Hacker News Reader

Comment by block_dagger | Hacker News Reader

After reading the Isaacson biography, it’s clear to me Elon is not a stable or trustworthy person. The evidence continues to mount.

View on HN

after reading the actual words he writes himself and publishes them for the world to see I came to the same conclusion

When people tell you who they are, listen.

I find this thread disturbing, and with 0 examples as to why you guys think that about him. Like what are these things he's written and said.

Do you think you look convincing, trying to pretend you're not aware of Elon Musk's reputation?

He's literally the richest person on Earth. It's as if you're pretending you don't know what Santa Claus is about.

I've heard of Santa Claus, but what does he do exactly?

I know who he is, what are you going on about? Why don't you give me some examples of why you think he's a bad person?

> I know who he is, what are you going on about? Why don't you give me some examples of why you think he's a bad person?

at this point there has to be some assumption that the confusion on your side lies in that all the rest of us think demonstrate that he is a "bad person" are things that you think makes him a "good person", so there is probably no point in supplying them

Elon Musk was insulted over the internet by an emergency worker during a deadly rescue of children trapped in a flooded cave, and he responded by accusing the rescue worker of pedophelia. Elon doubled down repeatedly on the claim, such as by later clarifying that by pedophile he meant sex with young Thai boys.

He also hired an investigator to try and find any dirt on the rescue worker. Now he says this is just his way of having fun.

Anyways, you mentioned something about being disturbed. Please do continue.

> He also hired an investigator to try and find any dirt on the rescue worker. Now he says this is just his way of having fun.

Let me translate it for Musk fans. He repeatedly tried to ruin a life of a hero, because he felt insulted. Its also fun.

There are literally dozens of examples, but not a single one will dissuade you from your pearl clutching behaviour when your bff billionaire needs defending.

I've also read the biography. It's clear that he's stable and trustworthy enough to run multiple large companies, assemble a loyal force of allies who follow him around to his different ventures, a force that includes multiple family members, and win long term government contracts.

The conclusion Isaacson himself reached is that Musk has an extraordinary need for intensity and challenge, to the extent that he becomes uncomfortable and unhappy if there isn't something big riding right on the edge of going spectacularly wrong. This is a trait that most people don't have, and it's ideal for doing the kinds of things he does. But don't mistake that need for intensity for being unstable or dishonest.

Au Contraire, don't mistake drive and ambition for being a good person. It's not uncommon for highly successful people to be awful. Typically, you need to be bone headed, rude, highly opinionated. Often you need to lie and steal.

Just because Musk has financial success does not mean he isn't awful. In fact, financial success is probably one of the worst indicators of being a person of high integrity.

I didn't mention "being a good person" anywhere, that's not the question at hand largely because I don't think it's a usefully complex way to think about people.

Ok, replace that word with stable and trustworthy, which you did say. I get very frustrated with people who play pedantic games. I know you understand what I'm saying. You're not being clever by doing this. All you're showing is that you don't have an argument or any useful thoughts to add, but you love the sound of your own voice, so you'll butt in with pedantic bullshit. It doesn't make you look smart; it makes you look pathetic and conceited.

Interesting. How did you come to this conclusion? Any specific thing or rather the overall impression after reading the book?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com