Hacker News Reader

Comment by SonOfKyuss | Hacker News Reader

I actually get a kick out of Eletrek’s roasting of Elon and Tesla, but if you read a few of their articles, it’s clear they don’t like him. Lots of opinions and editorializing in the articles. I have no problem with that, you just have to realize where they are coming from and base your interpretation accordingly

View on HN

Its not that they dont like him, its more of Editor was big believer until Tesla scammed him out of half a $mil worth of fake roadsters that never materialized.

If that's really the reason, that's the most idiotic reason possible. So he "earned" a couple of Roadsters by spamming his referral code, and it turns out his free cars might be a decade late, and maybe not as awesome as promised?

Booo hooooo

It's called fraud, the editor was a victim of fraud. At least he clued on late I guess..

There was no guarantee of Roadster delivery date.

Is it fraud if he paid $0 for non-existent roadsters? Referral credits are legal fictions, much like how Tesla Roadsters are physical fictions. Trading one fiction for another isn’t fraud, it’s cosplay.

>Is it fraud if he paid $0 for non-existent roadsters?

Is it fraud if you worked for a startup that promised you options, and then refused to honor/issue those said options? After all, because those options never existed, you also "paid $0 for non-existent [options]"?

> Leveraging an existing monetised readership for referral credits isn’t “work”.

> Is it fraud if he paid $0 for non-existent roadsters?

How do you think readership gets monetised in the first place? The biggest way is ads, which includes referrals.

Do you dismiss paid ad placement the same way you dismiss referrals? If not, what makes it different?

> Referral credits are legal fictions

A promise for $100 of stuff isn't exactly the same as a promise for $100, but it's close. Debt is a "legal fiction" but that doesn't mean it's not legitimate, or that you can pretend it doesn't exist.

> Do you dismiss paid ad placement the same way you dismiss referrals? If not, what makes it different?

The contract

Referrals usually have a contract. I don't know what went wrong in this situation, but in general those systems are just as legally binding.

> booo hoooo

If your employer said they'd pay you half a million if you worked for them, and then you did and they didn't pay you, I doubt you'd be dismissing it so frivolously

Okay but that’s not remotely analogous. Leveraging an existing monetised readership for referral credits isn’t “work”.

Then what is it?

> Leveraging an existing monetised readership for referral credits isn’t “work”.

it is literally a situation in which a business pays someone for doing a job (e.g. referring customers)

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

1. What is it then?

2. If it’s not hard work, then why didn’t Tesla go out and do it themselves instead of mooching off someone else to do it?

The reason for that is actually very funny. Electrek guy (Fred) was one of the main propagandist for Tesla's cult - he 'earned' 2 free Tesla Roadsters for his convincing enough people to buy a Tesla.

It was only once he realized that he has been duped and those will never materialize that the coverage turned negative.

Thanks for this - I've paid much less attention to Tesla over recent years, but my memory of Electrek was that it was a distinctly-pro Tesla outlet, but this was a few years back now.

I think Elon going full nazi also had a major influence on the changing judgement of Tesla.

Yup. Plain and simple.

I won’t purchase or use anything Elon Musk does. Bad behavior and corroding society needs to be met with social disapproval.

Fred has been going at Tesla far longer than Elon has been political.

It‘s been a gradual process.

Fred selling his stock also meant he was less inclined to be only pro-Tesla.

ChatGPT sums it up pretty well I think:

https://chatgpt.com/share/69552165-238c-8008-980b-4d0ff2e1b4...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com