> > Musk is way too smart
Is this your rational stance or you just want it to be true?
Maybe because you are emotionally attached to SpaceX and Tesla?
Is this your rational stance or you just want it to be true?
Maybe because you are emotionally attached to SpaceX and Tesla?
The guy has a double degree in physics and economics. The guy whose companies single handedly upended the car industry. The guy whose companies build the first viable reuseable rockets. Musk is definitely a weirdo. But denying his intelligence is wildly stupid.
Tesla is what? A 80,000 people company with 90bn in revenue? Peanuts compared to the United States of America.
Point is you cannot hide behind your title, sooner or later you have to sit in a room with other people and you have to speak, and if you say idiotic things people are gonna notice and call you out and you'll get exposed.
That's exactly what happened in the last 3 years with Musk.
There's a reason why the saying 'The emperor has no clothes' is so popular, it's because something like this happened thosands of times throughout history. Guy gets incredible and once in a lifetime tailwind, gets a title and sits on it.
People from all over the place come to meet the man with the unique title anticipating a world-shattering intellect/charisma or what have you and in the end they realize it was just a guy who had incredible tailwinds after all
Are you joking here? None of them are even remotely as successful as Musk. A president is not the founder of a country. It's incomparable.
> Tesla is what? A 80,000 people company with 90bn in revenue? Peanuts compared to the United States of America.
You forget SpaceX, Neuralink, Boring company, Twitter, Paypal, OpenAI.
> Point is you cannot hide behind your title, sooner or later you have to get in a room with other people and you have to speak, and if you say idiotic things people are gonna notice and call you out and you'll get exposed.
> That's exactly what happened in the last 3 years with Musk
How is he exposed? Some internet haters are talking smack? Musk is swimming in money while his companies are racking up successes. If anything this makes the haters look even more irrational.
What do you think it takes to create numerous highly successful companies? You don't need to talk to people to do that?
And by running his wide mouth he has proven the to the world that all of that is in spite of him, not because of him.
It's the equivalent of pop-stars trying to write their own songs or improvising on stage. They are nothing without the structure that propelled them forward, similarly Musk is nothing without luck, had he kept his mouth shut he'd have at least managed to fool those who are not familiar with the concept of survivorship bias, and apparently you seem to be one of them.
To be clear I believe all the above applies to every billionaire not just Musk.
Musk is and will forever be woefully underprepared to fight against someone with Mark’s training and level of fitness. His challenge to fight was childish and idiotic. Even smart people do idiotic things from time to time.
He's a grifter and a narcissist who was very good at throwing money at the right companies and taking credit as 'founder'. I guess he is 'smart' in some sense, but not the kind he likes to pretend to be.
It's just insane how Musk can spur such misinformation campaigns. It reminds me off the whole Obama birth certificate stuff. People are just not thinking right.
That comes from a broad liberal arts education and attending "Physics for non-physics people" lectures.
He's seen the Foucalt's Pendulum and heavy pendulum swinging at the head demonstrations but never had to get into the weeds with tensor calculations or most of the material B.Sc Physics grads would consider essential.
It's more physics than a History graduate would typically see, but less physics than, say, an Engineering graduate would be required to do.
It's technically a Physics degree, sure, but it's easy to see how many STEM people wouldn't regard that as an actual Physics degree.
It's quite an okay degree combo for a manager to have, Econ, Business, + exposure to some STEM.
And that's it, degree wise (sans any independant skill) it doesn't show any particularly ability in physics and|or engineering and were he to (say) apply to spaceX or elsewhere as an Engineer | STEM graduate for an Engineer | STEM role, on the basis of that bit of paper he'd be either binned or passed to "potential mid manager" pile.
I've been a part time STEM teaching assistent on and off for decades (six months, one or two courses, every third year) as a way of keeping in touch with old uni friends, a STEM consultant group, and upcoming talent looking for work .. liberal arts students doing 101 bridging corses vary widely in ability and mostly pass regardless (if they attend, hand in easy papers, and don't fluff rote exams) .. that's their skill level, STEM aware.
Some have actual STEM talent, many trade on the pretence of STEM talent.
TLDR; the relevance is that degree is no real evidence of any particular STEM skill.
Very probably (and I do mean this) Mr. Bean is|was a better Engineer than Musk (although admittedly he dropped out of his doctoral work for a more lucrative career)
You challenge someone to a fight, then talk over two months how it’s happening, it’s definitely happening, in August, it’ll happen, definitely happening, and then back out… because you were not given enough time?! Your economics degree and car company doesn’t change anything of that.