Bluesky

[Screwdriver]

Demo is right though, Musk didn't found Tesla. Or PayPal FWiW.

I was parodying your comment that:

TBF it's massively on brand for Musk to claim he introduced or invented something he didn't.

The implication being that Musk did nothing special and only copied something that anyone could do or that someone else did. Ironically, you are responding to an offhand comment I made regarding Musks unbelievably vast achievements. Not anything he has said so far as I am aware.

But you're right, Jobs was a loser too and did nothing original. Anyone could have done what he did.

Where's that sarcastic smiley just in case you don't realise I am deeply scornful of the sour grapes you're serving up here.

[Mr. Dazzle]

I think you need to stop sometimes and consider that not everyone it out to attack you or others. I've said before here, in as many words no less, that I think Musk's achievements are bloody impressive

If I'm making a point here it's that all these things you attribute to Musk are being overattributed, if that makes any sense. It's very "on brand" for you too, which is why you drink so much conspiracy Kool Aid. Everything that happens happens because of a small group of people taking discrete actions, not because it's actually a 'kin huge mishmash of stuff going on.

[Rockburner]

^ I just don’t understand how Instagram works
As for LinkedIn - it has always been there for people to eulogise about themselves. And in total tosh. However recently it has turned into employment FaceBook - with people posting about their kids degrees, weddings, engagements, and hospital visits as well and Facebook memes and stuff.
It like one upmanship top trumps for those with an over inflated view of how interesting they are

Re Linked In:

https://www.theregister.com/2024/11/28/ ... _ai_posts/

[Screwdriver]

I think you need to stop sometimes and consider that not everyone it out to attack you or others. I've said before here, in as many words no less, that I think Musk's achievements are bloody impressive

If I'm making a point here it's that all these things you attribute to Musk are being overattributed, if that makes any sense. It's very "on brand" for you too, which is why you drink so much conspiracy Kool Aid. Everything that happens happens because of a small group of people taking discrete actions, not because it's actually a 'kin huge mishmash of stuff going on.

I didn't see that as an attack on me, it's something I see all the time when people "pooh pooh" the achievements of some of the most brilliant minds on the planet.

Overattributed? I'm not going to list all of those companies you suggest I "attribute" to Musk. Just tell me, do you think SpaceX would exist without Musk? What about Tesla?

Is anyone else lobbing 100 metre tall rockets into space and catching all 500 tons of it when it falls back down? I know China are trying it after obviously copying the design. Has anyone else been able to even get close to their extraordinary evolution in the Raptor engines? You've seen how they have changed yes?

Boeing are a good comparative venture, given the same task as Musk, four times the budget because: NASA and yet they have been unable to complete a single mission. SpaceX are running up and down to the ISS like a bus service.

Anyhow, obviously I am a fan of Elon and clearly I am objecting to those achievements being dismissed as if he's just doing something anyone could do or he's really getting some other engineer to make it happen. Same thing was said about Jobs. And it is true. Musk isn't welding up giant stainless steel reusable tanks. He hasn''t single handedly optimised the Raptor engine and he wasn't even the first person to stick a battery in a car....

But so what? He has <whatever it is> which makes those things happen. No one else can do what he is doing and it beggars belief that, even if you are in awe of the technology, you cannot bring yourself to applaud perhaps the greatest engineer we have seen this century. Probably have to go back to Isambard Kingdom Brunel to find a similarly genius level engineering giant.

I am not going to address the "conspiracy theory" bollocks that people regurgitate when they have nothing better to say. I thought such mindless nonsense was beneath you. You want to suggest everything is happening chaotically and by accident when even an idiot like me can make simple obvious predictions based on what we can all see happening right in front of our eyes.

More often than not, those "conspiracy theories" subsequently come to pass. How does that work then?

[Taipan]

Not aimed at Dazzer, but IME people are often jealous of success at any level and quite bitterly too? Nice cars get keyed etc. As a young bloke I worked for a very successful local businessman and if it came out in conversation some people would say, "Oh him, I knew him when he had nothing!" which I always found odd as they still do whereas he'd marched on to say the least!

[Mr. Dazzle]

I find a weird sort of dichotomy about figures like Trump, Jobs and to some extent even Brunel etc.

On the one hand they're undeniably inspiring and visionary. I think that's the thing I'd say most about Musk, he's not a genius inventor or anything like that, he's a genius visionary. Have an idea, sell it, convince other people, motivate them to go further. Which is great.

The problem I have isn't even with him (or Jobs) etc. per se, it's the way it makes people think none of this stuff would've happened otherwise. Essentially getting credit for stuff they didn't do, and from the sounds of it particularly in Musk's case, shitting on the people who actually did all these great things*. Maybe the doers of this world don't like the limelight

Brunel built all those wonderful things but he also overspent in a way which would make HS2 wince

Still - I suspect in no small part you can't have the former without the latter.

*shades of Tony Benn perhaps

[mangocrazy]

The problem I have isn't even with him (or Jobs) etc. per se, it's the way it makes people think none of this stuff would've happened otherwise. Essentially getting credit for stuff they didn't do, and from the sounds of it particularly in Musk's case, shitting on the people who actually did all these great things*. Maybe the doers of this world don't like the limelight

I'd guess that the real doers and inventors are just too busy and too focussed on doing and inventing to think (or even have the interest) to commercialise their doings and inventions. In many cases for these people the act of doing/making/inventing something new and revolutionary is the end goal in and of itself. So it's left to people like Musk to see the potential in something, swipe it for a fraction of its value and make themselves rich on the back of it/them.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Maybe, but to be clear, I don't think the skill of selling an idea (and not just the literal sense of swapping it for money) is unimportant or even any easier than 'real' inventing. Indeed, in many ways its demonstrably harder

I'd include things like "We choose to go to the Moon...*" in that. Impressive achievement with no technical content.

*Which, BTW, knocks the socks off anything Musk or Jobs or Trump have ever said. "not because they are easy, but because they are hard". The world really has gone backwards

[Rockburner]

The problem I have isn't even with him (or Jobs) etc. per se, it's the way it makes people think none of this stuff would've happened otherwise. Essentially getting credit for stuff they didn't do, and from the sounds of it particularly in Musk's case, shitting on the people who actually did all these great things*. Maybe the doers of this world don't like the limelight

I'd guess that the real doers and inventors are just too busy and too focussed on doing and inventing to think (or even have the interest) to commercialise their doings and inventions. In many cases for these people the act of doing/making/inventing something new and revolutionary is the end goal in and of itself. So it's left to people like Musk to see the potential in something, swipe it for a fraction of its value and make themselves rich on the back of it/them.

I'd say that a fair percentage of "inventors" or "creators" are utterly gobsmacked when "normal" people look at their mighty works and say:


"huh? what's that for?"


The idea that such inventions need marketing or explanation is sometimes incomprehensible to the inventor.

As said above: the skills to exploit a product/item/service are often completely disparate to the skills to invent, and indeed produce, said product/item/service.

[Screwdriver]

I find a weird sort of dichotomy about figures like Trump, Jobs and to some extent even Brunel etc.

On the one hand they're undeniably inspiring and visionary. I think that's the thing I'd say most about Musk, he's not a genius inventor or anything like that, he's a genius visionary. Have an idea, sell it, convince other people, motivate them to go further. Which is great.

The problem I have isn't even with him (or Jobs) etc. per se, it's the way it makes people think none of this stuff would've happened otherwise. Essentially getting credit for stuff they didn't do, and from the sounds of it particularly in Musk's case, shitting on the people who actually did all these great things*. Maybe the doers of this world don't like the limelight

Brunel built all those wonderful things but he also overspent in a way which would make HS2 wince

Still - I suspect in no small part you can't have the former without the latter.

*shades of Tony Benn perhaps

An interesting exposé. I'm gonna have to think about that for a bit. I tend to broadly agree except I don't really know that much about Elon to claim one way or another how much or little input he may have on the broad brushstrokes of the design.

Certainly I DO NOT think any of these things "wouldn't have happened without Musk/Jobs/Brunel, after all, many of their designs had been done before to a greater or lesser degree. What they did do as you suggest is to develop those technologies beyond anything anyone else had done and, up to a point, anything that others can even aspire to emulate.

Boeing are struggling, Blue Origin are struggling and only China it would seem have the determination and resources to force their copies to work (maybe within the next ten years!).

Anyhow. Food for thought.

[Mr. Dazzle]

I do find it kinda weird that noone else makes self landing rockets like SpaceX.

The idea is not new, it's been in practice since the 1970s.

It is also not like nuclear fusion or anything like that. There's no new fundamental breakthrough in the understanding of physics etc.

Indeed, you tubers have made their own model falcon 9s which can launch and land like the real thing. Its "just" a standard technical problem you can solve with the right effort.

Which makes me think the barriers are more commercial and organisational.

[Screwdriver]

I'd include things like "We choose to go to the Moon...*" in that. Impressive achievement with no technical content.

*Which, BTW, knocks the socks off anything Musk or Jobs or Trump have ever said. "not because they are easy, but because they are hard". The world really has gone backwards

What did Trump do about that? He hired RFK jr., nephew of JFK you quote above, to work alongside Musk and a fair few other impressive people.

None of whom are perfect of course but a dream team if you ask me.

While I would much rather see some serious expeditions to the moons of Jupiter/Saturn, the idea that we will have a man on Mars within our lifetime, possibly within the next few years is seriously impressive. These are just exactly the right people to make that happen...

[Screwdriver]

I do find it kinda weird that noone else makes self landing rockets like SpaceX.

The idea is not new, it's been in practice since the 1970s.

It is also not like nuclear fusion or anything like that. There's no new fundamental breakthrough in the understanding of physics etc.

Indeed, you tubers have made their own model falcon 9s which can launch and land like the real thing. Its "just" a standard technical problem you can solve with the right effort.

Which makes me think the barriers are more commercial and organisational.

Because it is hard?

I think it's more about scale. Starship has to carry a ridiculous payload, 150 tons currently and the booster weighs in at a whopping 500 tons when they have to catch it in Mechazilla. That is insane but making it reusable was the key and the decision to go with a cluster of Raptor engines, 30 odd at the last count, looks like being another genius move.

Those engines are sensational. Yeah it's just engineering but look what they did....



Blue Origins Jeff Bezos scoffed at the Raptor 3 saying it wouldn't look so impressive when it has all of the accessories fitted. Musk soon wiped the grin off his face when he pointed out that "naked" looking engine is actually complete with all of the accessories either designed out or embedded within the complex 3d printed body. What an amazing feat of engineering that is!

[Mr. Dazzle]

3D printing is a pretty good case in point or the sort of thing I mean.

It's been around or ages. Since even before I started working on high tech stuff ~20 years ago people have been trying to get it in/on planes and cars etc. I came across it in nuclear rectors in the noughties. The challenge in getting it implemented has never been particularly technical, they've been able to make 3D printed "stuff" for ages. It's been all the legwork behind certifying it's going to work for a long period, or just convincing people not to worry about that

Now I'm not saying there have been no technical developments in 3D printing as a result of SpaceX, of course there have, but the thing they've really provided is cash and motivation for lots of people in Unis and labs to go away and make those developments they've always wanted to make That's SpaceX's big advtange - cash, and the freedom to spend it however they like, which NASA can't.

I'm not trying to diminish what SpaceX have done, just pointing out the old Newtonian observation

BTW the Russians made 30 engine rockets in the 1960s and 70s, I think they all blew up. Or at least, most of them It's the other sicences around them (chiefly vibration prediction) which have unlocked it for SpaceX. The Apollo programme used 5 big engines because, at the time, 30 small ones was a terrible idea.

[Screwdriver]

BTW the Russians made 30 engine rockets in the 1960s and 70s, I think they all blew up.

So really then, they did and they didn't...

Not gonna happen without money of course but even if you have the resources of an entire nation, success is still not guaranteed.

Be interesting to see how China get on with their copy version. They're even going to try to get a Mechazilla to work.

I think at the moment, NASA (and Boeing) are seriously considering writing off the entire Artemis/SLS program.

Bezos is probably going to have to try and either steal some of Elons team or buy a startup to get his Blue Origin thing off the ground. I don't know the chap but I get the feeling he is a proper asshole. I would enjoy watching him fail after reading about how he treats his employees.

[Count Steer]

I find a weird sort of dichotomy about figures like Trump, Jobs and to some extent even Brunel etc.

On the one hand they're undeniably inspiring and visionary. I think that's the thing I'd say most about Musk, he's not a genius inventor or anything like that, he's a genius visionary. Have an idea, sell it, convince other people, motivate them to go further. Which is great.

Not bad at recruiting either. eg Getting Tom Mueller in from launching his 'hobby rockets' in the Mojave to head up Propulsion wasn't a bad move.

[MingtheMerciless]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N1_(rocket)

[demographic]

Not aimed at Dazzer, but IME people are often jealous of success at any level and quite bitterly too? Nice cars get keyed etc. As a young bloke I worked for a very successful local businessman and if it came out in conversation some people would say, "Oh him, I knew him when he had nothing!" which I always found odd as they still do whereas he'd marched on to say the least!

Not so fast there pal.
People aren't keen on hypocrisy when for instance Musk claims to be a free speech absolutist but then bans the crap out of anyone who says something be doesn'tlike.
The whole "People are jealous of success" reads like the tat Iccy used to post (usually before accusing almost everyone of trying to dox him*) and its a weak argument that lacks any real substance.

Most people just don't really care if someone else has a bob or two as long as they're not a bellend to other people all the bloody time.


*Me included, dunno about other people but I think hes just a twerp and the best place for them is abroad where I never have to see em on site so doxxing him so he'd lose his job abroad would have beeen counterproductive in my opinion.

[Mr. Dazzle]

Because it is hard?

Just musing on this.

Stuff being hard never stopped anyone. Making microchips is hard. Hell, making decent choux pastry and playing Jazz trumpet is hard. Even more so if you try and do them simultaneously.

I once watched a video where a retired rocket engineer was giving a tour of a Saturn V rocket, a rocket he helped design. He was part of the team which put Armstrong on the moon. His proudest achievement though? Developing software that can read handwritten cheques.

Nah, being hard isn't why stuff doesn't happen I reckon. It's being unprofitable

Noone else has constructed a compelling and robust commercial case to do what SpaceX already do.

[Screwdriver]

Because it is hard?

Just musing on this.

Stuff being hard never stopped anyone. Making microchips is hard. Hell, making decent choux pastry and playing Jazz trumpet is hard. Even more so if you try and do them simultaneously.

I once watched a video where a retired rocket engineer was giving a tour of a Saturn V rocket, a rocket he helped design. He was part of the team which put Armstrong on the moon. His proudest achievement though? Developing software that can read handwritten cheques.

Nah, being hard isn't why stuff doesn't happen I reckon. It's being unprofitable

Noone else has constructed a compelling and robust commercial case to do what SpaceX already do.

It was a bit tongue in cheek because of one of my favourite quotes you posted earlier, the JFK one of course.

The thing is, Boeing, Blue Origin and the entire resources of the CCP are trying to do what SpaceX is doing and they're not getting it. Even China are said to still be 10 years away from where SpaceX is now. And that's even with whatever shenanigans they can pull to copy everything he is doing.

I don't think any of them are short of a few bob (!) so it's not money and profitability is no issue either. They all want to be able to do what SpaceX is doing and the commercial case is gigantically compelling with satellite launches, exploration and even weaponisation (esp for Boeing) being hugely compelling reasons to get into the game. But they are all missing the secret ingredient.

I think the secret ingredient is whatever it is that Elon Musk brings to the table. I wish I knew what it was!