his predictions were over-optimistic, he'd have preferred to make them anyway.

How long can you guys guess before his whole thing comes crashing down.

I've seen and heard about all sorts of people. The ones who crashed, were people like Nikola Tesla, who ended up giving away his technology to Edison and Westinghouse and spent his last few years living in a hotel with only pigeons for company. There's also Freddie Laker, who sold really cheap flights and undercut the other airlines, who then all did a price war together to force Laker into bankruptcy.

I just don't see Musk as that sort of a player. He made electric cars before the other manufacturers, but ones that had a lot of problems, and so didn't hurt his rivals. Now that Tesla is making better cars, so are the other car manufacturers.

So I think that Musk knows how to play the game of pretending to compete, while really working with your competitors. So he's one of the gang, and probably will get to keep his wealth.

I was actually wishing he at least gets to Mars since NASA gave up.

We had the technology to go to Mars long ago. We'll go to Mars, when it's convenient for the corporations and the political class.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I used to think that was a bad thing.

You are correct that its not a bad thing, but......

Tesla made electricity possible. Musk did not make space flight possible.

His job was to make it commercially viable, and that is still not honestly proven.

He did not invent a rocket, nor did he make a rocket launch much cheaper nor did he do it by himself, but after government gave him lots of greens to work with along with his own wealth.

Electric cars existed in 1900s. Elon Musk did not make them commercially viable.

He just mass manufactured few types of Teslas that honestly aren't making the world greener. The batteries still don"t provide good range, and the cars albeit good looking and good cars overall are not cheap.

So my question is what did Musk really bring to the table that was not here before.

He brought Space X, and Tesla cars. True, but those are just companies building on existing tech.

Musks job was to make both commercially viable. That is where his genius supposed to be. If he is not making profit and his stock is just inflated hot airballoon, then Musk is just failed investor. Just long term, but successful short term.

We had the technology to go to Mars long ago. We'll go to Mars, when it's convenient for the corporations and the political class.

Musk was promising Mars flights long time ago.

Also next 200 years it may never be convenient to go to Mars.

Collecting pace rock, and dirt planet with no atmosphere is not hospitable.

There is literally right now nothing to do except experiments and collecting samples.

Even if we collect samples with humans, the main point would be to land a human on Mars, which would beat any rock collection from Mars or anything.

Is it really necessary to put people into such risk just to make a notch on the board of superb human intellect landing a human on Mars? Cant say.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Lets not forget that making billions and doing nothing is really possible.

Cue > Theranos. So as long as we are talking about real achievement vs. Make believe I am good.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I'm inclined towards a similar position OP. Musk strikes me as being a narcissist whose built a cult of personality around himself in order to attract investors and talented people into his companies. He's smart but it's unlikely he has much technological or engineering skill and just takes credit for the ideas and work of others he invests into or employs.

This channel does a good job of debunking him. My intuition obviously leans me towards accepting this narrative over Musk's one, but it makes sense to me:

I watch both parts, and thanks for posting this.

I did not know its this bad.
I think Musk is going bankrupt real soon if all is true especially part 2.

 

[scorpiomover]

I used to think that was a bad thing.

You are correct that its not a bad thing, but......

Tesla made electricity possible. Musk did not make space flight possible.

What does that have to do with my post where I quoted Musk saying that he would rather be optimistic and wrong, than pessimistic and right?

Musk did not make space flight possible. His job was to make it commercially viable, and that is still not honestly proven.

I don't recall you, I, or anyone hiring Elon Musk to make space flight commercially viable. Do you? When was his deadline, and how much did you promise to pay him if he hit it?

He did not invent a rocket, nor did he make a rocket launch much cheaper nor did he do it by himself, but after government gave him lots of greens to work with along with his own wealth.

Electric cars existed in 1900s. Elon Musk did not make them commercially viable.

He just mass manufactured few types of Teslas that honestly aren't making the world greener. The batteries still don"t provide good range, and the cars albeit good looking and good cars overall are not cheap.

So my question is what did Musk really bring to the table that was not here before.

He brought Space X, and Tesla cars. True, but those are just companies building on existing tech.

Musks job was to make both commercially viable. That is where his genius supposed to be. If he is not making profit and his stock is just inflated hot airballoon, then Musk is just failed investor. Just long term, but successful short term.

This would have all been great arguments back in 2008, when Elon Musk supported the Democrats and Obama, and Tesla cars were sh*t and Space X was a pipe dream.

But these days, Tesla cars are pretty good, certainly when compared to other electric cars, and his Space X rockets have had pretty good results as well.

So people should like Musk a lot more now, than they did in the past.

The only reason I have thought of, as to explain the disssonance, is that ever since Musk said he was supporting Trump and the Republicans, the media have done a hatchet job on him.

Even since the media did a hatchet job on him, the mindless members of the public have followed suit, like lambs following a sheepdog to the slaughterhouse.

Collecting pace rock, and dirt planet with no atmosphere is not hospitable.

There is literally right now nothing to do except experiments and collecting samples.

To set up a base on the Moon or on Mars, we'd need the same things as we would need for an International Space Station in space. We have the ISS. So we can make a base on the Moon or on Mars.

Is it really necessary to put people into such risk just to make a notch on the board of superb human intellect landing a human on Mars? Cant say.

Don't you want Star Wars and Star Trek to become real?

 

[ZenRaiden]

What does that have to do with my post where I quoted Musk saying that he would rather be optimistic and wrong, than pessimistic and right?

So OK he might be wrong, but if he is wrong about stuff then his company might suffer financial loss.

Thus the goal of his company to make profit in space flights is not possible.
Thus his company will seize to exist.
Thus no more space X.

I don't recall you, I, or anyone hiring Elon Musk to make space flight commercially viable. Do you? When was his deadline, and how much did you promise to pay him if he hit it?

The government nor people investing into Musk companies are not giving free hand outs. They are giving him money, because one day it will pay back.
Unless it was charitable expense with the intend to fuel space exploration and make people drive electric cars.
If US government already invested into Musk to do what the US government could do, they unmade their progress in space exploration.

Now they rely on Musk mostly. He has to deliver or US will fall behind in space flights completely.

Space exploration is expensive to everyone. Maybe they saw Musk as possible person to invest into space exploration with, because would not have his hands tied with government requirements.
Instead they would let Musk work within capitalist constrains and generate profit while making space flying cheaper.

If Musk gets cheaper flights than even Russians he will be top monkey in space business world wide. Because right now russians are all star team making ton of money and making superb engines that even NASA used them. They also make them quite cheap and reliable and good. They also have good price range for dollars per kilo flights to low orbit.

But these days, Tesla cars are pretty good, certainly when compared to other electric cars, and his Space X rockets have had pretty good results as well.

Have you seen other models from rivaling companies. Not bad at all.
Teslas are good, but they have niche market.

That market can be easily sliced up between companies that might provide something less expensive in more reasonable price range and with adequate design and comfort. Way sooner than people think.

Teslas still look bare bone in some ways for the cost. You don't think large companies are competition? After all they make huge profits from gas cars, why diverting production to electric ones would be expensive?

All they have to do is make some production halls for electric cars. Production halls that already exist.

As for space flights unless Musk is launching rockets like the Russians are launching rockets his commercial viability is theory. He needs to have profit. Currently he is depth and understandably so. The US gave him money so that his debt won't hinder his progress.

So far Soviet Union launched most rockets ever and Musk is behind. He needs to at least match Soviet Union space program to match current Russia.

Also lets not forget Chinese space program. Very progressive guys in China.

To set up a base on the Moon or on Mars, we'd need the same things as we would need for an International Space Station in space. We have the ISS. So we can make a base on the Moon or on Mars.

Musk wants to develop the Starship model. If it flies he won. At least in theory.
It supposed to be refueling and cargo carrying and people carrying.
He claims it will make Mars flight possible.

But you are wrong about all we need is the tech we have.
Some tech for Mars still needs to be made. Only difference is people in NASA had top engineers to do that. Not sure Musk has the labs for such things.

Don't you want Star Wars and Star Trek to become real?

Star Trek somewhat Star Wars no. Lets just say I am not positive he will even come close to catching up with what was already done. So far he got to the level of normal flights that Russians make routinely.

 

[scorpiomover]

What does that have to do with my post where I quoted Musk saying that he would rather be optimistic and wrong, than pessimistic and right?

So OK he might be wrong, but if he is wrong about stuff then his company might suffer financial loss.

Thus the goal of his company to make profit in space flights is not possible.
Thus his company will seize to exist.
Thus no more space X.

None of that is about what I wrote. You're responding to a straw man.

I don't recall you, I, or anyone hiring Elon Musk to make space flight commercially viable. Do you? When was his deadline, and how much did you promise to pay him if he hit it?

The government nor people investing into Musk companies are not giving free hand outs. They are giving him money, because one day it will pay back.
Unless it was charitable expense with the intend to fuel space exploration and make people drive electric cars.
If US government already invested into Musk to do what the US government could do, they unmade their progress in space exploration.

Now they rely on Musk mostly. He has to deliver or US will fall behind in space flights completely.

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

The US also has Falcon rockets.

There's also Virgin Galactic.

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

They're trying to get lots of companies in on it.

Space exploration is expensive to everyone. Maybe they saw Musk as possible person to invest into space exploration with, because would not have his hands tied with government requirements.

Instead they would let Musk work within capitalist constrains and generate profit while making space flying cheaper.

NASA is relying on Musk's tendency to be an inventor. Even if he doesn't succeed, he'll probably come up with a lot of clever ideas that NASA will then use later on.

If Musk gets cheaper flights than even Russians he will be top monkey in space business world wide. Because right now russians are all star team making ton of money and making superb engines that even NASA used them. They also make them quite cheap and reliable and good. They also have good price range for dollars per kilo flights to low orbit.

The Russians are still using the Soyuz.

It costs $90 million a flight.

The Soyuz spacecraft was first launched in 1966. That makes it over 56 years old.

But these days, Tesla cars are pretty good, certainly when compared to other electric cars, and his Space X rockets have had pretty good results as well.

Have you seen other models from rivaling companies. Not bad at all.

Yes. They use the same design model as Tesla came up with.

Teslas are good, but they have niche market.

That market can be easily sliced up between companies that might provide something less expensive in more reasonable price range and with adequate design and comfort. Way sooner than people think.

Teslas still look bare bone in some ways for the cost. You don't think large companies are competition? After all they make huge profits from gas cars, why diverting production to electric ones would be expensive?

All they have to do is make some production halls for electric cars. Production halls that already exist.

You keep saying that "might == will", when it comes to being pessimistic about Tesla.

As I said before, that pessimism was warranted 10 years ago. Had people been pessimistic about Tesla then, and still were pessimistic about Tesla now, I could understand that.

But most people who seem to be pessimistic about Tesla NOW, were optimistic about Tesla 10 years ago, when it didn't make sense to be optimistic. They became pessimistic about Tesla and negative about Musk, since the US media have been mud-slinging at Musk ever since he said openly that he supported Trump & the Republicans.

You don't need to be a genius to figure out what is going on.

As for space flights unless Musk is launching rockets like the Russians are launching rockets his commercial viability is theory. He needs to have profit. Currently he is depth and understandably so. The US gave him money so that his debt won't hinder his progress.

So far Soviet Union launched most rockets ever and Musk is behind. He needs to at least match Soviet Union space program to match current Russia.

You want to go up in a Soyuz?

Also lets not forget Chinese space program. Very progressive guys in China.

The Russians came out with the microwave, the AF-47, and all sorts of new inventions.

What did the Chinese come up with, that wasn't already well-developed in other countries?

Doing things that are already conventional technologies, is conservative.

To set up a base on the Moon or on Mars, we'd need the same things as we would need for an International Space Station in space. We have the ISS. So we can make a base on the Moon or on Mars.

Musk wants to develop the Starship model. If it flies he won. At least in theory.
It supposed to be refueling and cargo carrying and people carrying.
He claims it will make Mars flight possible.

So are Virgin Galactic, and FalconX. Ships that go into space are VERY expensive. They also use a huge amount of fossil fuels and natural resources.

So everyone is looking at making space ships recyclable, because they'd be a LOT cheaper, and a LOT better for saving the planet from climate change.

But you are wrong about all we need is the tech we have.

There are oxygen recycling equipment in nuclear submarines.

There are equipment to withstand strong differences in pressure in submarines.

Hydroponics is a standard method for growing all sorts of crops.

Solar panels can suck up tremendous amounts of energy in outer space.

Some tech for Mars still needs to be made. Only difference is people in NASA had top engineers to do that. Not sure Musk has the labs for such things.

So what? I don't know if he does have top scientists and top labs or not.

If NASA had top scientists and top labs, NASA would not be turning to Musk for help, not unless the top scientists at NASA said that they can't crack these problems with their scientists and labs, and also said that Musk's unorthodox out-of-the-box approach is just what is needed to crack these problems.

So most likely, they want to fund Musk, because he's likely to come up with a weird NTP way to solve them that doesn't even need a lab.

Don't you want Star Wars and Star Trek to become real?

Star Trek somewhat Star Wars no. Lets just say I am not positive he will even come close to catching up with what was already done. So far he got to the level of normal flights that Russians make routinely.

I noticed that you're pessimistic about Musk.

I was pessimistic about Tesla and SpaceX several years ago, and am still unsure what the future holds for them now.

But that was because I was being realistic.

If the world is only listening to the media, and the media is turning on Musk because of politics, then it's the politicians who will end up making the decisions about which companies and spaceships will be used in the future.

 

[ZenRaiden]

Let me sum it up.

When someone says its better to aim for the stars and hit the moon, what they are really saying is they are subscribing to western corporate culture.

Phrases, bon mots, cliques and bullshit.

When Trump went for president elections I said he would win.
Many people said he has zero chance and if by chance he wins it will be the end of world as we know it, US will be irredeemable and they would rather move out of US.

I said Trump is going to win.

When Trump won many said he is going to get impeached very soon, there is no way he could be president full term.

I said he will be president full term, but not very good one.

I read thinking fast and slow which is about human bias.
Then I read about Noise by same author.

Human bias is and always will be strong. What is more "noise" as they call it is what covers up the error of bias. Which means not only are we biased, but we have so much noise that we cannot even identify the bias properly, let alone make good predictions.

Musk is typical poster child of bias. Building a coke can and flying it into space is not revolutionary by any stretch. Period.

Musk is not logical, he is passionate on camera. He is human and makes human errors.
He is not engineer or scientist. He has no STEM knowledge.

Stock markets where most of his value rests is not rational either.

So Musk is not rational, and stock market is not rational.

Do you believe corporate culture of "Yes we can" can get Musk on Mars or let alone build all the models of space ship and make the profitable?

I mean hard facts already say he is losing. Its only matter of time.

I am not saying everything he has done up this point is all wrong.

But he has chosen commercial route not you and me. It was his choice, and his risk.

Investing is one of the most riskiest jobs ever right after rescuing people from collapsed mines. So you might be holding up for a Hero that never existed.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Ex-User (9086)]

He's not going to go bankrupt. People will lose faith in his techno hyperoptimism. Spacex will be fine.

All of his ideas besides rockets and electric cars are a lunacy and a waste of time. He's going to get outcompeted on the electric car market so Tesla's future is uncertain.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

I said Trump is going to win.

When Trump won many said he is going to get impeached very soon, there is no way he could be president full term.

I said he will be president full term, but not very good one.

Not really indicative of what you said, just to get it on the record. He was impeached, twice, it's just that he wasn't removed from office because his party was the majority of the Senate. Swell system we have here.

 

[ZenRaiden]

I said Trump is going to win.

When Trump won many said he is going to get impeached very soon, there is no way he could be president full term.

I said he will be president full term, but not very good one.

Not really indicative of what you said, just to get it on the record. He was impeached, twice, it's just that he wasn't removed from office because his party was the majority of the Senate. Swell system we have here.

Yeah true. He was impeached, but not convicted if I understand correctly. As convictions come from votes.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

That video frames Elon Musk as an experiment imo. If you ask me not for Musk, but rather to justify capitalism, or as I said earlier, aristocratic imperialism. Wonder how many connections Musk's family has now that I know his Father was involved in policy formation. Oof that hurts.

 

[ZenRaiden]

 

[Puffy]

It would be a bit of a rude awakening for all the wholesome fan boys and girls out there.

I'm unsure if he'll go bankrupt or not, I just suspect that he's a fraud.

 

[EndogenousRebel]

This thread has done a pretty good job of assassinating his character.

I forgot all about that Thai cave incident, and TF lining up all these failed promises just adds to the picture that aligns with reality.

I see so many headlines giving him such a charitable view you'd think he's working their shafts. He "gives a Masterclass in [emotional intelligence, problem solving, management, ect]"

I didn't like him before, but I feel dirty.

 

[ZenRaiden]