You're viewing a single thread.
Is Musk really an antagonist? Sure the guy is a douchebag, but he doesn't seem to be actively dismantling society. In fact, I'd say he's still net positive.
I'd say hyperloop was a scam, and scammers are bad people.
Hyperloop was a napkin sketch that he gave to the world, it wasn't a product of any of his companies just an idea he thought might be good, but which he was unwilling to try
The boring company was created by Musk for this, you are not removing his responsibility.
Beats me how you came to this conclusion. Me and my coworkers shit talk this guy all day whilst barely making more than minimum wage- Billionaires shouldn't exist period, much less ones that don't pay taxes and who buy entire social media platforms just to flood them with hate speech and ban critics...
I guess it sucks that he broke one of the more damaging internet services
On his good side he made electric cars cool, he made space access cheaper and is working on making it cheaper still
I wouldn't call anything Tesla does cool. The cybertruck? That's a bootleg delorean and a death trap too. Space? You're joking. In my opinion, that's the last thing that should be privatized. Elon specifically is responsible for a lot of space junk already. And don't even get me started on how unethical and inane neuralink is...
The way he ruined Twitter, the whole Hyperloop scheme, his spreading of conspiracies… what was the last positive he brought to society? Starlink? And he managed to be an ass about that too.
I could’ve agreed with you maybe 2/3 years ago, but he’s gone full mask off recently. I wouldn’t label him as a “main” antagonist but he definitely is one.
Let's not forget his recent lawsuit against Media Matters for accurately reporting on the hate speech on xitter.
He managed to be an ass about it in a way that helped Russia's invasion and got Ukrainian soldiers killed.
No no, you got everything wrong, he just wants the war to stop, it only casually happened that that particular action was detrimental to Ukraine. He definitely doesn’t have ties to Russia, so it could also happen the other way around. Just wait. Any minute now.
Virtually all the good things Musk has supposedly done were done by other people. He's just an asshole with enough money to buy a whole lot of name recognition.
Sometimes, progress takes an asshole. Is he personally down there coming up with new technology like Tony Stark? Of course not, you'd be a fucking idiot to believe that.
Would electric vehicles, solar battery storage, world wide Internet access via satellite, or the commercial space industry be ANYWHERE near as advanced as they are if Elon Musk never existed? Of course not, you'd have to be a fucking idiot to believe that.
Sure, anyone could have done what he did. All he did was hire a bunch of smarter people to achieve his successes. But the point is, while anyone could have done that, he's the only one who did. People have a god damn hate boner for the guy because he's a douchebag. But people let that hate blind them from having to admit the truth: his impact on humanity has, so far at least, been a net positive.
Can you honestly say we'd be in a better place if Musk never existed? Not suddenly died, or all of a sudden stopped being an out of touch douchebag, but never existed. There would be zero market for EV vehicles, the idea of global wifi would be a fucking joke, the space industry as a whole would be on life support, solar would still be unfeasible for single homes.
People thought of him as the next Tesla. They were wrong. Elon Musk isn't like Tesla, he's like Edison. EXACTLY like Edison. A self-obsessed, vindictive, little jackass whose only famous because he repeatedly stole and took credit for the accomplishments of others. But, just like Edison, his existence has driven innovation for the advancement of humanity. I'm not going to sit around and pretend otherwise just because I don't like the guy on a personal level. Sometimes, progress takes an asshole.
You cant calculate net positive based on actuals, but also include opportunity cost, and regardless, simple utilitarianism is morally reprehensible imho. Someone invents the cure for all cancers, and only commits the occasional rape or murder. Net positive? Hero/villain?
I'm a solid believer in utilitarianism, so yes, I'd say it's a net positive. Hero/villain doesn't come into it because those are meaningless words that only allow for a black and white view of things.
Let's say this person existed. Someone who literally created the cure for all cancers, but every 2 years they raped and murdered someone. Now let's say you had a button that would wipe them from existence. Not kill them, wipe them from existence as if they had never been born. Would you push it?
Keep in mind, if you don't push it, there is nothing stopping people from holding them accountable and stopping their rapes/murders while still having the cancer cure. Meanwhile, if you do push it, a handful of people will be spared rape/murder, but humanity as a whole would lose the cure for cancer and you'd condemn not just millions of current people, but all those who could have benefited in the future. Hell, even if they were never held accountable they'll still die eventually, but humanity would still have their cure.
So, would you push it?
I'd say 50/50 as much bad as good. But it's turning in to 60/40 fast (in a bad way)
Agreed, he might be a bit far fetched with his paedophile jokes but for the most part he's just a bit spontaneous and shortsighted