Information icon.svg

Nominations for the RationalMedia Foundation 2020 board of trustees election are now open!

Talk:Elon Musk

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.


We probably ought to start with background.


--chipbag01Tolk page 21:22, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

Article needs attention[edit]

This article is currently of low quality, with a basic fact list and a few unhelpful anecdotes which don't help us understand him. Lack of references. Should be merged with Hyperloop. TeslaK20 (talk) 21:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Delete or write a real page[edit]

All Musk has to do with Hyperloop is publishing a PDF stating that it is possible. It's definitely not the only thing he does, so it seems unfair to redirect him there. It's as if somebody looked for anything bad about him. At most it could be mentioned as reverse stopped clock. — Unsigned, by: / talk / contribs

Iain M Banks[edit]

I saw the article touches on Musk's interest in Banks' Culture series of sci-fi novels. Which reminded me of this article from 3 years ago. The 2 autonomous barges that serve as landing platforms for SpaceX's verticle landing reusable rockets are named after 2 of the sentient starhips from the Culture novels.

Whilst searching for the above article I also found an article from The Guardian which entirely coincidentally has today's date on it, which suggests that Musk badly misunderstands Banks' views and his work. . Anyway I hope these articles might prove usefull if anyone wanted to expand upon the existing Banks references.

As an aside, Iain M Banks just happens to be one of my favourite ever writers and I highly recommend that any sci-fi fan that hasn't already done so, should prioritize reading all of the 'Culture' series as soon as they possibly can. Some of his non sci-fi work, which he wrote as Iain Banks, the M is only used for his sci-fi, is also pretty good, I just could not put 'The Wasp Factory' down, read it from cover to cover in a single sitting. not a real jedidamn right i'm paranoid 23:36, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

r/EnoughMuskSpam[edit] LuodiWang (talk) 19:38, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

That's a nice subreddit. I like thread. We should definitely cover his promises that only serve to hype futurists.— Spinning-Burger.gif (talkstalk) 21:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Writing quality[edit]

The overall quality of writing in this article is extremely poor when compared to other RW articles. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 14:32, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Great. Make it better GrammarCommie! Thanks!!! ShabiDOO 20:47, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
I myself am not interested in talking about his assholish behavior. --It's-a me, Lgm sigpic.png LeftyGreenMario!(Mod) 20:52, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
@Shabidoo I know very little about Musk, and am not sure I want to change that. ☭Comrade GC☭Ministry of Praise 21:18, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Content is not the only thing you can do. Rewriting some of the text, correcting grammar, cutting out the padding, finding copyright images, add a bit of snark. And as for content, you'd be surprised how little time it takes to read up on him and add a thing or two. I knew very little about him as well. And you don't have to just look up the stupid shit he does or says. It could use a little more of his biography which you can easily find reliable sources for and give a brief overview. ShabiDOO 21:52, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Hey, folks! I think the section on his business ventures could expand. His electric cars and space capsules have been receiving a lot of attention recently. Nerd (talk) 21:58, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Non sequitur?[edit]

Under the batshit crazy section it mentions substance abuse and goes on to say he smoked weed on a podcast. Went to find said smoking on Youtube, apparently Joe Rogan offered it to him, whereupon Musk made doubly sure it was legal to smoke it, tried it briefly, and went on to proclaim he never smokes weed. What am I missing here, is smoking weed the aforementioned substance abuse? Are we trying to say that smoking this weed was a bad thing? (Also, he seemed like a genuinely nice and caring person in that short part of the podcast I watched, but that's just an aside thing I noticed, not really relevant since we are trying to find what the bad things about him are.) Oh, btw, this is the bit: Right in the first minute is where he smokes. Feel free to use as citation. (talk) 16:52, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

The substance abuse refers to taking both stimulants and transquilizers to work 20 hour days and try and sleep 4 hours. He admitted this. The pot smoking online, in itself is not a big deal (though a CEO doing that is disconcerting for investors), doing it while you're already stuck in several controversies sets off some red flags. He likely is a pleasant guy to be around, however he has tweeted some very awful stuff, multiple times, about several people and issues and won't back down from it. It is an interesting contrast with his otherwise near Mesiah image (which may deserved to some extent). ShabiDOO 22:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Fair enough. May be good to put this clarification you provided in the article itself, maybe with a citation to where he admitted it, but by no means are you obligated to do so. (talk) 14:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Up in smoke[edit]

Is his future so doing? (talk) 17:20, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

He's still a millionaireDoublethink (talk) 04:17, 1 December 2018 (UTC)


Really sad that he lost his mind. He was a visionary.Doublethink (talk) 04:08, 1 December 2018 (UTC)


@Nerd While some of it may have been redundant, there's no need to delete the snarky aspects of the article. This is RW, not Wikipedia. Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 19:28, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Having two sections on his questionable accusation of pedophilia is redundant to me. Furthermore, there is a difference between reasoned criticism and downright bashing. The former we do; the latter we avoid. Nerd (talk) 19:30, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Really? Bashing counts as snark, and frankly, Elon deserves it. Besides, RW has always been open to bashing, it's called "snark" for a reason. Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 19:32, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes, really. Verbal attacks are not OK. (We are better than him, no?) Instead of throwing vitriol at him, why not dissect the things he has said and done? This is a place for rational thought, not hit pieces. Nerd (talk) 19:42, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
There's no reason to not make it funny while doing so. Other than that I`m not disinclined to disagree with you. Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 20:17, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Ah, but snark or humor to some is offensive or over the top to others. So let's be careful. We do not want to give the impression that we are some sort of angry blog.
You are not disinclined to disagree with me. A triple negative is a negative. Care to explain what the problems are in your view? Nerd (talk) 21:55, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
RW has always been snarky, just because some people take offense to it doesn't mean we should take it down. This website was like that for years. Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 21:57, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I disagree. Just because it has always been that way does not mean we should continue. I consider it my mission here to bring in as many relevant facts and and as much nuance as possible, leaving aside the opinions. Readers can certainly think for themselves. Some light humor is totally fine. But abuse is a different story. Furthermore, there is very little difference between your revision and mine. Nerd (talk) 22:02, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

You're free to disagree, but don't go deleting content just because you don't like it, there must be a more valid reason than personal feelings regarding snarky humor. This isn't Wikipedia. Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 22:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
I don't like the big chunk I deleted because it is redundant. We do not need two sections on allegations of pedophilia. Nor do we need loaded language. Nerd (talk) 22:07, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I agree with deleting the redundant sections of the article, but I disagree on removing the loaded language. This isn't Wikipedia. Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 22:10, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
Yes, this is not Wikipedia. We focus on debunking misconceptions. But that does not mean using loaded language, something we can easily and clearly do without. Nerd (talk) 22:13, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
I give up. Obviously you aren't going to change your mind on this. You win. Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 22:14, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
In any case, thank you for the respectful conversation. I appreciate it. We should have more of the same around here. Nerd (talk) 22:18, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
It's part of RW policy to make articles at least somewhat funny, we don't need to be dry like Wikipedia. Ɖøn Ĵuan Harass 11:40, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

how the fuck could he win?[edit]

when nothing he said about Unsworth was remotely true, and when accusations of this type ruin lives. AMassiveGay (talk) 16:19, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

becaues he was tried in Silicon Valley, it's a statistical impossibility to find five people in Silicon Valley and have absolutely none of them be insane Musk cultists who think he's the messiah and can do no wrong and would never under any circumstances vote to convict him.
Speaking of which how is Musk not classified as a libertarian wingnut and how is there no section on his insane cult of personality at this point? (talk)
By all means, start writing it and we'll help you out. ShabiDOO 17:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)