Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | juleiie's commentslogin

There is literally not many things in life I hope so much for than starship success. Sounds strange perhaps but I just love space and I hope it succeeds.

Funnily I absolutely despise Musk at the same time for being absolute buffoon


We're days away from the SpaceX IPO that will make Musk even richer than he is now. I don't trust him with that money.

Last time he got a bunch of money he used it to fund SpaceX and Tesla.

Now also Neuralink.

It’s hard to imagine anyone else who’s done more for the planet with his money than Musk.


[flagged]


Another recent commentator wrote here that he's responsible for "millions" of dead via the curtailing of USAID.

I'm a bit skeptical of estimates that vary by 3 orders of magnitude.


For the sake of argument let’s say that number was accurate.

How would you feel about that?


I'm not engaging in convicting people without concrete evidence.

I think that the reason you reject the claims and won’t even entertain the notion as a hypothetical is because you know deep down that you’ve been duped by Musk and can’t admit that fact publicly.

Should incontrovertible proof of the magnitude of the atrocities that he has committed come to light you’ll pivot and say that it was worth it because he’s taking us to Mars.

That’s how conmen work and Musk is a damn good one. The sooner you can admit that you’re duped is the sooner you’ll stop letting yourself be duped by him.

I’ll admit that I was duped by him too. I used to believe his stuff and this dream of mars.


When you find proof of atrocities, feel free to post it.

> dream of mars

He's doing something about it, while nobody else does nuttin.

Meanwhile, https://medium.com/swlh/here-s-to-the-crazy-ones-941190f58c5...

And it's his money being spent on it, not yours. You're not out anything. And if he succeeds, we all win.

The starship is a reality. Not a con.


Why don’t you just admit that you don’t really give a shit how many people he kills or laws he breaks as long as he does cool space stuff?

Like why beat around the bush? Just be honest man. The honesty would be refreshing.

It’s not like this attitude is unprecedented in aeronautics.


He hasn't killed anybody. Nor has he been charged with any crimes.

google sez: "One estimate suggests Tesla’s impact, through emission reductions, has saved over 20,000 lives globally."

google sez: "A 2022 report suggested that Tesla and other electric vehicle technologies (which often include enhanced safety features) have contributed to saving thousands of lives."

Empathy is judged by what one is willing to freely give. Not by making someone else give, and not by spending someone else's money.

> It’s not like this attitude is unprecedented in aeronautics.

You'd be quite wrong. I've worked with many aeronautical engineers, and their primary concern is safety. I'm personally very proud that the system I worked on has never been at fault in an accident. When the MD-83 went down because of jackscrew failure, I was sweating bullets worrying that it was a 757. Whenever I board an aircraft that is a 757, I feel a lot of pride and I always ask to speak to the captain and ask him how he likes it. They always say they love the 757. Makes me happy!


Here's the deal. I feel the same way about it as you do Walter.

I don't really care about all those people who will die because of Musk's actions at Doge with USAID. Poor Americans, poor Africans, In the context of getting humanity to space are all just fuel for the fire -- just like the slaves in mittelwerk and Von Braun. You don't need to convince me that you care about human life and that Elon Musk does too with some nebulous numbers that indicate that Tesla cars save a smattering of lives through reduced collisions and emissions.

My criticism of Musk isn't that he's hurting people -- that's just what shitty people do and I can't stop him -- my criticism is that he's not actually going to do the cool shit that he said he was going to do. It's all a con.

I think they'll get Starship mostly figured out but it'll end up underdelivering on payload. I don't just mean like the way it already has but they claim to be fixing it in v2 and v3, I mean the final version that does launch and comes back to Earth will have a relatively underspecced payload compared to what he sold us as a bill of goods all those years ago. It won't facilitate going to Mars as he sells it but it will enable amazing orbital stuff that can maybe one day serve as a springboard to further space exploration.

But Mars, it just ain't happening.

If you listen to his recent interview with Dwarkesh[0] you'll see that Mars is off the table now. The moon is actually where the cool kids have always wanted to go to and not Mars. And we're building data centres in space now -- terawatts worth -- and robot taxis with robot chauffers or something?

Do you actually think that space will be the cheapest place to locate data centres by 2029? If not then, will it ever be? It seems pretty bogus to me. Why would he make such an outrageous claim? The physics seem to work out, but I'm not certain about the radiation issue in LEO. I don't know enough about it, but it seems to me that it will ultimately require redesigned hardware architectures that can handle this kind of stuff, the workload certainly seems amenable to it, so it should be doable. But designing new chip architectures, and producing and testing all this in three years, on top of everything else that will go into one of these satellites, on top of everything else that his companies are doing sounds too good to be true. This ain't happening in three years.

Do you actually think that Musk's companies will actually be fabbing terawatts of photovoltaics? He says they plan to do it all in house, so what does that mean? Are they going to make their own wafers? Their own ingots? Source their own sand? How long will take to scale up? I don't see hown they can ever compete with China and I'm sure China will knee-cap them at every turn to prevent a competitor in the solar market. I just don't see an American company ever producing a significant quality of solar panels ever again. Just like America is the pornography producing capital of the world and always will be I think it's going to be the same with solar for China. People specialize in what they're good at. That's just comparative advantage.

As for the Optimus Robot -- do you actually think humanoid robots are going to be a household item in the next five years? Worth shutting down to automobile assembly lines to convert into robot production lines? Seems a bit foolish to me when you could be selling cars, a proven product with a known market. I don't think I need to say too much about the robotaxi stuff -- this list of claims about self driving speaks for itself.[0]

When you listen to Elon Musk talk about these things in the interview and you look at his facial expressions and mannerisms, do you actually get the impression that he knows what he's talking about and not just blowing smoke up the host's ass? Because when I look at this stuff, I see a con-man. I see a flim-flam man doing the interview circuit to drum up some press for his impending IPO.

The way I see it Walter, you and others are still in denial about getting duped by Musk. I think on some level you're aware but pride prevents you from expressing doubts and you're still a ways off from admitting the possiblity that you could have been duped. I was duped too. It's okay to admit it.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autono...


Did you know that von Braun was jailed by the SS because he was spending too much time dreaming about planets and not enough about weapons? Von Braun was a dead man if he didn't do what they said. What would you do in his shoes?

As for Mars, I've advocated in this forum numerous times that a more practical goal was a Moon base. I doubt I'll live to see a man on Mars.

If Musk has 10 amazing goals, and delivers on 3 of them, is he a success or a con man? I say success. So what has he delivered on? Tesla, X, Grok, AI, Neuralink, The Boring Company (yes it is profitable!), reusable cheap rockets, and Starlink. Any one of those would be a storied lifetime achievement for anyone else.

Platitude alert: If you're not failing, you're not trying.

Who would you say is a more successful entrepreneur than Musk?


Presumably he doesn't "admit" it because it isn't true. You aren't going to get anywhere convincing people if you make attacks on your interlocutor like this.

He's directly responsible for the deaths of several hundred thousand people via DOGE and their abrupt withdrawal and support of food aid.

https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/usaid-shutdown-has-led-to-hund...


Those estimates are highly disputed because they all come from modeled projections, not anything attributed on the ground.

If a death toll like that was real and attributable it would be the only thing in the news, 24/7, until the next election.

The fact is, it’s not. Aid was relocated to other departments and continued. Significant insider pork was cut leading to a lot of very loud people complaining with hyperbole in their outrage.

Elon remains the most effective person in history at wielding wealth for the benefit of mankind. It is not particularly close and he has banked more credibility for moon-shot efforts (pun intended) than anyone on the planet.


> The fact is, it’s not. Aid was relocated to other departments and continued.

Source?

All the recent data I can find shows a more than 80% decline in global food aid, education, and vaccinations, as of February 2026.

Education aid for 23 million children, 95 million lost access to basic healthcare, and from March 2025 to Feb 2026, an estimated ~3 million preventable deaths caused by this.

Sources: https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/making-foreign-a...

https://firstfocus.org/resource/fact-sheet-usaid-cuts-total-...

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/chikungunya/quick-takes-death-tol...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/02/04/africa-trump...

https://www.rescue.org/article/innovation-vs-cuts-humanitari...


Directly? I do not think it means what you think it means.

Hate the guy all you want, even for this, but don't try and juice it another 20% with emotional words that are ultimately incorrect.


Okay let me juice you with some "emotional words".

There is a direct line from his decisions to more than ten times the number of Americans KIA in the entirety of the Vietnam war.

Argue about how it happened all you want, the bodies are at his fucking feet. CEOs and leadership of organizations are accountable for their decisions.

"Emotional"

How about get a fucking working conscience.

Hundreds of thousands are dead, two thirds of which were kids. Children.


How do we take it away from him?

I trust his gargantuan insecurity

Sometimes the flaws of someone make him completely predictable. Very trustworthy to repeatedly pour billions in an attempt to become someone he fantasizes to be.

There are innumerable amount of assholes in history that sold things we use daily, sometimes at the expense of original inventors. It is hard to cope with the idea that greed, ambition and ruthlessness are the building blocks of everything that stands around us.

Sometimes it makes me want to reject everything I know of good and human and feed these traits until they fill the hollow parts of mind with wealth, empty fame and too many lonely sunsets on a private island.


His stated and oft-repeated goal is to save mankind by making it interplanetary.

It doesn't seem to be about personal aggrandizement. He has built no monuments to himself, has not named his company "Musk Inc", he doesn't run for office, etc.

Musk does not own a yacht or even a house.

> lonely

If he feels lonely, he can message me and I'd treat him to dinner.


Well he is a piece of shit no matter what theoretical ideals he holds. I am sure many evil people in history wanted to “save mankind”

I don’t think I need to remind you how he treated his transgender daughter and that’s just single example


Steve Jobs rejected his daughter.

George Washington declined being crowned king and set the tone for a modest and limited Executive branch. Yet he also owned slaves.

Saint Thomas More burned people at the stake.

You'll have a hard time finding any faultless people.


It's pretty annoying to be a fan of space in 2026. On the one hand you have NASA, a shadow of its former self. Clearly there is something deeply dysfunctional with it.

On the other you have an old drug addict, still functional, thankfully, dead set on antagonizing every possible person alive. (I guess dems will probably shut his space program down after they win? Can he even get on good standing with them at all after everything that has transpired?)

Shit CEO vs Money pit


Good luck finding a saint. You won't find any.

I would settle for just a decent human being

> I absolutely despise Musk at the same time for being absolute buffoon

Buffoonery is harmless, why despise him for that?


Tell that to the 100k+ people he killed by abruptly and illegally halting usaid

What I've heard is it's "thousands", "100k+", and "millions", which doesn't sound like anything trustworthy.

Besides, that's not what "buffoonery" means.


Here you go - hundreds of thousands as of Nov 2025 - https://hsph.harvard.edu/news/usaid-shutdown-has-led-to-hund...

The link blames the Trump administration, not Musk.

google sez: "The World Health Organization (WHO) is the UN's specialized agency for health, aiming to ensure the highest possible level of health for all people. It acts as a global leader, directing health emergencies, promoting healthier lives, expanding universal health coverage, and setting international health standards based on science."

Why isn't the WHO stepping up?


[unexplained loss of data]

It is funny if you think about it, imagine you arrive on a planet and there is nothing there, now what. Not saying it is not worth doing but it's like other aspects of life, about the journey. But yeah I think we are lucky to have this ability/get outside of our sandbox. Be aware of the bigger picture.

Solar generates like 1/10 in the northern countries for half of the year. No batteries currently can solve this.

The problem with global ecological regulations is they never differentiate between countries on the equator or 30th parallel with countries around 60. They expect everyone to only run on sun and wind. It isn't possible. There has to be at least nuclear which is ridiculously expensive.

It's generally not an easy problem to solve otherwise it wouldn't be a problem anymore.

First sensible thing to do is to relax the expectations for countries like Poland that have no good way to compete with other countries energy wise because of geographical location that noone chooses.

It is extremely unfair to treat everyone the same even though every country has different energy resources.


There's a solution that costs less than fossil fuels, but it's a coordination problem and the USA is structurally unable to solve those anymore. I guess the Soviet Union wins the last laugh?

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


Yeah well I just don’t care about „AI dark forest”

You seriously need to go outside and touch grass if you are so defeated by another chess winning machine

Nobody wants to Watch AI play chess, nobody wants to read ai blogposts

AI makes human writing more valuable, not less.

I will pay good money for pure human made books certified as made without a single word auto generated whether in original or during process of Translation.


Truly rich people would never buy EV as pleasure car, maybe city workhorse but then, they don’t need a city workhorse. Lamborghini have just cancelled their electric car because of lack of demand. People love the roar of ICE

EVs are cars for the masses that are priced like goods for higher class with requirements that only well situated can fulfill. Hence they aren’t as popular as they could be.


It's improving.

There might not be much of a market for true EV supercars, but that market is so small as to be inconsequential anyway, with many models selling 10s of units and many of these cars never actually being driven significantly.

In the 'high performance but actually driveable' toy zone, there are plenty of Porsche Taycan 'company cars' around London. But sports cars are niche. Lots of rich people drive SUVs, and there are plenty of Porsche / Audi / BMW, etc, SUV EVs around outer London.

EVs will keep getting cheaper as China puts pressure on the market and as the number of EVs on the roads increases. In the UK, you can already get a second-hand VW ID.3, a great EV, for well under £15. And new cars from BYD and MG are available at ever more reasonable prices.


I don’t get why someone would want to own an electric supercar. A Ferarri engine is beautiful even if it’s impractical. Electric motors aren’t special even if they are tremendously powerful and efficient.

I could see a market for hybrid supercars if cities go further on being clean air zones, enough of a battery to let the owner drive slowly around Knightsbridge.

Nah. EVs are the fastest street drivable vehicles you can get. Rich people want the best.

It’s a professional mobile artist bonanza idk why you claim it isn’t used much when this expensive device is more than earning its worth

Yeah sure if you buy it as a toy it may not be used for much lol. Check your consumerism


I not saying anything about device itself.

I just pointing out how quite a big part of Apple consumer base use these devices: buy most expensive one, play with it for a few weeks and then leave it as kitchen tablet that is used ocassionally. You know every second housewife wants to be an artist but very few actually use it for this beyond first few weeks.

Providing this audience with always-on display is a sure way to have a lot of people unhappy with burned-in OLED screens.


Yeah so pretty niche use case. No need to attack others with snarky childish comments just because you dont like reality out there

First of all I love snark

Second, it is not a fault of the device that consumers are brain dead, buying something they do not need and then whine about how the device is “useless”. It sucks to suck


Today Integrity is merely means to score more views and likes

That’s how far we have fallen. We are all painfully aware how corrupted all sorts of people are but instead of actual action we give each other likes on social media under carefully crafted anger bait.

So much everything online is fake that it is tempting to just throw your phone away.

The genuineness is the highest luxury

I try to make sure to get truly downvoted to hell every other week on social media. It resets the addicted brain and stops hive mind progress bar for a little while at least. Also get banned - this is good for you too precisely because it feels slightly uncomfortable.

That’s how I try to survive online landscapes anyway.


We are repeating a very, very old lesson. We will learn once more, the hard way.

What happens?

A professional scientist I know (tenured, professor) recruited me to set up a backtesting framework for a predictive finance model. When the results were not as they expected (this person does not work in finance and never has), they asked to see the code, then told me that claude had found a problem with the way some of the calculations were done (there was actually no problem), supplied the claude comments, and told me to change the code to match what they thought was correct. I did it anyway. Had they had more expertise in the domain (finance), they likely would have been able to leverage claude as a tool rather than inadvertently pursuing a very stupid mistake. Domain experts tend to doubt their ability to excel in other domains which is amplified by LLMs.

I work with a bunch of PHD's and have been since before ai coding.

Their code is aways terrible, and they constantly think it's good.

The exercise is always the same: explain the math to me, like I'm 5, then we profile it and see what is faster.

Oddly Claude Code, integrated into their IDE's has made this situation happen much less.

I never want to work in a place again where the fun way to start the Monday meeting is a "math problem".

PS: Don't even get me started on their SQL.


My first job out of university was at IBM wrangling a prototype some research PHDs had written into a shipping product, and.. yeah, this tracks.

This sounds rather similar to the form of scientific fraud where you first create a conclusion, then invent/manipulate the data until it supports your conclusion.

They suddenly act as if Claude has awarded them with a second PhD in CS. Now they know everything and everything you tell them gets filtered through Claude.

It's like "software dude thinks he can do hardware", but on steroids. They don't know what they don't know and they think they have a panacea in their hands.

Don't you know? Software is beneath them and the fiddly bits are just standing in the way of them getting their BigImportantWork™ done.


If rich people are this stupid then they deserve to be parted with their cash.

If you invest money so mindlessly that you don’t even check what you buy, then no legislation in the world will manage to protect you from your own mind


It’s not just rich people though. Most people (at least in the US) have their retirements and the like in things like 401ks, tied to some kind of index like the S&P 500. A company doing bullshit to manipulate the stock affects pretty much anyone who uses an index fund or ETF, which is pretty much everyone in the US.

You invest in index funds and etfs so your money averages out and you don’t get impacted by a single companies stupidity.

No, the impact is lessened, but there can still be an impact from an individual company's stupidity.

as it has always been, and therefore expected rates of return and risk assessments reflect that. this is precisely what markets and legal systems do. it's naive to imagine that there is a utopia someplace that we are failing to find

Guys you have no idea about these things and what you are talking about. source: I am a city plot owner.

No land owner will suddenly become a developer to build an apartment block.

A plot owner can sell land to a developer or form a joint venture with developer putting in their land as starting capital (much more risky) most people either keep land as gold or sell it when they need money.

I hope it is clearer now.

The very idea that everyone who owns land should build an apartment block is laughable, it is very complicated endeavour best not to get into it if you know nothing about it. Hell building a single family house is complex, let alone five story building.

So you either keep it if you don’t need money or you sell it if you want to buy something else or need to have liquidity. And you don’t even sell it to buy other investment vehicle because land is already better than gold.

My plot increased 3 times in price in 10 years. Try to beat that with SP500. It’s virtually immune to inflation no matter how the broader economy fares it will always shield from inflation because you cannot make more land hah.

Even in utopia of automation and post scarcity society good location land will be truly lucrative and unimaginably expensive if not outright prohibited to own by private individuals. The question is what will be a “good location” in 30 years.


> My plot increased 3 times in price in 10 years. Try to beat that with SP500. It’s virtually immune to inflation no matter how the broader economy fares it will always shield from inflation because you cannot make more land hah.

The GFC says hi :-)


> Even in utopia of automation and post scarcity society good location land will be truly lucrative and unimaginably expensive if not outright prohibited to own by private individuals.

Indeed, there’s a reason you see silicon valley execs going all in all acquiring land to build fortresses. At the end of the day, regardless of the cold march of technological progress, land remains the root of all real power.


> No land owner will suddenly become a developer to build an apartment block.

No one is suggesting this.

> A plot owner can sell land to a developer or form a joint venture with developer putting in their land as starting capital (much more risky) most people either keep land as gold or sell it when they need money.

Most people don't own vacant lots, but some who do hold onto it as an investment. It's a pretty poor one on average over time, just like gold (which is a good analogy).

> The very idea that everyone who owns land should build an apartment block is laughable, it is very complicated endeavour best not to get into it if you know nothing about it. Hell building a single family house is complex, let alone five story building.

Again, no one is suggesting this. The assumption is that a developer would buy a lot to build on, because that's what happens in practice.

> So you either keep it if you don’t need money or you sell it if you want to buy something else or need to have liquidity. And you don’t even sell it to buy other investment vehicle because land is already better than gold.

Land and gold are not better than the stock market over time.

> My plot increased 3 times in price in 10 years. Try to beat that with SP500. It’s virtually immune to inflation no matter how the broader economy fares it will always shield from inflation because you cannot make more land hah.

The S&P 500 beats real estate over time. Congratulations on getting lucky with your plot of land. Land is a good inflation hedge, assuming you are in a growing area. Ask rust belt land owners how things worked out for them.

> Even in utopia of automation and post scarcity society good location land will be truly lucrative and unimaginably expensive if not outright prohibited to own by private individuals. The question is what will be a “good location” in 30 years.

Thanks for highlighting one of the many issues with communism, but we will never reach a post-scarcity society for many reasons, including this one.


You have no idea what you are talking about…


What on earth are you talking about?

You know what increased more than 3x in the last 10 years? The S&P 500 index (it went from $203.87 at the start of 2016 to $681.92 at the start of 2026). And your plot of land is a massive outlier to the upside in the US overall during that time.

Historically, undeveloped land basically tracks inflation. Obviously, there are specific plots of land that dramatically exceed that, and there are specific plots of land that don't keep up with inflation.

That's the only thing you got right: raw land is an inflation hedge.


If you think you do know what you are talking about, do you think you could back it up with a source?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: