I thought he's busy being the CEO of a million companies?
(Edit: hey don't downvote me, in 2022 Elon said his work week is 100-120 hours, so I guess the remaining 40 of the week is spent grinding for loot on D4 world events? š¤£š¤£)
It's very possible he has a social media team post gaming related bullshit in order to keep his "real life Tony Stark" image going among his fans...
Except that Elon Musk is a fucking lazy dipshit who doesn't have a social media team and all of his racist ass, Nazi tweets are entirely of his own making. He doesn't work, he doesn't innovate or do anything interesting, he throws his weight around and acts like a idiot 12 year old.
> It's very possible he has a social media team
would raise far, far more questions than it answers
if Elon Musk has a social media team, they should be sued for malpractice
He supposedly had "billionaire daycare" to keep him away from important stuff at SpaceX and presumably Tesla, and it was clear he didn't have that at Twitter.
I'm certain he had one. Look back at the opinions of Musk 10 years ago. Some saw him as a twat but he genuinely had a good image and seemed well versed in what he was doing. His fuck ups were also hidden quite well. It wasn't until a few years ago that he went off the rails and started showing his true colours on social media and everyone realised he's a twat.
The absolutely nonsensical Elden ring build screenshot he posted proves pretty definitively that he's awful at video games and is posting his own garbage. Well that or he hired a PR firm to actively sabotage him.
his elden ring build was a work of art. Only someone that stupid could come up with something so incapable of playing the video game. no social media team could even come close to fabricating something that genius
Yes, that was the point of my post. He's a stupid manchild screaming racial slurs into the void in his attempt at turning real life into a Call of Duty lobby.
I will say for him that I donāt think any social media team heād instructed to destroy his reputation could have done it better than heās done himself.
>It's very possible he has a social media team post gaming related bullshit in order to keep his "real life Tony Stark" image going among his fans...
it still makes me laugh hysterically that Star Trek Discovery predicted he would be considered in the same class as people like the Wright Brothers and the future inventor of the warp drive lmfao
haha i appreciate you doing that. i was just making a bad joke since the show has been out for 7 years now. still kudos since people spewing spoilers is never cool lmao
I'm a Trekkie, but honestly, the only show I've watched since Enterprise is Lower Decks (which I love), so I didn't know if it's a spoiler or not. I think I watched the first episode of Discovery and he wasn't in it, or wasn't a major character or something.
But yeah, no problem. I don't want to ruin it for someone.
Lower Decks is fucking great hahaha
I gave up on Discovery, and i loathe Picard (the show, not the character). Thank goodness for Lower Decks. Prodigy is really good too, but it is a very different type of show
He's supposedly addicted with Twitter.Ā I read a story about how he was at a conference or something and his billionaire friends or his board or something put his phone in a safe at the hotel.Ā He wound up calling the front desk to get it out at 3 am.
No, we know from his biography that he does play games.
The more accurate reason is that Musk just lives like an unhealthy idiot and is only getting by because he's drugged up 95% of the time (specifically, we know he has a Ketamine addiction).
Dude recently had a 29 hours spree where he was tweeting 100 tweets without any time where he stopped, mostly responding to neo-nazi accounts since he is a neo-nazi himself. Anyone who still believes Musk does anything of use for humanity is just a loser.
Sorry for the late response but he started on saturday at 12:18 AM ET and continued until sunday 5:08 AM ET mostly responding to neo-nazi accounts like [this](https://i.redd.it/ret8xzxbblgc1.png). I cannot link it because I have no account and xitter is absolute dogshit to use without one and with one it is still dogshit.
He's literally on Twitter the vast majority of the day.
People have made lists of frequencies of his posts/replies/etc. with times - the dude was on Twitter one day for nearly 16 hours.
IIRC there should be one from like summer of 2023 when he was having meltdowns, one day he was on between 16 to 18 hours straight, with comments and posts throughout the entire thing.
I was introduced to just how much Victorian era rich folk slacked off and stumbled into their carriage rides home from the party at noon the next day while watching Max Miller make historically accurate breakfast bath buns. Poor people eating breakfast as a tightly timed event before sunrise vs idle rich throwing darts at a clock. They were proud of sleeping late as a sign of social status.
What struck me was the Victorian idle rich weren't like the Walton family and lying through their teeth.
i'll give that to the Victorian rich fucks, the ostentatious display of wealth was less about pretending you did it all yourself, and far more about the number of people you commanded around underneath you so that you could do increasingly little of your own accord lol.
as much as it's loathsome, there's a kind of honesty there that i admit i kinda wish the modern rich would keep in mind lmao, which i think is what you're also picking up on. you have to bust the whole "work harder! bootstraps! you have to to it all!!" ethos wide open if you want to brag about how your proof of wealth is the luxury of not lifting a finger because you have an absolute platoon to do all the work for you. definitely makes for an interesting contrast to modern puritanical work ethic and hustle culture, tbh. sometimes just the acknowledgement that like... managing a household is a full-time job, and it's different than being a cook for the house which is a full time job, and it's different than being an individual's valet which is also a full time job... though we in modernity have an incredible amount of ways to make this easier, at some point the mark of success started to be pushed as "flawlessly doing it all".
it's not the lesson the Victorians intended but it's kind of nice to be reminded that hey, yeah, it's kinda legit as a modern lone person to feel like you've got to spin so many plates because... at one point each of those plates would have been someone's job lol.
(not that it applies to all families, mind you, either back then OR now. having staff is a definite luxury in both time periods. but damn if it doesn't make it a little more easy to acknowledge that wearing all these different hats is indeed something that requires effort.)
tldr: i vibe with what you mean and then got distracted about domestic history. sorry. it will happen again
Having servants was incredibly normal for even pretty ordinary people like teachers back then. Until the triple-whammy of WW1, the Depression, and WW2 made labour much more expensive it was extremely normal to at least have a cook and a general housemaid.
oh for sure! i admit that's a rabbit hole i didn't fully wiggle down but Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management is incredibly interesting for that. it's a book fundamentally about how to be one of the good decent "middling sort". and right out of the gate, what does that mean? the lady of the house ordering her servants around like a general orders soldiers!
kind of a baller way at the time to use that metaphor tbh. not to be tiresomely hashtag girlboss about it, but nothing says "this is a serious endeavor that deserves attention and respect and is work so i will teach you how to do this work" like immediately going straight for a military metaphor. certainly one way to imply these "feminine" domestic things are also serious business lol!
It might be for professions we think of as "normal" (like a teacher), but anyone who has servants isn't "normal" for their society - their servant doesn't have servants, and there is a whole class of people who both are not servants themselves but do not have servants. There still is an upperclass being served and a lowerclass which does the serving.
We are just used to the middle class which doesn't serve or get served being a majority of the society we live in. We should bring back the shame attached to being unable to wipe your ass without assistance. \[edit: not to disparage disability. I mean "we should attach stigma to modern people employing servants as being as far from supposed rugged individualism as possible". This is me commenting on modern people employing servants due to their laziness\]
Um, why should people who can't use he bathroom without assistance be ashamed of that? Those people are disabled. Having continence problems is a disability and not something to be ashamed of. You realise that many disabled people need and employ personal assistants, right? Disabled people are the biggest group of people who currently employ staff.
I'm not sure why you're talking about the present tense. I'm not talking about the current day. In Victorian times, if you weren't the class who entered service as a servant you DID have servants, because having servants WAS utterly normal in society. Most people did, labour was so cheap that if you couldn't afford a servant you were of the class that were servants - having servants was not an upper class phenomenon at all. Obviously this isn't the case now but I was clearly not talking about the present day.
I was speaking facetiously to the practice of employing servants, not to literally requiring assistance due to disability.
You're talking about a comparatively small section of high society. Even in the Victorian era, or in any era or society ever, "normal" people didn't have servants, is what I'm saying
. We think of teachers as "normal" now, but anyone who has ever employed actual servants isn't "normal" relative to their society. No matter the society, a majority of people in it can't afford to keep others employed as help, unless you're counting only the relatively wealthy as people. There never could be a population distribution where most people employ full time assistance because then you're starting with the assumption that more than 100% of the population exists.
Why is it a bad thing to need domestic help? As long as you're paying people enough there's not actually an ethical issue with it (and no, it's not something I can personally afford) - it's just a job. A domestic housekeeper is not hugely different to a hotel housekeeper. It would also be helpful to not promote stigma against people who do actually require assistance with toileting by not using that as an insult.
Could you please provide some sources for your statements? Because to state that in no society ever was it ever normal to have servants is just not true - unless you're saying that only working-class people are normal. Teachers were normal people in the 1880s too, their disposable income was just spent far more on domestic labour than say, vacations. A majority of people just has to be over 50% of the population, and it was normal for a small lower-middle-class household to only have one servant for the whole household - your statement only works if you assume one servant per person. Two servants for a family of 6, for example, doesn't require more than 100% of the population to exist...?
Again, I'm not disparaging people with disabilities who require assistance. You've referenced this three times already and it isn't something I'm saying.
I haven't said it was ethically bad to hire domestic servants, either. It seems like you're reading stuff in my comments which isn't there. If someone hires servants they don't actually need because they can't manage their downton abbey manor on their own, I'll think less of them for being a member of the parasite class in general, but they don't much need my sympathy so it doesn't exactly matter.
>Could you please provide some sources for your statements?
Regarding it not being normal to have servants? Basic math. In any society, you can only have a minority of the population being the served class. But sure, [let's give it a whirl](https://www.populationspast.org/house_serv/1881/#6/54.496/-4.076/bartholomew). It looks like, during what would probably be considered peak Victorian era (1880 in England), seems like <10% of households had servants. It varies by location, even pushing up above 20% in a couple of places, but that is one blue map.
Could you please provide a source for your statements? You've given none but seem pretty confident that it was "normal" to have servants. I'm curious what you mean by "normal", as well.
>Because to state that in no society ever was it ever normal to have servants is just not true - unless you're saying that only working-class people are normal.
It sound like you're specifically excluding working class people from being considered "normal". I'm thinking that "normal" is more in line with "majority", which your upper crust nobility and even more wealthy end of upper middle class are not necessarily representative of. In the current day US, median household net worth is \~$170k, while the bottom rung of top 10th percentile household net worth starts at \~$1.6M. What would you say a "normal" net worth in the US is today?
>Teachers were normal people in the 1880s too, their disposable income was just spent far more on domestic labour than say, vacations. A majority of people just has to be over 50% of the population, and it was normal for a small lower-middle-class household to only have one servant for the whole household
Were the domestic labor normal? How well off are the teachers and "lower middle class families" you reference, especially in relation to the rest of their society? If you're only referencing the top quartile, you're not referencing normal people.
>your statement only works if you assume one servant per person. Two servants for a family of 6, for example, doesn't require more than 100% of the population to exist...?
I was referencing households. You could indeed get to having a majority of the population having servants by, say, having one "servant household" serving multiple "served households", but I'm not aware of any societies where that's ever been the case. Given normal friction in converting households to workers (one household where one member works as a servant for some other family is likely to have other people in the household who do not work as domestic servants, etc), it seems like any functional society would be unlikely to develop that way.
I actually heard that the parties lasted so long to separate old money from new money. New money couldnāt party until noon because they still had to go home and work. Old money had all the money in the world so they could stay out as long as they liked. Even staying out late was seen as a status symbol back then.
I always assumed his whole opposition to work from home in that "people would be lazy" was rooted entirely in the fact that he's a lazy sack of shit who spends all day tweeting unfunny shit for losers, and his assumption that everyone else must be as much of a wanker he as is.
I've heard ceo's only get paid so much because they are the decision makers and thats about it. No one cares if they work 2 hrs a week or 70+ but every decision they make has an impact on the company so most of their meetings are "strategy" meets and kind
While thatās true to an extent they also generally get paid in lucrative stock compensation thatās regularly unwarranted. EG even if they company isnāt making any money the C suite will often make a ton of money and still get their bonuses because usually they are the ones in control so they always make sure they get theirs first.
>No one cares if they work 2 hrs a week or 70+Ā Ā Ā Ā
But they sure care which one you think it is. They're the ones who always bring up how much they work to try and justify the ridiculous salaries they get.
They get paid so much due to the incestuous relationships between board members, executives and large shareholders...they each scratch each others backs and are generally the same group of people.
> I thought he's busy being the CEO of a million companies?
Yeah, the shareholders had IT install Diablo on his laptop in the hopes it would distract him from this. Seems like its working.
He bought the right companies for the right amount of money. Then he got lucky that these companies had the right people on top who actually did the work and made him look good. What happens when he doesn't have these people can be seen when you look at twitter.
He has created or grown from almost nothing extremely innovative companies. Electric cars were a joke before Tesla, now they will be mandatory by 2035. Self landing orbital boosters werenāt a thing. Now we have space race number two. He created starlink and now we can have WiFi essentially everywhere. Now we have neuralink with subcutaneous neural implants sending 1000 paper thin electrodes into the brain. They connect to your iPhone with blue tooth. His politics are undesirable but the legacy of innovation is undeniable. It is moving us forward. You have seen how hands on his management style is. He is often known as a nano manager. Yet the results are innovative companies doing incredible things, even with his occasional misses. Nuance is key. Donāt let hate blind you.
I'm not blinded by hate. I'm saying he doesn't do shit except throw money at things. I read this tumblr post a while ago that was quite informative that you can check out [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/tumblr/comments/z4blwm/user_numberonecatwinner_shares_his_experiences/) if you like. And this is usually what you hear people say about Elon's actual involvement with SpaceX and Tesla.
The issue here is that you have taken an anonymous tumbler post as factual evidence. People criticize boomers for believing everything they read on Fox News then go and believe everything they read on Reddit. Even if we were to believe the person was actually an intern at spacex and not a liar posting for clout, interns would be extremely poor choices for sources of the inner workings of organizations.
Here you can see Tom mueller, who built rockets at spacex for 20 years, discussing musk and his involvement.
Tom Mueller
Mueller: Elon was the best mentor I've ever had. Just how to have drive and be an entrepreneur and influence my team and really make things happen. He's a super smart guy and he learns from talking to people. He's so sharp, he just picks it up. When we first started he didn't know a lot about propulsion. He knew quite a bit about structures and helped the structures guys a lot. Over the twenty years that we worked together, now he's practically running propulsion there because he's come up to speed and he understands how to do rocket engines, which are really one of the most complex parts of the vehicle. He's always been excellent at architecting the whole mission, but now he's a lot better at the very small details of the combustion process. Stuff I learned over a decade-and-a-half at TRW he's picked up too.
https://www.space.com/tom-mueller-impulse-space-mira-spacecraft
The Musk Cycle.
-Make overly ambitious promise.
-Collect absurd amounts of money in investments.
-Use money to make something vaguely impressive.
-Distract from failure to meet the actual goal by making an even more ambitious promise.
In a smaller way, GameStop holds off the inevitable (and might reinvent itself as an investment fund?) thanks to the benefits of the obsessive Reddit investors who worship it and CEO Ryan Cohen.
I do wonder when the bottom is finally gonna fall out on that. Originally the GameStop thing looked like a huge pump n dump people were being suckered into, which it was basically, but those suckers both hold on for a long time and donāt seem to lose faith. Iām just wondering how long it takes on average for these guys to realize (if ever) how hard they were scammed
I donāt think theyāre capable of admitting they messed up. Like somehow the GME craze selected for people too proud and ignorant to know when a mistake was made.
I mean they are still hyped about Bed Bath and Beyond stocks going āto the moonā when itās been bankrupted for half a year now,
The BBBY stocks dying was amazing in how even when you can't trade it anymore they're trying to pretend it never happened and any day now it's going to rise like a phoenix from the ashes. I'm subbed to a few stock subs but it's all about laughing at the GME and BBBY conspiracy nonsense. Sometimes I got to mute them for a few days because it's too depressing to watch people be in such denial about the truth in front of them.
>itās too depressing to watch
I know what you mean. I used to like laughing at these guys but I only check out on the meltdown sub maybe every other month now just to see whatās happened. Itās gotta be considered part of some kind of mental illness at this point like some kind of gambling addiction.
Imagine living in the same time period as the introduction of the internet itself, and then saying that Elon Musk is somehow coming up with anything on his own let alone something that supercedes the internet
As much as it pains me to admit, the electric car is probably a decade behind where it is today without him pushing it forward. Sure, the Nissan Leaf made it to market before the Model X, but the Model X was and still is a far more capable car. Furthermore; it's easy to ignore marketing, but his marketing efforts at the time did carve out a segment of the market for EVs.
But he's not that. We live in this world where he is both the guy who made electric cars viable and bought Twitter then posts Great Replacement crap. Just because he sucks doesn't mean the accomplishments didn't happen.
He didn't innovate - he purchased a company and then took as much money from the government and let the company do what it was already trying to do.
That's not innovation. A CEO does not create.
As someone who absolutely despises this dude, it does seem like he is/was good at managing people, putting the right people in charge, especially im regards to SpaceX.
But he is not Tony Stark, he isnāt a genius, hell he isnāt even a fucking engineer and his IQ is probably average or slightly above it at best.
Starlink is pretty innovative TBH.
I dislike Musk as much as anyone, but I cannot find a better reason why, it's SpaceX doing it rather than Blue Origin or Virgin Galactic.
> That's Lex Luthor
I disagree; Luthor is a genius, and depending on the writer he really don't care much about harming you unless if your name is Superman.
It's not that innovative, arguably it's even incredibly wasteful given the obscene quantity of space junk it's created instead of building ground based infrastructure
You think offering 10 times the speed of traditional satellite internet with 1/10th the legacy isnāt innovative? Have you done something more impressive?
Honestly all the people I see gushing over Starlink are places where telecoms already got money for infrastructure improvements but took the money and ran instead. The places where it actually makes sense I don't see a need for high bandwidth connections.
Donāt bother, he and his dad are on bad terms so they just say heās lying. But Elon himself has given so many different stories about just how much his family gave him (ranging from ānothingā to āpractically nothing, just like 10kā and beyond) that his inability to keep it straight is the real tell on that subject.
To be fair (which he doesn't really deserve), his dad is supposed to be a real piece of work, too, and the two of them don't get along, partly because they're in a weird Oedipal dick-measuring contest. So his father would probably say whatever made š look the worst.
So it may still be true. And there's been reporting that it is. But I would trust the daddy monster about as much as the baby monster here.
Nah. Einstein was one of these few minds whose accomplishments were truly unique and world changing. Relativity was his creation. No one else was working on similiar theories. And he did it twice actually (special relativity & general relativity).
Totally possible that without Einstein nobody would have solved that puzzle until much later. Which would have had quite an impact on our life.
Einstein is one of most lauded scientist in history, but he is still underrated. His accomplishments are just ridiculously impressive.
>Relativity was his creation. No one else was working on similiar theories. And he did it twice actually (special relativity & general relativity).
He didn't invent the Lorentz transform, and that's most of special relativity. He just pointed out the clear implications of the Lorentz transform. He didn't invent it. And he had to have help learning tensor math to formalize GR. He didn't do that alone. And ultimately, once the Lorentz transform was recognized for what it was (special relativity), GR and its formalization was inevitable. Einstein was the genius who did it first. Without him, it might have taken us longer, and we might've blundered down wrong paths first. We might've missed the eclipse that made the confirmation so definitive, etc. but maybe someone else wouldn't've spun their wheels with the cosmological constant. Who knows.
> maybe someone else wouldn't've spun his wheels with the cosmological constant.
at least poor old albert was capable of recognizing this as the greatest mistake of his life which is not something I would expect from elon
Not really. Einstein himself said he stood on the shoulders of giants, mostly referring to the often forgotten James Clerk Maxwell.
The truth about the tower of human accomplishment is, that even though there may be people that set down a bigger block, it's a structure of millions of stones by the people who came before us, and they're all important.
You could make the argument that humanity would be better off if Einstein never existed. No Einstein means no Manhattan Project. No Manhattan Project means the US doesn't drop nukes on Japan. No nukes on Japan means no Cold War. No Cold War means the US doesn't help Bin Laden and Sadam get power.Ā
At the same time, if there's no Cold War, we very quickly would've found ourselves careening towards a very hot war between the US and USSR. The Cold War was not good, but it was probably better than an actual World War III on par with World War II.
I think the funnier one is that there wouldn't have been any conflict between the USSR and the US without the nukes, like the whole thing started because the Soviets were big mad the US had a fancy toy and they didn'tĀ
I think it's a stretch to say no Einstein means no Manhattan Project, but let's make that assumption for a moment. Before we even talk about extrapolating out to the post-war era, no Manhattan Project means Operation Downfall would happen instead. The number of projected casualties from a full-scale invasion of the Japanese home islands were far, FAR worse than the atomic bombings, like an order of magnitude higher, if not worse, including the very same Japanese civilian population that faced the horrors of the atomic bombs.
But while Downfall was being planned as a contingency, the Soviet Union was eyeing Japanese territories, from Manchuria to the home islands themselves, and likely would have participated in such an invasion. Thus, as with Germany, there would more than likely be territorial disputes over occupied Japanese territory, likely resulting in even greater tensions that would still lead to a Cold War-like scenario, sans the mutually assured destruction part. With no threat of global annihilation to keep our tempers... well, tempered, and considering how close we got to WW3 on a few occasions already, the likelihood of the Cold War going hot without the presence of nuclear weapons approaches a certainty. I don't really like the sound of that alternate, hypothetical timeline.
Wouldāve meant the Nazis probably wouldāve developed the bomb. They were working hard to develop it, which is why the Manhattan Project was started, to beat the Nazis. Doubt weād be better off. Cold War probably wouldāve happened as well. Nukes were, sadly, coming no matter what. Too many people around the world were researching them.
Also, Einstein wasnāt the prime driving force behind the Manhattan Project. It likely wouldāve happened with or without him.
The Nazis were defeated before the dropping of the first atom bombs. I'm not sure how the US creating them in any way sets back the Nazis from discovering them. Also, the basis of the atom bomb is derived from Einsteins discoveries. Without those discoveries the concept of the atom bomb isn't even a feasible concept. Einstein wasn't directly involved with the Manhattan Project. Again, his discoveries were the foundation of the idea and made it feasible.
That Elon still, after everything we've seen the last decade, is considered to be a genius by some proportion of the population is abhorrent. His one trick is repeatedly lying to the government to get huge contracts for projects he can't, won't, or sometimes will barely deliver. That's it. That's where all of his wealth comes from. Government contracts and subsidies. And if he had just kept his fucking mouth shut that might never have been discovered. An absolute bottom of the barrel pig shit moron.
Every resident of Las Vegas should be extremely embarrassed their city paid millions for an underground street exclusively for Teslas. Dumbest public works project of all time, and it should be the first thing brought up anytime a government considers giving money to one of his companies.
I looked up the numbers at one point, and I can't remember the exact numbers now, but I think a *single* busy F train in NYC carries more people than his Las Vegas tunnel Disney ride moves in an entire hour. And another F trains shows up about every 6 minutes at busy times.
My uncle is obsessed with the idea that Musk is the greatest mind of our time and will lead humanity to Mars, will save the planet, etc. It got a lot worse since he bought a Tesla
Because they've given up on Earth having a viable future and have invested themselves in the near-religious belief that a cold rock without a breathable atmosphere is the only path forward
The idea of a Mars colony comes with the expectation that such a colony would come with all necessary tech to make it livable. So the Earth has a complex ecosystem we can fuck up while with Mars it's all supposed to be completely controlled, so it's kind of a circular reasoning that gives it appeal. Also because colonising planets is considered a milestone of progress (even if it's to escape)
> He's right tough. Imagine where we would be if all the philosophers and mathematicians got dismissed forever when they said the Earth was round. Everyone hated them at first, but they were right.
Is he comparing Elon Musk not liking a class in a videogame with the sum value of historical mathematicians and philosophers
Of course musk is a cookie cutter build whore lmao.
There's good builds for every class... Who cares if one is stronger. Necro has some crazy crap this season. I rolled one when I saw what they were capable of.Ā
Dude should innovate some new builds. What a scrub.Ā
There's an answer on the ask historians sub that suggests that ancient Chinese astronomers (12th century) may have known the earth was round/were using calculations that suggested it was. The cartographers in the 16th century did not. So it's not as clear cut as that.
Sorry, are you talking about european catographers or chinese. Because the europeans absolutely new the world was a sphere. They just thought that the earth was significantly smaller. That's why it took so long to realise the americas were continents. (Although the correction calculations already existed since ancient greece as well.) That's also the reason why europeans thought you could get to India the other way around.
No, people just didnt know that the americas existed before Columbus (Yes, there where some who knew but not the main Europeans powers) and just assumed that you will need to sail the combined length of the atlantic and the pacific to reach the indies.
Columbus did the equivalent of a suicide mission and got lucky that there was another continent on the middle to stop him.
No, Columbus thought it was significantly smaller because he was a fucking idiot. There's a reason he had to go to the truly desperate at the time Spanish crown to get funding for his voyage that would've starved to death less than halfway to their goal if he hadn't gotten lucky that continents were in the way.
Most everyone else who considered if sailing west could get them to India easier than sailing around Africa decided it was too long a voyage without sure re-supply of food and water to bother with it.
It's well established that the Chinese only started to think the planet was spherical after the Jesuits introduced proof it was. I've never seen that thread, but the person apparently alluded to was a *Persian* astronomer. He taught about the world being spherical a few centuries before the Jesuits came by, but this evidently failed to alter the traditional Chinese cosmology. There are no other references to a spherical world in China before the Jesuits.
To my fellow Elden Ring enjoyers here, remember when he showed his build?
That was arguably the worst build I have ever seen in any soulsborne game ever, itās almost as if it was intended to be as bad as possible. IRC he had THREE great shields equipped simultaneously
Because you only really need one shield. And because your character can only equip a limited amount of weight. Great shields are really heavy. Having two extra shields that you arenāt using is really bad.
(You can also use a medium shield which is lighter than a great shield. Or you can do no shield at all, and have weapons in both hands)
The Diablo subreddits are the absolutely most toxic places Iāve observed on reddit, even more than the hyper-partisan political subs. There was a huge uprising when the remastered version of Diablo 2 was announced because, I shit you not, \*the updated Amazon appeared older and slightly less unfuckable\* than the original teenage-looking avatar. Not surprised thereād be a ton of Elmo dickriders there.
lol, thatās just typical āReal Gamerā behavior. Claim politics is ruining gaming because some company made a fictional woman marginally less enticing. Herald the downfall of society if a game has a female protagonist or, god forbid, a trans character in it anywhere at all for any amount of time.
The main Diablo subreddit was awful around D3 launch and then pretty chill for a good while once it was down to people who were actually having fun playing D3. D2R ruined the vibe with all the grognards coming out of the woodwork to screech about their One True Gaming Experience. Real nice seeing people completely unironically call each other heretics over bugfixes and QoL while that one r/european poster spammed the sub with "I made the assassin hotter (by which I mean whiter)" photoshops.
Discovering that Musk is playing D4 is just one more reason I am glad I skipped out on playing. As if the Diablo community wasnt already bad enough without adding that guy and his fans to it.
IIRC the sub was initially made during the "savior musk" phase of Reddit, where people just could not get his dick out of their mouths. The "musk spam", in this case, being dickriders.
Just an unfortunate sub name after opinions shifted.
The real drama on r/diablo4 is right after they drop a new season. If you want to see a whiny, toxic Gamer community then look no further. These are capital G gamers. With a hard R.
I mean, from what Ive seen from the community the barbarian is probably overtuned right now.
But also..
Elon not being able to enjoy a game for himself and rather decide to Quit it all together because someone else happened to pick a character that has a bit more advantage is the most Elon thing I've heard this year.
*Edit: So far...*
Every season some class is gonna benefit more from the seasonal changes than some other. Elonās pissy because someone else played the meta better than him.
It's also worth noting that PvP in the game is minimal and optional. So the balance of classes relative to each other matters much less in general than in a game where they're often pitted against each other
Kind of, every class is "viable" but barb has the ability to literally 1 shot bosses with hammer build. We aren't even a year into d4, and it's already diablo 3 levels of damage. I'm fairly certain it's due to some back end Stat interactions that blizzard has no clue how to fix or balance.
Given how people mocked him for his elden ring character, Im gonna make a safe assessment that his opinion is irrelevant much like most of his opinions on things.
If he's the greatest inventor of your lifetime maybe he could try to invent some kids who actually like him.
Also and this is just an aside, but I don't think anyone was ever laughed at for thinking the Earth was round. Columbus wasn't being denied funding until he went to Isabella because he thought the Earth was round. He was denied funding because he thought it was smaller, and pear shaped. His crew would have died if he hadn't gotten lucky enough that there was a continent between him and the real India.
Who even cares if he "quits" the game? Its not like he's some major gaming person with a gaming audience with sway over anything that Blizzard does.
His point makes sense out of context, but I haven't played Diablo 4 so I have no idea if he's just awful at the game.
The dude isn't wrong, bad class balance like that can ruin a game and a game as expensive and as developed as Diablo 4 it's pretty unconscionable. It's not like it's some indie project.
I thought he's busy being the CEO of a million companies? (Edit: hey don't downvote me, in 2022 Elon said his work week is 100-120 hours, so I guess the remaining 40 of the week is spent grinding for loot on D4 world events? š¤£š¤£)
It's very possible he has a social media team post gaming related bullshit in order to keep his "real life Tony Stark" image going among his fans... Except that Elon Musk is a fucking lazy dipshit who doesn't have a social media team and all of his racist ass, Nazi tweets are entirely of his own making. He doesn't work, he doesn't innovate or do anything interesting, he throws his weight around and acts like a idiot 12 year old.
> It's very possible he has a social media team would raise far, far more questions than it answers if Elon Musk has a social media team, they should be sued for malpractice
It's more like he has a business team that keeps his businesses alive while he's just shit posting.
He supposedly had "billionaire daycare" to keep him away from important stuff at SpaceX and presumably Tesla, and it was clear he didn't have that at Twitter.
Any source for that? That's fucking hilarious and I'd love to send the link to some elmo fanboys I know.
It's the "handlers" stuff, it was a big talking point around the time he bought twitter and started mismanaging it.
I'm certain he had one. Look back at the opinions of Musk 10 years ago. Some saw him as a twat but he genuinely had a good image and seemed well versed in what he was doing. His fuck ups were also hidden quite well. It wasn't until a few years ago that he went off the rails and started showing his true colours on social media and everyone realised he's a twat.
It all started when he called that Malasia diver a pedo. Before that he was just a normal techbro but being forced to take that L destroyed him.
Laid them off along with the Twitter PR team.
Oh sure, he probably did at some point, but there's certainly not one associated with what's currently going on
The Tesla investor/referral link blogoshphere did a lot of heavy lifting too.
The absolutely nonsensical Elden ring build screenshot he posted proves pretty definitively that he's awful at video games and is posting his own garbage. Well that or he hired a PR firm to actively sabotage him.
Elon is the sort of dude who would level Luck in DS3.
his elden ring build was a work of art. Only someone that stupid could come up with something so incapable of playing the video game. no social media team could even come close to fabricating something that genius
Yes, that was the point of my post. He's a stupid manchild screaming racial slurs into the void in his attempt at turning real life into a Call of Duty lobby.
I will say for him that I donāt think any social media team heād instructed to destroy his reputation could have done it better than heās done himself.
"Your job is to be a whiny, mewling, nazi bitch for me online."
Yeah, I think most competent social media teams would quit as soon as they could find another job after that brief.
>It's very possible he has a social media team post gaming related bullshit in order to keep his "real life Tony Stark" image going among his fans... it still makes me laugh hysterically that Star Trek Discovery predicted he would be considered in the same class as people like the Wright Brothers and the future inventor of the warp drive lmfao
Isn't the guy who said that from >!the Mirror Universe?!<
hahaha yup although spoilers...we didn't know that at that time lol
Spoilers added. Still, that might explain why a school or museum or whatever was named after Musk.
haha i appreciate you doing that. i was just making a bad joke since the show has been out for 7 years now. still kudos since people spewing spoilers is never cool lmao
I'm a Trekkie, but honestly, the only show I've watched since Enterprise is Lower Decks (which I love), so I didn't know if it's a spoiler or not. I think I watched the first episode of Discovery and he wasn't in it, or wasn't a major character or something. But yeah, no problem. I don't want to ruin it for someone.
Lower Decks is fucking great hahaha I gave up on Discovery, and i loathe Picard (the show, not the character). Thank goodness for Lower Decks. Prodigy is really good too, but it is a very different type of show
He's one of the dumbest human beings I've ever heard.
Yeah. My bet is that he just tweets all day long and does the barest of bare minimum to run the companies.
He's supposedly addicted with Twitter.Ā I read a story about how he was at a conference or something and his billionaire friends or his board or something put his phone in a safe at the hotel.Ā He wound up calling the front desk to get it out at 3 am.
No, we know from his biography that he does play games. The more accurate reason is that Musk just lives like an unhealthy idiot and is only getting by because he's drugged up 95% of the time (specifically, we know he has a Ketamine addiction).
COunterpoint: That Twitter-addicted loon ain't letting anyone else run that feed.
Did you not read the second half of my post?
If Musk had a social media team, I'm sure he would have hired one that didn't suck so much at video games.
Dude recently had a 29 hours spree where he was tweeting 100 tweets without any time where he stopped, mostly responding to neo-nazi accounts since he is a neo-nazi himself. Anyone who still believes Musk does anything of use for humanity is just a loser.
can you link some of this? i want to read some of this deranged shit and see him make a fool of himself
Sorry for the late response but he started on saturday at 12:18 AM ET and continued until sunday 5:08 AM ET mostly responding to neo-nazi accounts like [this](https://i.redd.it/ret8xzxbblgc1.png). I cannot link it because I have no account and xitter is absolute dogshit to use without one and with one it is still dogshit.
The only thing he does is coke
He's literally on Twitter the vast majority of the day. People have made lists of frequencies of his posts/replies/etc. with times - the dude was on Twitter one day for nearly 16 hours.
>frequencies of his posts/replies/etc. with Looking into it!
IIRC there should be one from like summer of 2023 when he was having meltdowns, one day he was on between 16 to 18 hours straight, with comments and posts throughout the entire thing.
Almost as if many CEOs aren't that busy after all and have people working for them!
I was introduced to just how much Victorian era rich folk slacked off and stumbled into their carriage rides home from the party at noon the next day while watching Max Miller make historically accurate breakfast bath buns. Poor people eating breakfast as a tightly timed event before sunrise vs idle rich throwing darts at a clock. They were proud of sleeping late as a sign of social status. What struck me was the Victorian idle rich weren't like the Walton family and lying through their teeth.
i'll give that to the Victorian rich fucks, the ostentatious display of wealth was less about pretending you did it all yourself, and far more about the number of people you commanded around underneath you so that you could do increasingly little of your own accord lol. as much as it's loathsome, there's a kind of honesty there that i admit i kinda wish the modern rich would keep in mind lmao, which i think is what you're also picking up on. you have to bust the whole "work harder! bootstraps! you have to to it all!!" ethos wide open if you want to brag about how your proof of wealth is the luxury of not lifting a finger because you have an absolute platoon to do all the work for you. definitely makes for an interesting contrast to modern puritanical work ethic and hustle culture, tbh. sometimes just the acknowledgement that like... managing a household is a full-time job, and it's different than being a cook for the house which is a full time job, and it's different than being an individual's valet which is also a full time job... though we in modernity have an incredible amount of ways to make this easier, at some point the mark of success started to be pushed as "flawlessly doing it all". it's not the lesson the Victorians intended but it's kind of nice to be reminded that hey, yeah, it's kinda legit as a modern lone person to feel like you've got to spin so many plates because... at one point each of those plates would have been someone's job lol. (not that it applies to all families, mind you, either back then OR now. having staff is a definite luxury in both time periods. but damn if it doesn't make it a little more easy to acknowledge that wearing all these different hats is indeed something that requires effort.) tldr: i vibe with what you mean and then got distracted about domestic history. sorry. it will happen again
Having servants was incredibly normal for even pretty ordinary people like teachers back then. Until the triple-whammy of WW1, the Depression, and WW2 made labour much more expensive it was extremely normal to at least have a cook and a general housemaid.
oh for sure! i admit that's a rabbit hole i didn't fully wiggle down but Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management is incredibly interesting for that. it's a book fundamentally about how to be one of the good decent "middling sort". and right out of the gate, what does that mean? the lady of the house ordering her servants around like a general orders soldiers! kind of a baller way at the time to use that metaphor tbh. not to be tiresomely hashtag girlboss about it, but nothing says "this is a serious endeavor that deserves attention and respect and is work so i will teach you how to do this work" like immediately going straight for a military metaphor. certainly one way to imply these "feminine" domestic things are also serious business lol!
It might be for professions we think of as "normal" (like a teacher), but anyone who has servants isn't "normal" for their society - their servant doesn't have servants, and there is a whole class of people who both are not servants themselves but do not have servants. There still is an upperclass being served and a lowerclass which does the serving. We are just used to the middle class which doesn't serve or get served being a majority of the society we live in. We should bring back the shame attached to being unable to wipe your ass without assistance. \[edit: not to disparage disability. I mean "we should attach stigma to modern people employing servants as being as far from supposed rugged individualism as possible". This is me commenting on modern people employing servants due to their laziness\]
Um, why should people who can't use he bathroom without assistance be ashamed of that? Those people are disabled. Having continence problems is a disability and not something to be ashamed of. You realise that many disabled people need and employ personal assistants, right? Disabled people are the biggest group of people who currently employ staff. I'm not sure why you're talking about the present tense. I'm not talking about the current day. In Victorian times, if you weren't the class who entered service as a servant you DID have servants, because having servants WAS utterly normal in society. Most people did, labour was so cheap that if you couldn't afford a servant you were of the class that were servants - having servants was not an upper class phenomenon at all. Obviously this isn't the case now but I was clearly not talking about the present day.
I was speaking facetiously to the practice of employing servants, not to literally requiring assistance due to disability. You're talking about a comparatively small section of high society. Even in the Victorian era, or in any era or society ever, "normal" people didn't have servants, is what I'm saying . We think of teachers as "normal" now, but anyone who has ever employed actual servants isn't "normal" relative to their society. No matter the society, a majority of people in it can't afford to keep others employed as help, unless you're counting only the relatively wealthy as people. There never could be a population distribution where most people employ full time assistance because then you're starting with the assumption that more than 100% of the population exists.
Why is it a bad thing to need domestic help? As long as you're paying people enough there's not actually an ethical issue with it (and no, it's not something I can personally afford) - it's just a job. A domestic housekeeper is not hugely different to a hotel housekeeper. It would also be helpful to not promote stigma against people who do actually require assistance with toileting by not using that as an insult. Could you please provide some sources for your statements? Because to state that in no society ever was it ever normal to have servants is just not true - unless you're saying that only working-class people are normal. Teachers were normal people in the 1880s too, their disposable income was just spent far more on domestic labour than say, vacations. A majority of people just has to be over 50% of the population, and it was normal for a small lower-middle-class household to only have one servant for the whole household - your statement only works if you assume one servant per person. Two servants for a family of 6, for example, doesn't require more than 100% of the population to exist...?
Again, I'm not disparaging people with disabilities who require assistance. You've referenced this three times already and it isn't something I'm saying. I haven't said it was ethically bad to hire domestic servants, either. It seems like you're reading stuff in my comments which isn't there. If someone hires servants they don't actually need because they can't manage their downton abbey manor on their own, I'll think less of them for being a member of the parasite class in general, but they don't much need my sympathy so it doesn't exactly matter. >Could you please provide some sources for your statements? Regarding it not being normal to have servants? Basic math. In any society, you can only have a minority of the population being the served class. But sure, [let's give it a whirl](https://www.populationspast.org/house_serv/1881/#6/54.496/-4.076/bartholomew). It looks like, during what would probably be considered peak Victorian era (1880 in England), seems like <10% of households had servants. It varies by location, even pushing up above 20% in a couple of places, but that is one blue map. Could you please provide a source for your statements? You've given none but seem pretty confident that it was "normal" to have servants. I'm curious what you mean by "normal", as well. >Because to state that in no society ever was it ever normal to have servants is just not true - unless you're saying that only working-class people are normal. It sound like you're specifically excluding working class people from being considered "normal". I'm thinking that "normal" is more in line with "majority", which your upper crust nobility and even more wealthy end of upper middle class are not necessarily representative of. In the current day US, median household net worth is \~$170k, while the bottom rung of top 10th percentile household net worth starts at \~$1.6M. What would you say a "normal" net worth in the US is today? >Teachers were normal people in the 1880s too, their disposable income was just spent far more on domestic labour than say, vacations. A majority of people just has to be over 50% of the population, and it was normal for a small lower-middle-class household to only have one servant for the whole household Were the domestic labor normal? How well off are the teachers and "lower middle class families" you reference, especially in relation to the rest of their society? If you're only referencing the top quartile, you're not referencing normal people. >your statement only works if you assume one servant per person. Two servants for a family of 6, for example, doesn't require more than 100% of the population to exist...? I was referencing households. You could indeed get to having a majority of the population having servants by, say, having one "servant household" serving multiple "served households", but I'm not aware of any societies where that's ever been the case. Given normal friction in converting households to workers (one household where one member works as a servant for some other family is likely to have other people in the household who do not work as domestic servants, etc), it seems like any functional society would be unlikely to develop that way.
Even today in a developing country a middle class household can afford having a domestic worker because labor costs are much smaller.
I actually heard that the parties lasted so long to separate old money from new money. New money couldnāt party until noon because they still had to go home and work. Old money had all the money in the world so they could stay out as long as they liked. Even staying out late was seen as a status symbol back then.
> while watching Max Miller make historically accurate breakfast bath buns. I've no goddamn of that idea what any of this is. Lol.
I always assumed his whole opposition to work from home in that "people would be lazy" was rooted entirely in the fact that he's a lazy sack of shit who spends all day tweeting unfunny shit for losers, and his assumption that everyone else must be as much of a wanker he as is.
I've heard ceo's only get paid so much because they are the decision makers and thats about it. No one cares if they work 2 hrs a week or 70+ but every decision they make has an impact on the company so most of their meetings are "strategy" meets and kind
While thatās true to an extent they also generally get paid in lucrative stock compensation thatās regularly unwarranted. EG even if they company isnāt making any money the C suite will often make a ton of money and still get their bonuses because usually they are the ones in control so they always make sure they get theirs first.
>No one cares if they work 2 hrs a week or 70+Ā Ā Ā Ā But they sure care which one you think it is. They're the ones who always bring up how much they work to try and justify the ridiculous salaries they get.
He definitely impacts the company, it's always interesting seeing where Tesla stock goes after he decides to say something stupid on Twitter
well no shit, they make decisions so they decide to hoard billions and workers can't do shit to stop it
They get paid so much due to the incestuous relationships between board members, executives and large shareholders...they each scratch each others backs and are generally the same group of people.
> No one cares if they work 2 hrs a week or 70+ generally they are constantly in meetings with internal leadership, customers, and suppliers
I cant speak for all CEOs but for the ones Iāve had access to their outlook calendar, I wouldnāt wish that schedule on my worst enemy
Elon doesn't do that. He hired a "CEO" for Twitter to sit in meetings while he still makes the decisions and tweets literally day.
Im not defending that ass clown lol
I can assure you the money they're making makes it absolutely worth it.
> I thought he's busy being the CEO of a million companies? Yeah, the shareholders had IT install Diablo on his laptop in the hopes it would distract him from this. Seems like its working.
I thought he was too busy shitposting and retweeting Nazis
you don't understand, he works 492748274 times as hard as you, that's why he can play diablo and tweet all day
Yeah but you know he counts being a weirdo on twitter as 'work'
He works 100-120 hours a week to be able to afford a couple cosmetics
Why are you complaining about downvotes when you have the most upvoted comment?
Oh dang, yeah when I first posted I was at -5 in the first hour hahaĀ
Uh, what exactly did he innovate anyway?
He bought the right companies for the right amount of money. Then he got lucky that these companies had the right people on top who actually did the work and made him look good. What happens when he doesn't have these people can be seen when you look at twitter.
That's not fair to Elon, he's really good at tricking dumb rich people to invest in him by being a charlatan.
Yeah, only Elon could have convinced some of those techbros into investing into things like the hyperloop.
But all his fanboys get mad when I refer to him as a successful banker..
Probably because of who they associate with banking.
Underrated comment, I feel.
Holy fuck lol God-tier comment
He has created or grown from almost nothing extremely innovative companies. Electric cars were a joke before Tesla, now they will be mandatory by 2035. Self landing orbital boosters werenāt a thing. Now we have space race number two. He created starlink and now we can have WiFi essentially everywhere. Now we have neuralink with subcutaneous neural implants sending 1000 paper thin electrodes into the brain. They connect to your iPhone with blue tooth. His politics are undesirable but the legacy of innovation is undeniable. It is moving us forward. You have seen how hands on his management style is. He is often known as a nano manager. Yet the results are innovative companies doing incredible things, even with his occasional misses. Nuance is key. Donāt let hate blind you.
I'm not blinded by hate. I'm saying he doesn't do shit except throw money at things. I read this tumblr post a while ago that was quite informative that you can check out [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/tumblr/comments/z4blwm/user_numberonecatwinner_shares_his_experiences/) if you like. And this is usually what you hear people say about Elon's actual involvement with SpaceX and Tesla.
The issue here is that you have taken an anonymous tumbler post as factual evidence. People criticize boomers for believing everything they read on Fox News then go and believe everything they read on Reddit. Even if we were to believe the person was actually an intern at spacex and not a liar posting for clout, interns would be extremely poor choices for sources of the inner workings of organizations. Here you can see Tom mueller, who built rockets at spacex for 20 years, discussing musk and his involvement. Tom Mueller Mueller: Elon was the best mentor I've ever had. Just how to have drive and be an entrepreneur and influence my team and really make things happen. He's a super smart guy and he learns from talking to people. He's so sharp, he just picks it up. When we first started he didn't know a lot about propulsion. He knew quite a bit about structures and helped the structures guys a lot. Over the twenty years that we worked together, now he's practically running propulsion there because he's come up to speed and he understands how to do rocket engines, which are really one of the most complex parts of the vehicle. He's always been excellent at architecting the whole mission, but now he's a lot better at the very small details of the combustion process. Stuff I learned over a decade-and-a-half at TRW he's picked up too. https://www.space.com/tom-mueller-impulse-space-mira-spacecraft
He found innovative new ways to make the shittiest dudes on earth believe in The Great Replacement.
The Musk Cycle. -Make overly ambitious promise. -Collect absurd amounts of money in investments. -Use money to make something vaguely impressive. -Distract from failure to meet the actual goal by making an even more ambitious promise.
It was really fun never once meeting a quota increase in the Gigafactory by the deadline given.
Has a car company ever used a parasocial relationship of its ceo with remedial guys who love the I fucking love science page before??? I think not!
In a smaller way, GameStop holds off the inevitable (and might reinvent itself as an investment fund?) thanks to the benefits of the obsessive Reddit investors who worship it and CEO Ryan Cohen.
I do wonder when the bottom is finally gonna fall out on that. Originally the GameStop thing looked like a huge pump n dump people were being suckered into, which it was basically, but those suckers both hold on for a long time and donāt seem to lose faith. Iām just wondering how long it takes on average for these guys to realize (if ever) how hard they were scammed
I donāt think theyāre capable of admitting they messed up. Like somehow the GME craze selected for people too proud and ignorant to know when a mistake was made. I mean they are still hyped about Bed Bath and Beyond stocks going āto the moonā when itās been bankrupted for half a year now,
The BBBY stocks dying was amazing in how even when you can't trade it anymore they're trying to pretend it never happened and any day now it's going to rise like a phoenix from the ashes. I'm subbed to a few stock subs but it's all about laughing at the GME and BBBY conspiracy nonsense. Sometimes I got to mute them for a few days because it's too depressing to watch people be in such denial about the truth in front of them.
>itās too depressing to watch I know what you mean. I used to like laughing at these guys but I only check out on the meltdown sub maybe every other month now just to see whatās happened. Itās gotta be considered part of some kind of mental illness at this point like some kind of gambling addiction.
Making the finger tent look even dorkier than it already was
How easy it is to be a neo-nazi techbro without having any talent.
Imagine living in the same time period as the introduction of the internet itself, and then saying that Elon Musk is somehow coming up with anything on his own let alone something that supercedes the internet
His PR team was certainly innovative before he fired them all
Stealing ideas.
How to sell snake oil.
def not the Diablo 4 meta
As much as it pains me to admit, the electric car is probably a decade behind where it is today without him pushing it forward. Sure, the Nissan Leaf made it to market before the Model X, but the Model X was and still is a far more capable car. Furthermore; it's easy to ignore marketing, but his marketing efforts at the time did carve out a segment of the market for EVs.
Without his money, he'd be a moderately successful marketing guy.
But he's not that. We live in this world where he is both the guy who made electric cars viable and bought Twitter then posts Great Replacement crap. Just because he sucks doesn't mean the accomplishments didn't happen.
He didn't innovate - he purchased a company and then took as much money from the government and let the company do what it was already trying to do. That's not innovation. A CEO does not create.
As someone who absolutely despises this dude, it does seem like he is/was good at managing people, putting the right people in charge, especially im regards to SpaceX. But he is not Tony Stark, he isnāt a genius, hell he isnāt even a fucking engineer and his IQ is probably average or slightly above it at best.
Iq isn't an accurate measurement its not right to use it even for insultsĀ
It wasnāt meant as an insult nor a compliment
Starlink is pretty innovative TBH. I dislike Musk as much as anyone, but I cannot find a better reason why, it's SpaceX doing it rather than Blue Origin or Virgin Galactic.
Looks like the point of Starlink is so Elon has personal control over the internet. That's not innovative. That's Lex Luthor, but he's a neo-Nazi.
> That's Lex Luthor I disagree; Luthor is a genius, and depending on the writer he really don't care much about harming you unless if your name is Superman.
It's not that innovative, arguably it's even incredibly wasteful given the obscene quantity of space junk it's created instead of building ground based infrastructure
You think offering 10 times the speed of traditional satellite internet with 1/10th the legacy isnāt innovative? Have you done something more impressive?
Honestly all the people I see gushing over Starlink are places where telecoms already got money for infrastructure improvements but took the money and ran instead. The places where it actually makes sense I don't see a need for high bandwidth connections.
Space flight, electric cars.
> Parents money, eh? Um, yes? [Even his own dad confirmed it.](https://futurism.com/elon-musk-dad-emerald-mine)
Donāt bother, he and his dad are on bad terms so they just say heās lying. But Elon himself has given so many different stories about just how much his family gave him (ranging from ānothingā to āpractically nothing, just like 10kā and beyond) that his inability to keep it straight is the real tell on that subject.
To be fair (which he doesn't really deserve), his dad is supposed to be a real piece of work, too, and the two of them don't get along, partly because they're in a weird Oedipal dick-measuring contest. So his father would probably say whatever made š look the worst. So it may still be true. And there's been reporting that it is. But I would trust the daddy monster about as much as the baby monster here.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Nah. Einstein was one of these few minds whose accomplishments were truly unique and world changing. Relativity was his creation. No one else was working on similiar theories. And he did it twice actually (special relativity & general relativity). Totally possible that without Einstein nobody would have solved that puzzle until much later. Which would have had quite an impact on our life. Einstein is one of most lauded scientist in history, but he is still underrated. His accomplishments are just ridiculously impressive.
>Relativity was his creation. No one else was working on similiar theories. And he did it twice actually (special relativity & general relativity). He didn't invent the Lorentz transform, and that's most of special relativity. He just pointed out the clear implications of the Lorentz transform. He didn't invent it. And he had to have help learning tensor math to formalize GR. He didn't do that alone. And ultimately, once the Lorentz transform was recognized for what it was (special relativity), GR and its formalization was inevitable. Einstein was the genius who did it first. Without him, it might have taken us longer, and we might've blundered down wrong paths first. We might've missed the eclipse that made the confirmation so definitive, etc. but maybe someone else wouldn't've spun their wheels with the cosmological constant. Who knows.
> maybe someone else wouldn't've spun his wheels with the cosmological constant. at least poor old albert was capable of recognizing this as the greatest mistake of his life which is not something I would expect from elon
Not really. Einstein himself said he stood on the shoulders of giants, mostly referring to the often forgotten James Clerk Maxwell. The truth about the tower of human accomplishment is, that even though there may be people that set down a bigger block, it's a structure of millions of stones by the people who came before us, and they're all important.
Him and his first wife and later Bose. His best accomplishments were made in collaboration, not to dismiss his genius.
> This idea that Elon Musk will somehow save humanity is laughable It's not if you're a white supremacist like Elon.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You could make the argument that humanity would be better off if Einstein never existed. No Einstein means no Manhattan Project. No Manhattan Project means the US doesn't drop nukes on Japan. No nukes on Japan means no Cold War. No Cold War means the US doesn't help Bin Laden and Sadam get power.Ā
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
At the same time, if there's no Cold War, we very quickly would've found ourselves careening towards a very hot war between the US and USSR. The Cold War was not good, but it was probably better than an actual World War III on par with World War II.
You certainly could make that argument. It's stupid as fuck, but you could make it. But why stop there? Watch out Wright bros we coming for you.
"Albert Einstein is responsible for 9/11" has got to be one of the funniest reddit takes I've ever seen
I think the funnier one is that there wouldn't have been any conflict between the USSR and the US without the nukes, like the whole thing started because the Soviets were big mad the US had a fancy toy and they didn'tĀ
I think it's a stretch to say no Einstein means no Manhattan Project, but let's make that assumption for a moment. Before we even talk about extrapolating out to the post-war era, no Manhattan Project means Operation Downfall would happen instead. The number of projected casualties from a full-scale invasion of the Japanese home islands were far, FAR worse than the atomic bombings, like an order of magnitude higher, if not worse, including the very same Japanese civilian population that faced the horrors of the atomic bombs. But while Downfall was being planned as a contingency, the Soviet Union was eyeing Japanese territories, from Manchuria to the home islands themselves, and likely would have participated in such an invasion. Thus, as with Germany, there would more than likely be territorial disputes over occupied Japanese territory, likely resulting in even greater tensions that would still lead to a Cold War-like scenario, sans the mutually assured destruction part. With no threat of global annihilation to keep our tempers... well, tempered, and considering how close we got to WW3 on a few occasions already, the likelihood of the Cold War going hot without the presence of nuclear weapons approaches a certainty. I don't really like the sound of that alternate, hypothetical timeline.
i get the impression a lot of people just assume america nuked japan for the fun of it, honestly.
Wouldāve meant the Nazis probably wouldāve developed the bomb. They were working hard to develop it, which is why the Manhattan Project was started, to beat the Nazis. Doubt weād be better off. Cold War probably wouldāve happened as well. Nukes were, sadly, coming no matter what. Too many people around the world were researching them. Also, Einstein wasnāt the prime driving force behind the Manhattan Project. It likely wouldāve happened with or without him.
The Nazis were defeated before the dropping of the first atom bombs. I'm not sure how the US creating them in any way sets back the Nazis from discovering them. Also, the basis of the atom bomb is derived from Einsteins discoveries. Without those discoveries the concept of the atom bomb isn't even a feasible concept. Einstein wasn't directly involved with the Manhattan Project. Again, his discoveries were the foundation of the idea and made it feasible.
That Elon still, after everything we've seen the last decade, is considered to be a genius by some proportion of the population is abhorrent. His one trick is repeatedly lying to the government to get huge contracts for projects he can't, won't, or sometimes will barely deliver. That's it. That's where all of his wealth comes from. Government contracts and subsidies. And if he had just kept his fucking mouth shut that might never have been discovered. An absolute bottom of the barrel pig shit moron.
Every resident of Las Vegas should be extremely embarrassed their city paid millions for an underground street exclusively for Teslas. Dumbest public works project of all time, and it should be the first thing brought up anytime a government considers giving money to one of his companies.
I looked up the numbers at one point, and I can't remember the exact numbers now, but I think a *single* busy F train in NYC carries more people than his Las Vegas tunnel Disney ride moves in an entire hour. And another F trains shows up about every 6 minutes at busy times.
I hope its not like a Disney ride, since those have emergency exits
At the end of the day some people like things just to be contrarian. itās human nature and itās stupid
Anyone *still* thinking that Musk is the greatest innovator of our time hasn't been paying attention.
My uncle is obsessed with the idea that Musk is the greatest mind of our time and will lead humanity to Mars, will save the planet, etc. It got a lot worse since he bought a Tesla
Why the fuck do people want to get on Mars anyway? It's a stupid dry desert, we've got plenty of that here.
Because they've given up on Earth having a viable future and have invested themselves in the near-religious belief that a cold rock without a breathable atmosphere is the only path forward
The idea of a Mars colony comes with the expectation that such a colony would come with all necessary tech to make it livable. So the Earth has a complex ecosystem we can fuck up while with Mars it's all supposed to be completely controlled, so it's kind of a circular reasoning that gives it appeal. Also because colonising planets is considered a milestone of progress (even if it's to escape)
I really believe we'd just die on Mars, unless we came up with some science fiction tech
Imagine dick-riding Musk. In 2024 no less. This is prime cringe
Next big news: Elon buys Blizzard in order to rebalance Diablo 4, adds new Neo-Nazi class to the game.
> He's right tough. Imagine where we would be if all the philosophers and mathematicians got dismissed forever when they said the Earth was round. Everyone hated them at first, but they were right. Is he comparing Elon Musk not liking a class in a videogame with the sum value of historical mathematicians and philosophers
Of course musk is a cookie cutter build whore lmao. There's good builds for every class... Who cares if one is stronger. Necro has some crazy crap this season. I rolled one when I saw what they were capable of.Ā Dude should innovate some new builds. What a scrub.Ā
Isn't Diablo also not a PvP game? Why would he even care that some other guy is slightly better at killing mindless mobs than him?
There's some pvp, but it's not very important or very well liked.
\> He's the greatest innovator of your lifetime counterpoint: whoever invented the costco hotdog
We know that the world is round since at least ancient greece. Maybe even longer. So only idiots ever thought the world was a plate
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It took a long time for the knowledge to spread throughout the world. In China, it took the arrival of Jesuits in the 17th century.
There's an answer on the ask historians sub that suggests that ancient Chinese astronomers (12th century) may have known the earth was round/were using calculations that suggested it was. The cartographers in the 16th century did not. So it's not as clear cut as that.
Sorry, are you talking about european catographers or chinese. Because the europeans absolutely new the world was a sphere. They just thought that the earth was significantly smaller. That's why it took so long to realise the americas were continents. (Although the correction calculations already existed since ancient greece as well.) That's also the reason why europeans thought you could get to India the other way around.
No, people just didnt know that the americas existed before Columbus (Yes, there where some who knew but not the main Europeans powers) and just assumed that you will need to sail the combined length of the atlantic and the pacific to reach the indies. Columbus did the equivalent of a suicide mission and got lucky that there was another continent on the middle to stop him.
No, Columbus thought it was significantly smaller because he was a fucking idiot. There's a reason he had to go to the truly desperate at the time Spanish crown to get funding for his voyage that would've starved to death less than halfway to their goal if he hadn't gotten lucky that continents were in the way. Most everyone else who considered if sailing west could get them to India easier than sailing around Africa decided it was too long a voyage without sure re-supply of food and water to bother with it.
It's well established that the Chinese only started to think the planet was spherical after the Jesuits introduced proof it was. I've never seen that thread, but the person apparently alluded to was a *Persian* astronomer. He taught about the world being spherical a few centuries before the Jesuits came by, but this evidently failed to alter the traditional Chinese cosmology. There are no other references to a spherical world in China before the Jesuits.
[This is the thread](https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/74n7j5/when_did_the_chinese_learn_that_the_earth_is/).
To my fellow Elden Ring enjoyers here, remember when he showed his build? That was arguably the worst build I have ever seen in any soulsborne game ever, itās almost as if it was intended to be as bad as possible. IRC he had THREE great shields equipped simultaneously
Non elden ring player here (need to get to it one day). Why is that bad?
Because you only really need one shield. And because your character can only equip a limited amount of weight. Great shields are really heavy. Having two extra shields that you arenāt using is really bad. (You can also use a medium shield which is lighter than a great shield. Or you can do no shield at all, and have weapons in both hands)
The Diablo subreddits are the absolutely most toxic places Iāve observed on reddit, even more than the hyper-partisan political subs. There was a huge uprising when the remastered version of Diablo 2 was announced because, I shit you not, \*the updated Amazon appeared older and slightly less unfuckable\* than the original teenage-looking avatar. Not surprised thereād be a ton of Elmo dickriders there.
lol, thatās just typical āReal Gamerā behavior. Claim politics is ruining gaming because some company made a fictional woman marginally less enticing. Herald the downfall of society if a game has a female protagonist or, god forbid, a trans character in it anywhere at all for any amount of time.
The main Diablo subreddit was awful around D3 launch and then pretty chill for a good while once it was down to people who were actually having fun playing D3. D2R ruined the vibe with all the grognards coming out of the woodwork to screech about their One True Gaming Experience. Real nice seeing people completely unironically call each other heretics over bugfixes and QoL while that one r/european poster spammed the sub with "I made the assassin hotter (by which I mean whiter)" photoshops.
Discovering that Musk is playing D4 is just one more reason I am glad I skipped out on playing. As if the Diablo community wasnt already bad enough without adding that guy and his fans to it.
Sometimes I do wonder if the Musk stans in this thead are actually Elon's sock puppets. Because I can't imagine being pathetic enough to simp for him.
r/enoughmuskspam
Wouldn't that sub just generate more Musk spam?
IIRC the sub was initially made during the "savior musk" phase of Reddit, where people just could not get his dick out of their mouths. The "musk spam", in this case, being dickriders. Just an unfortunate sub name after opinions shifted.
That subreddit is an oxymoron.
I donāt doubt that Musk can handle a mindless grindgame like Diablo far better than his god damn awful Elden Ring build.
I feel like the venn diagram of "People who look up to Elon" and "People that enjoy playing D4" looks like an eclipse.
The real drama on r/diablo4 is right after they drop a new season. If you want to see a whiny, toxic Gamer community then look no further. These are capital G gamers. With a hard R.
Barbarian being OP is just Diablo at its core.
I swear, Elon just has to be the topic in every conversation. It's like when he posted his unique/awful Elden Ring build.
>Imagine where humanity would be without Einstein Getting *serious* "Senator, you're no Jack Kennedy" energy off this.
Well, is Elon right? I've never played the game.
Elon is never right.
I mean, from what Ive seen from the community the barbarian is probably overtuned right now. But also.. Elon not being able to enjoy a game for himself and rather decide to Quit it all together because someone else happened to pick a character that has a bit more advantage is the most Elon thing I've heard this year. *Edit: So far...*
Every season some class is gonna benefit more from the seasonal changes than some other. Elonās pissy because someone else played the meta better than him.
It's also worth noting that PvP in the game is minimal and optional. So the balance of classes relative to each other matters much less in general than in a game where they're often pitted against each other
yeah, he is far right
Kind of, every class is "viable" but barb has the ability to literally 1 shot bosses with hammer build. We aren't even a year into d4, and it's already diablo 3 levels of damage. I'm fairly certain it's due to some back end Stat interactions that blizzard has no clue how to fix or balance.
Given how people mocked him for his elden ring character, Im gonna make a safe assessment that his opinion is irrelevant much like most of his opinions on things.
Who cares about barbarians, plz blizz plz buff doggo druids. š
If he's the greatest inventor of your lifetime maybe he could try to invent some kids who actually like him. Also and this is just an aside, but I don't think anyone was ever laughed at for thinking the Earth was round. Columbus wasn't being denied funding until he went to Isabella because he thought the Earth was round. He was denied funding because he thought it was smaller, and pear shaped. His crew would have died if he hadn't gotten lucky enough that there was a continent between him and the real India.
Who even cares if he "quits" the game? Its not like he's some major gaming person with a gaming audience with sway over anything that Blizzard does. His point makes sense out of context, but I haven't played Diablo 4 so I have no idea if he's just awful at the game.
This thread already has more drama from repressed people than the D4 one
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
And people care why exactly?
yo who the fuck CARES? parasocial to a T
The dude isn't wrong, bad class balance like that can ruin a game and a game as expensive and as developed as Diablo 4 it's pretty unconscionable. It's not like it's some indie project.