Elon Musk (No Politics)

[EEVblog]

if you put politics and ideology at work into your work, and you are asked to stop, and you don't stop... The only legal way to stop you is to fire you. All these woke idiots corrupting our discussion who were fired had a chance to be a decent person.

I remember once at work in the late 90's.
I got called into to managers office urgently and asked to explain why I was posting restricted photos of our companies product on my personal website.
One of our suppliers who had to sign an NDA about our product found it and reported me.
I tried not to laugh my arse off as I tried to explain that what a hyperlink was (this was early internet web days), and that I had posted a public URL to the Australian Designs Awards website where we won an award, and they had the photo of our product, provided by us as part of the public award submission. 

They told me to take it down the link anyway, not understanding it didn't get rid of the image, and that I'd be fired if I didn't do it. Yes, it was temping to just walk our laughing, but I removed the link.

[EEVblog]

Others like CommonSenseSkeptic trounce Musk on a daily basis, way worse than Thunderf00t does, and none of them ever get banned. Barnacules Nerdgasm is another one that comes to mind that I know of (and they have had personal tussles in the past), and there are countless others. None of them get banned.
This rumor started because the mainstream media went with a story one time that must was permanently banning journalists. They were just temporarily banned due to breaking the T&C for various reasons.

Again, if you think Musk is banning people he hates then provide provide actual examples.
He let the ultimate litmus test Alex Jones back on the platform, and he hates his guts.

Well, if what you wrote is true, then point in Musk's favor. (Not a fanboi here.)

Yes, I've seen countless people claim that Musk bans everyone on X who disagrees with him, yet they can never name a single solid example, whilst his harshest critics remain. Literally people's who's sole online presence on X is to expose Elon/Tesla etc with every post.
Musk is remarkably tolerant for a dictator 

[tszaboo]

if you put politics and ideology at work into your work, and you are asked to stop, and you don't stop... The only legal way to stop you is to fire you. All these woke idiots corrupting our discussion who were fired had a chance to be a decent person.

Quite a few months ago I responded to a SpaceX employee who complained on X that he was fired for posting a company grounds photo of Starship on X.
When they asked him to take it down because it's company policy for employees not to post any work related images online, he refused, so they fired him.

His excuse was that there a hundred similar photos of the same Starship taken by people right outside the gates, why should his photo be any different.
I tried to explain how the real work works, and how the company has to have a policy, but he got all upset and claimed he did nothing wrong and that they fired him for no cause
Some people just don't get it.

Tried to find the post, but found this instead, LOL.
https://x.com/eevblog/status/1592352154433777665

Some people just don't get it, and it's not even political.
Company I worked for quite a while ago, had the policy "No phone with camera on company premises". It's a simple rule. buy a dumb phone if you need to call someone, you don't need a smartphone because you are there to work, not to play candy crush.

And taking a photo from a space craft, placing it online? You did that 40 years ago, FBI locks you up and charges you with treason.

[Psi]

if you put politics and ideology at work into your work, and you are asked to stop, and you don't stop... The only legal way to stop you is to fire you. All these woke idiots corrupting our discussion who were fired had a chance to be a decent person.

I remember once at work in the late 90's.
I got called into to managers office urgently and asked to explain why I was posting restricted photos of our companies product on my personal website.
One of our suppliers who had to sign an NDA about our product found it and reported me.
I tried not to laugh my arse off as I tried to explain that what a hyperlink was (this was early internet web days), and that I had posted a public URL to the Australian Designs Awards website where we won an award, and they had the photo of our product, provided by us as part of the public award submission. 

They told me to take it down the link anyway, not understanding it didn't get rid of the image, and that I'd be fired if I didn't do it. Yes, it was temping to just walk our laughing, but I removed the link.

I'd have be tempted to say, "You should probably run that by your lawyers first, because firing me for this
would be extremely illegal under employment laws." At least in NZ it would be.

But I'd probably have thought meh, too much effort, and simply removed the hyperlink and replaced it with the text saying something like  "You can see an image of the product on the Australian Designs Awards website under XYZ".  But if they still fired me for that, then yeah, employment board would have a field day with that one.

But pissing managers off would likely ruin any chances of pay rises any time soon, and getting fired even when you win a court case still requires finding a new job, so meh, probably better to bite tongue and remove it i guess.

[Cyclotron]

Others have said in this thread, and I'll repeat it: I do not understand why so much of what I see around Elon seems emotional. And I've seen the same from others about other public people, and find it just as irrational and, well, odd to me.

Elon is often portrayed as a genius, but no one seems to define why or in what capacity. I do not believe that, in the strict sense, he is. He is a gifted leader and at least intelligent and educated enough to recognize innovative thinking and technology.  Steve Jobs was such a leader and visionary. He was also well known as an "@ssh0le" and a tyrant to work for. I walked past his Mercedes several times, only to see it parked in handicapped spots outside Apple's old headquarters.

Looking at significant innovations, you can point back to great science fiction as the source of thought fodder. The tables and phones we use today were well-sorted in the science fiction of decades past. The rockets landing, robots working, and electric cars whirring were also well-worn. It takes great engineers to build those into reality, but it takes outstanding leadership to believe in it, to believe it can be better, and to sell it to investors and the public.

Elon is a fair target for criticism. I don't like some of his trollish behaviors, but I don't eat dinner with him either.

Twitter/X:
He put his money where his mouth is on X and appears to have a chance of saving the company. If anyone really believed it was going to last before he bought it, they were smoking something. Time will tell if he can make it a go.

Politics:
He used his money in politics. All of the very wealthy people do, just more quietly, which is the key. It's their money, do we get to tell them what they can do with it?

DOGE:
He volunteered his time to step in and "help". You can debate whether what he did was good. I have seen people say that he caused harm, but I haven't seen anything substantiated on that front. I have seen the numbers substantiated on claimed savings, and no one on the other side of politics in the government seems to argue that those savings aren't real. But back to my point, he volunteered to go help. I haven't. What I've seen is a lot of hand-waving about potential harms, potential privacy issues, potential this or that. And, yes, disruption.

Otherwise, he leads some of the most innovative companies on the planet. Companies that are disrupting industries and will forever hold a positive place in history.

[vk6zgo]

If it was limited to trolling, it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is that sometimes it isn't trolling and it damages by  stomping over things that other people value. Just because something can be done, doesn't mean that rich entitled riff raff should do it.
One example was his enshittification of Twitter.

Twitter is VASTLY better than what it was before. Musk improved it more in 6 months than in the entire history of Twitter, with 75% less staff.

I decided that I couldn't just sit back & criticise "X" "secondhand" without experiencing it, so signed up.
I lasted about a week!-----All I can say is if that is the "improved" version, Twitter must have really been crap!

[Matrix_Glitch]

I decided that I couldn't just sit back & criticise "X" "secondhand" without experiencing it, so signed up.
I lasted about a week!-----All I can say is if that is the "improved" version, Twitter must have really been crap!

It depends on your values.
If you value essential (even if incomplete) freedom of speech, X has no equal.
No one I know comes even remotely close to it.

Sure, it has its faults, but so far it's (by far) the best we got.

[Cyclotron]

I decided that I couldn't just sit back & criticise "X" "secondhand" without experiencing it, so signed up.
I lasted about a week!-----All I can say is if that is the "improved" version, Twitter must have really been crap!

It depends on your values.
If you value essential (even if incomplete) freedom of speech, X has no equal.
No one I know comes even remotely close to it.

Sure, it has its faults, but so far it's (by far) the best we got.

The latest news supports your view. Bluesky was created and marketed as a place where liberals could feel safe when Musk purchased X.

Bluesky is being called out for a lack of diversity and for being more hostile than X.
https://fortune.com/2025/06/12/bluesky-backfiring-mark-cuban-lack-of-diversity-of-thought-x-users/
https://www.newyorker.com/culture/infinite-scroll/social-media-is-navigating-its-sectarian-phase

If the news is to be believed, all those high-profile blue check marks are slinking back to X.

I don't use X though I have an account there. I'm an anti-social media user, though I have an exception for EEvBlog and YouTube.

[tggzzz]

I literally get called both an Elon sycophant AND an Elon hater on the same day on X 

No surprise: Twatter was - by design -  never the place for subtle reasoned arguments.

Musk has made it even more polarised

[tggzzz]

I decided that I couldn't just sit back & criticise "X" "secondhand" without experiencing it, so signed up.
I lasted about a week!-----All I can say is if that is the "improved" version, Twitter must have really been crap!

It depends on your values.
If you value essential (even if incomplete) freedom of speech, X has no equal.
No one I know comes even remotely close to it.

Sure, it has its faults, but so far it's (by far) the best we got.

Freedom of speech has limitations, e.g. not to shout "fire" in a crowded room.

With freedom comes responsibility, e.g. not to call a rescuer a "paedo", nor "traitor" to someone you don't like.

Fortunately nothing else equals Twatter; one of them is more than enough.

Sometimes the "best" isn't good enough.

[Matrix_Glitch]

Freedom of speech has limitations, e.g. not to shout "fire" in a crowded room.

I see you are gulping Nazi KoolAid - Fanta.

That's not limitation of the freedom of speech but persecution of malevolent  action.

Just like e.g. persecution of forgery doesn't impinge on freedom of artistic creation.

With freedom comes responsibility, e.g. not to call a rescuer a "paedo", nor "traitor" to someone you don't like.

No one should prevent you from doing that. What if guy is a pedo ?
But ofcourse, if it isn't true, "freedom of speech" won't shield you from consequences.

Just like you have freedom of movement, which doesn't mean that you can jaywalk or disrupt road traffic etc.

Fortunately nothing else equals Twatter; one of them is more than enough.

Fortunately, we have Ursula and her crew to the rescue - again.
What would we do without her ?
https://x.com/Sydney_Smith221/status/1988449662269874302?s=20
https://x.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/1988782720345075803?s=20

[Matrix_Glitch]

Freedom of speech has limitations, e.g. not to shout "fire" in a crowded room.

If that was even remotely true de-facto, whole top of EU governance would be in prison long ago.
Or got their belly dance in front of a firing squad.

[Matrix_Glitch]

Freedom of speech has limitations, e.g. not to shout "fire" in a crowded room.

With freedom comes responsibility, e.g. not to call a rescuer a "paedo", nor "traitor" to someone you don't like.

Fortunately nothing else equals Twatter; one of them is more than enough.

Sometimes the "best" isn't good enough.

BTW, this is EXACTLY where Ursula and her crew wants you.
Just days ago she has pushed  to formation  of "The Eu Ministry Of Truth".

Which meant to muzzle every voice.
No one gets to shout "Fire" of that's against EU's dogma- whether there is fire or not.
Or pedofile etcetc.

[Cyclotron]

Freedom of speech has limitations, e.g. not to shout "fire" in a crowded room.

I see you are gulping Nazi KoolAid - Fanta.

That's not limitation of the freedom of speech but persecution of malevolent  action.

Just like e.g. persecution of forgery doesn't impinge on freedom of artistic creation.

With freedom comes responsibility, e.g. not to call a rescuer a "paedo", nor "traitor" to someone you don't like.

No one should prevent you from doing that. What if guy is a pedo ?
But ofcourse, if it isn't true, "freedom of speech" won't shield you from consequences.

Just like you have freedom of movement, which doesn't mean that you can jaywalk or disrupt road traffic etc.

Fortunately nothing else equals Twatter; one of them is more than enough.

Fortunately, we have Ursula and her crew to the rescue - again.
What would we do without her ?
https://x.com/Sydney_Smith221/status/1988449662269874302?s=20
https://x.com/MikeBenzCyber/status/1988782720345075803?s=20

I'm not sure what I witnessed here. I am in some disbelief that the retort posted to your view, that X provides the best venue for freedom of speech, implies that speech should be restricted. Your response is some of the best I've seen to such drivel.

To top that, the misogynistic slur used to describe said place while insinuating one shouldn't be able to just call people names that are disliked. The irony in such a compact form; Color me amazed.

[tggzzz]

Freedom of speech has limitations, e.g. not to shout "fire" in a crowded room.

With freedom comes responsibility, e.g. not to call a rescuer a "paedo", nor "traitor" to someone you don't like.

Fortunately nothing else equals Twatter; one of them is more than enough.

Sometimes the "best" isn't good enough.

BTW, this is EXACTLY where Ursula and her crew wants you.
Just days ago she has pushed  to formation  of "The Eu Ministry Of Truth".

Which meant to muzzle every voice.
No one gets to shout "Fire" of that's against EU's dogma- whether there is fire or not.
Or pedofile etcetc.

Having looked at your blessedly short posting history, clearly you aren't interested in anything other than a flame war.

[Matrix_Glitch]

Having looked at your blessedly short posting history, clearly you aren't interested in anything other than a flame war.

If you reserve the right to remain ignorant, no one shall stand in your way.

[PlainName]

Yes, I've seen countless people claim that Musk bans everyone on X who disagrees with him, yet they can never name a single solid example, whilst his harshest critics remain. Literally people's who's sole online presence on X is to expose Elon/Tesla etc with every post.
Musk is remarkably tolerant for a dictator 

X Purges Prominent Journalists, Leftists With No Explanation

Twitter appears to throttle New York Times

Twitter suspends several journalists who shared information about Musk's jet

Etc.

BTW, I thought the blue tick originally denoted the account was of the actual person. Prior to that, someone could set up, say, DonaldJTrump and no-one would be the wiser as to if it were really him. The blue tick showed that it was (and lack of same suggested it wouldn't be).

[wraper]

Yes, I've seen countless people claim that Musk bans everyone on X who disagrees with him, yet they can never name a single solid example, whilst his harshest critics remain. Literally people's who's sole online presence on X is to expose Elon/Tesla etc with every post.
Musk is remarkably tolerant for a dictator 

X Purges Prominent Journalists, Leftists With No Explanation

I've checked a few, and their accounts are not banned right now.

Twitter appears to throttle New York Times

If X's algorithm does not promote this trash media, it's a good thing, frankly.

Twitter suspends several journalists who shared information about Musk's jet

Doxxing in a nutshell. Dude even got around Privacy ICAO Address that Elon's private jet used at some point. X banned this account after a car with Elon's little son was attacked by a nutjob at an airport.

[tggzzz]

Yes, I've seen countless people claim that Musk bans everyone on X who disagrees with him, yet they can never name a single solid example, whilst his harshest critics remain. Literally people's who's sole online presence on X is to expose Elon/Tesla etc with every post.
Musk is remarkably tolerant for a dictator 

X Purges Prominent Journalists, Leftists With No Explanation

I've checked a few, and their accounts are not banned right now.

Twitter appears to throttle New York Times

If X's algorithm does not promote this trash media, it's a good thing, frankly.

Twitter suspends several journalists who shared information about Musk's jet

Doxxing in a nutshell. Dude even got around Privacy ICAO Address that Elon's private jet used at some point. X banned this account after a car with Elon's little son was attacked by a nutjob at an airport.

Some people in this thread (and elsewhere) claim free speech is A Very Good Thing, and fight against any limitations to free speech.

I'm not one of them.

[daqq]

DOGE:
He volunteered his time to step in and "help". You can debate whether what he did was good. I have seen people say that he caused harm, but I haven't seen anything substantiated on that front.

Erm, well, yes, selfless Samaritan work indeed... https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-03-27/elon-musk-trump-doge-conflicts-of-interest ... I'm sure nothing was gained by him. Yes, time to get a halo for Musk.

[Cyclotron]

DOGE:
He volunteered his time to step in and "help". You can debate whether what he did was good. I have seen people say that he caused harm, but I haven't seen anything substantiated on that front.

Erm, well, yes, selfless Samaritan work indeed... https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2025-03-27/elon-musk-trump-doge-conflicts-of-interest ... I'm sure nothing was gained by him. Yes, time to get a halo for Musk.

How can anyone volunteer in government and not have some conflicts of interest?  This is just FUD unless there's evidence that someone actually exercised their privileges for personal gain, such as the congresspeople who use insider information to trade stocks. I didn't say the person is a saint, but what exactly did he do that's illegal?

[PlainName]

Twitter suspends several journalists who shared information about Musk's jet

Doxxing in a nutshell. Dude even got around Privacy ICAO Address that Elon's private jet used at some point. X banned this account after a car with Elon's little son was attacked by a nutjob at an airport.

Did you read it all?

Many of the journalists who were suspended Thursday night had tweeted or written about the rift between Musk and the jet-tracking account.

So writing about the situation, not doxxing.

[Cyclotron]

Having looked at your blessedly short posting history, clearly you aren't interested in anything other than a flame war.

If you reserve the right to remain ignorant, no one shall stand in your way.

Matrix_Glitch,
The hilarity continues. Some people like that don't just want to remain ignorant; they must suppress you, too. Since there's interest in arbitrary free speech rules and laws, I get to pass mine first. Here's mine: "Anyone wanting to restrict or limit anyone else's freedom of speech must first exercise their right to STFU."  Seems fair to me.....   

You'd probably be better off adding them to your ignore list now. It won't stop.

[daqq]

How can anyone volunteer in government and not have some conflicts of interest?  This is just FUD unless there's evidence that someone actually exercised their privileges for personal gain, such as the congresspeople who use insider information to trade stocks. I didn't say the person is a saint, but what exactly did he do that's illegal?

Do you really not see anything wrong with a person being given the power to gut a public entity that is investigating him/his companies? Do you not see the gain he gets if an entity tasked with investigating him gets gutted by him? I do believe there's some gain for him there. Do you really not see any issue with this?

[tggzzz]

How can anyone volunteer in government and not have some conflicts of interest?  This is just FUD unless there's evidence that someone actually exercised their privileges for personal gain, such as the congresspeople who use insider information to trade stocks. I didn't say the person is a saint, but what exactly did he do that's illegal?

Do you really not see anything wrong with a person being given the power to gut a public entity that is investigating him/his companies? Do you not see the gain he gets if an entity tasked with investigating him gets gutted by him? I do believe there's some gain for him there. Do you really not see any issue with this?

I doubt he does.

The blindness is either wilful (and there cannot be a good reason for that) or ignorant (and that casts doubt on their general judgement)