Announcement

uziq
Member
+470|2827
i interact with leading astrophysists every day who would decline to comment on population replacement and the coming collapse of white civilisation. that’s because they don’t have PhD’s in that topic, and furthermore it is intensely political and open to debate/interpretation.

it’s a specific STEM sort, say a dilbert or musk, who thinks every subject outside of their ken could be figured out in an afternoon, or with a quick google search, as is so often the case with dilbert’s level of research and argument. apparently having a master’s in engineering makes you an expert on the highly unscientific topic of race biology.

considering the nature of his businesses, having a PhD or at least some noteworthy research chops/contribution would be a bare minimum to get a job in those fields/industries. most all of his employees who are making a serious contribution to his businesses will have a PhD or proper accreditation. as i said, he’s a grad school dropout but his fans credit him with all the ‘genius’, as if he understands rocket science or battery tech. it’s also highly funny that hardly any musk fanboy is interested in listening to all the complaints of his employees, or of giving props where they’re actually due: like to the woman founder and chief of spacex.

rich kid flunks out of stanford. this impresses you as genius? lol ok. there are higher educated people barking out half-baked ideas on fox news every day.

Last edited by uziq (2022-06-27 08:10:37)

Larssen
Member
+93|1262
'Intelligent enough' =/= genius.

Anyway, I think that in some cases succes amplifies a person's worst qualities. Musk has seen most things he has touched turn into literal gold and has seen his companies and persona celebrated by nerds all over the world. If he was ever a little insecure about himself and his ideas of the world, that probably was some 80 billion in net worth ago. It would probably take the collapse of his companies for Musk to reconsider acting like an insufferable know it all.

Having said so he appears to be knowledgeable and decent as long as the topic doesn't stray from his immediate business ventures. Just don't ask the man about the meaning of life or how to rescue a bunch of trapped kids from a cave in thailand...

Last edited by Larssen (2022-06-27 08:17:28)

uziq
Member
+470|2827
steve jobs didn't invent the iphone. elizabeth holmes, another stanford phd dropout who was feted and fawned over in the media, didn't revolutionize the blood-testing medical industry with theranos. we get it: the concept of a billionaire tech geek genius who is going to fix all of humanity's most pressing problems is a very seductive idea. especially if you're a cucked nerd-type yourself. elon's people spend a lot of money to promote this very image.

but saying that elon musk is a 'genius', or even 'intelligent enough', is a bit like giving the medicis the credit for all of da vinci's findings and creations. musk didn't make shit, not even in the early paypal days. all of this can be readily accessed in 5 minutes of background reading, if you look outside of the glossy magazine puff-pieces and publicity astroturfing. there is a talent and a knack for being a silicon valley/tech/finance bro and leading such organizations, i'll give you that (though it just so happens that the boards/shareholders of both tesla and spacex are increasingly less happy with elon's performance in this very type of role). but it's a long way from polymathic, world-saving genius. 'rich kid spends life manoeuvring for places on corporate boards and pushing out founders and inventors, whilst aggrandizing every success to his own name' sure is a somewhat different order of talent from 'genius inventor, engineer, and scientific ubermensch'.

all of this really is about dilbert's deep-held emotional conviction that government and society generally could be sorted if we just turned it over to businessmen and engineers, his sort of 'hard-nosed' expert. it's reheated technocracy with a very partial and selective reading of the history of such ideas. he's probably so salty about the blair/new labour years because they were supposed to be about a politically agnostic, vaguely 'progressive', forward-looking technocratic form of government. britain fell for the trump 'the apprentice' myth of competency in its way too, you know, with the labour 'lord' alan sugar, of amstrad ... let's get problem-solving businessmen to run society! hence the bizarre non sequitur of mentioning boris johnson and 'humanities oxford grads' in response to any criticism of musk. he has a bugbear for this topic that goes way beyond the personal aptitudes, or lack thereof, of elon musk.

Musk has seen most things he has touched turn into literal gold
tesla is massively overvalued, but that's by the by. it came along during an era of capitalism when mass-funded SV ideas and platforms had money thrown at them, regardless of actual market performance or profitability. the CEOs of wework, uber, airbnb, etc, all fancy themselves as renaissance men, too, i'm sure, despite their businesses barely making a profit for 10 years. amazon is obviously the leader of this type of 'turning things into literal gold': tank a massive operating loss for a decade until you've emptied out the bottom of the market, then abscond on taxes and pay your zero-hours contracts workers a pittance. wow, genius! modern Midases, one and all.

It would probably take the collapse of his companies for Musk to reconsider acting like an insufferable know it all.
he tried to buy out twitter on an egotistical whim, thinking like he could fix the site's problems in a few weeks (like bots and fake accounts), as if it hadn't occurred to the current twitter management or boffins to tackle it before. as i said, for people like dilbert/musk, every problem encountered by other people or in other specialisms is a doddle that can be sorted in an afternoon, if you focus your god brain on it.

turns out he shackled himself to a terrible deal, an overvalued company that makes barely any profit and has deep structural issues with its technology/community. any reasonable investor or buyer would have taken this into account; but no, musk ploughed ahead. now he's had to try and save face because his 'business genius' saw him commit to a purchase price for a company whose share value had dropped 30% in 2 weeks. this is impressive business acumen, how, exactly?

Last edited by uziq (2022-06-27 08:48:42)

KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,947|6006|949

Musk never went to Stanford
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,986|6146|USA

Calling somebody "obsessed" for taking potshots at some entitled asshole who constantly puts himself in the public spotlight is dumb. The same derelict thought went into the gestation of "Trump Derangement Syndrome" as an insult.
uziq
Member
+470|2827

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

Musk never went to Stanford
correct, he dropped out after less than a week iirc. and, my god, has his people spun that into a marvel. imagine taking the academic credit and lustre from an institution after attending for all of 2 days. musk has two undergraduate degrees - with one being a BA in econ. remind me how having an undergraduate degree entitles you to act like a super-genius in, well, anything again?

it's exhausting having to continually debunk the half-truths and spin that fills the internet about this guy. you have to continually go back to first principles and remind the fanboys that, no, he didn't 'invent' paypal; no, he didn't graduate from stanford as a PhD or undertake any meaningful scientific research there; no, he doesn't know diddly squat about electric cars or space rockets.

he's a CEO narcissist who spitballs vague ideas and lets the actually smart people get on with it. rather like crediting steve jobs with everything apple achieved under his tenure (which, ironically, rankles engineering-godrace types like dilbert).

he just uploaded a presentation recently with jordan fucking peterson (lmao) about the 'future of humanity'. yeah, because if there's two people i trust to give us insight into the future of western civilization, it's a 'life guru' who cries on camera once a week and got addicted to benzos and a CEO who sits on twitter making 4am shitposts.

Last edited by uziq (2022-06-27 17:52:33)

SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+575|3094
It is a shame Jordan P. recovered from that Russian medical procedure that left him catatonic. Would have been the perfect ending to his story if he got killed because he thought he knew better than all of the doctors in the western world.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
uziq
Member
+470|2827
it's too perfect that those two have teamed up. two totally spurious gurus who have cultivated a cult-like following on the internet among almost exclusively young male dweebs. it's a case study waiting to be written.

imagine getting a physics undergrad degree 30 years ago and suddenly deciding you're in a position to call a conference on global population studies. this whilst running several major businesses and trying to takeover a social media company. where does this guy get the time?

if you look at his twitter it seems he's spent 100s of hours either having someone else play dark souls for him or grinding out the same. but he's also an expert on population studies now. gotcha.
SuperJail Warden
Gone Forever
+575|3094
I assume the focus on population studies is him building up to say there are too many blacks being born and the whites will be chased through the suburbs by roving bands of Black Lives Matter.
https://i.imgur.com/xsoGn9X.jpg
uziq
Member
+470|2827


genius. this reminds me of that creepy 'Quiverfull' christian shit.
lil_droo
Member
+19|869

uziq wrote:

it's too perfect that those two have teamed up. two totally spurious gurus who have cultivated a cult-like following on the internet among almost exclusively young male dweebs. it's a case study waiting to be written.

imagine getting a physics undergrad degree 30 years ago and suddenly deciding you're in a position to call a conference on global population studies. this whilst running several major businesses and trying to takeover a social media company. where does this guy get the time?

if you look at his twitter it seems he's spent 100s of hours either having someone else play dark souls for him or grinding out the same. but he's also an expert on population studies now. gotcha.
where does he get the time? i don't worship him like some people but musk is ridiculously smart. u just explained it. he's running multiple different business ventures, pushing the limits of science etc. he's focused on so many different things it's insane. there's a reason why he's the most successful/richest person in the world and will go down in the history books. dude's the closest thing to a real life tony stark/iron man. he prolly sleeps like 4 hours a day (trump was the same way that's why he was always tweeting in the middle of the night sometimes)
gang shit
uziq
Member
+470|2827
he isn't pushing the limits of science. why does this need to keep being repeated?

he employs some very smart people. the woman running spacex deserves your praise. elon musk ... could not design a rocket.

trump was the same way that's why he was always tweeting in the middle of the night sometime
trump was by all accounts addicted to fox news and cable tv. channel surfing in your underwear at night, narcissistically waiting for people to mention you, is somehow genius-level behaviour to you?

you're supposed to get smarter as you age, drooz.

Last edited by uziq (2022-06-27 19:29:04)

lil_droo
Member
+19|869

uziq wrote:

he isn't pushing the limits of science. why does this need to keep being repeated?

he employs some very smart people. the woman running spacex deserves your praise. elon musk ... could not design a rocket.

trump was the same way that's why he was always tweeting in the middle of the night sometime
trump was by all accounts addicted to fox news and cable tv. channel surfing in your underwear at night, narcissistically waiting for people to mention you, is somehow genius-level behaviour to you?

you're supposed to get smarter as you age, drooz.
well yeah smart people delegate. he can't be 100% focused on the hard sciences of sending people to mars etc obviously he needs a team.

and explain how he's NOT pushing the limits of science? biggest fleet of EV vehicles featuring tech no one has seen, the boring company, spacex, neurolink, etc and who knows what else he's working on.

i didn't mean to imply trump was a genius. was more so talking about the super focused and motivated part and not sleeping. oprah was the same for example IIRC.

put the politics aside and u can't honestly say musk isn't a fucking badass.

Last edited by lil_droo (2022-06-27 20:22:04)

gang shit
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,986|6146|USA

uziq wrote:

he's a CEO narcissist who spitballs vague ideas and lets the actually smart people get on with it.
There's where the counter usually goes downhill, and the fanboys smirk triumphantly gesticulate, and go "that's why he's so clever!" and then you're back to square one. BF2S is about the only time I bother with Musk stuff.
uziq
Member
+470|2827

lil_droo wrote:

and explain how he's NOT pushing the limits of science? biggest fleet of EV vehicles featuring tech no one has seen, the boring company, spacex, neurolink, etc and who knows what else he's working on.
every single one of those technologies existed before elon musk. he didn’t ‘originate’ anything. electric vehicles? tunnel boring? satellite internet? brain–computer interfacing?

tesla is a very interesting business case study and undoubtedly, now at least, coming into ‘success’. but that’s only because they effectively broke the business/funding model and ‘disrupted’ the auto-industry. tesla was valued at something like 2x the total market value of general motors back when they were only making a few 1000 vehicles a year. there is JUST as much financial ‘innovation’ involved as technological innovation.

anyone can check the timelines of musk’s arrival on the boards of these businesses. tesla, spacex, especially: all were fully functioning businesses with working models or proofs-of-concept. it’s not like elon musk came along and helped them with their designs or spurred them on to some new breakthrough. he’s a money man. money men are important. but all this fanboy promotion of his ‘genius’ is ridiculous.

peter thiel is another paypal-era billionaire with very strange ideas about his talents and the future of humanity. similarly incubated at stanford/silicon valley. rather than mars colonies, he wants to build giant floating offshore cities where his SV friends can evade tax and live according to weirdo dystopian interpretations of plato’s republic or whatever. elon musk is much closer to this type of techbro CEO than a ‘renaissance polymathic science genius’.

Last edited by uziq (2022-06-28 01:39:11)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+1,986|6146|USA

With auto reviewers, gearheads, detailers releasing some pretty scathing observations on Tesla build quality, I'd probably look elsewhere for an electric vehicle. Definitely overrated by the musk-eteers.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,783|5480|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

steve jobs didn't invent the iphone. elizabeth holmes, another stanford phd dropout who was feted and fawned over in the media, didn't revolutionize the blood-testing medical industry with theranos. we get it: the concept of a billionaire tech geek genius who is going to fix all of humanity's most pressing problems is a very seductive idea. especially if you're a cucked nerd-type yourself. elon's people spend a lot of money to promote this very image.

but saying that elon musk is a 'genius', or even 'intelligent enough', is a bit like giving the medicis the credit for all of da vinci's findings and creations. musk didn't make shit, not even in the early paypal days. all of this can be readily accessed in 5 minutes of background reading, if you look outside of the glossy magazine puff-pieces and publicity astroturfing. there is a talent and a knack for being a silicon valley/tech/finance bro and leading such organizations, i'll give you that (though it just so happens that the boards/shareholders of both tesla and spacex are increasingly less happy with elon's performance in this very type of role). but it's a long way from polymathic, world-saving genius. 'rich kid spends life manoeuvring for places on corporate boards and pushing out founders and inventors, whilst aggrandizing every success to his own name' sure is a somewhat different order of talent from 'genius inventor, engineer, and scientific ubermensch'.

all of this really is about dilbert's deep-held emotional conviction that government and society generally could be sorted if we just turned it over to businessmen and engineers, his sort of 'hard-nosed' expert. it's reheated technocracy with a very partial and selective reading of the history of such ideas. he's probably so salty about the blair/new labour years because they were supposed to be about a politically agnostic, vaguely 'progressive', forward-looking technocratic form of government. britain fell for the trump 'the apprentice' myth of competency in its way too, you know, with the labour 'lord' alan sugar, of amstrad ... let's get problem-solving businessmen to run society! hence the bizarre non sequitur of mentioning boris johnson and 'humanities oxford grads' in response to any criticism of musk. he has a bugbear for this topic that goes way beyond the personal aptitudes, or lack thereof, of elon musk.

Musk has seen most things he has touched turn into literal gold
tesla is massively overvalued, but that's by the by. it came along during an era of capitalism when mass-funded SV ideas and platforms had money thrown at them, regardless of actual market performance or profitability. the CEOs of wework, uber, airbnb, etc, all fancy themselves as renaissance men, too, i'm sure, despite their businesses barely making a profit for 10 years. amazon is obviously the leader of this type of 'turning things into literal gold': tank a massive operating loss for a decade until you've emptied out the bottom of the market, then abscond on taxes and pay your zero-hours contracts workers a pittance. wow, genius! modern Midases, one and all.

It would probably take the collapse of his companies for Musk to reconsider acting like an insufferable know it all.
he tried to buy out twitter on an egotistical whim, thinking like he could fix the site's problems in a few weeks (like bots and fake accounts), as if it hadn't occurred to the current twitter management or boffins to tackle it before. as i said, for people like dilbert/musk, every problem encountered by other people or in other specialisms is a doddle that can be sorted in an afternoon, if you focus your god brain on it.

turns out he shackled himself to a terrible deal, an overvalued company that makes barely any profit and has deep structural issues with its technology/community. any reasonable investor or buyer would have taken this into account; but no, musk ploughed ahead. now he's had to try and save face because his 'business genius' saw him commit to a purchase price for a company whose share value had dropped 30% in 2 weeks. this is impressive business acumen, how, exactly?
Good lord.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,783|5480|eXtreme to the maX
Meanwhile the humanities wastrels are doing a great job at delivering the future.

https://static.standard.co.uk/2021/06/17/09/ac7c0f6c7237907aa322827da0ef8b14Y29udGVudHNlYXJjaGFwaSwxNjI0MDA0MzI1-2.60284180.jpg?width=968&auto=webp&quality=50&crop=968%3A645%2Csmart
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+470|2827
some of the best UK prime ministers of all time had humanities educations.

the majority of FTSE100 CEOs and industry chiefs - your beloved technocratic 'business leaders' who should have more of a say in running the country - have humanities degrees. derp derp.

https://www.ft.com/content/49939726-dac … 144feabdc0

no one like boris or thinks he is competent. nor that he is a 'superlative' humanities graduate. trotting out the same 4 undergraduate latin quotations and writing terribly researched books about churchill is not fooling anyone except White Van Dave. no peers in the humanities or classics thinks he is a scholar or 'representative' of the discipline.

you do know that johnson's govt are systematically defunding and shuttering humanities departments, right?

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2021/0 … c-j09.html

Universities in England are threatening a huge wave of course closures in the arts, languages, humanities and social sciences, derided by the Tory government as “dead-end courses”.
it's literally amazing how clueless and piss-poor is your analysis.

Last edited by uziq (2022-06-28 03:51:08)

uziq
Member
+470|2827

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

steve jobs didn't invent the iphone. elizabeth holmes, another stanford phd dropout who was feted and fawned over in the media, didn't revolutionize the blood-testing medical industry with theranos. we get it: the concept of a billionaire tech geek genius who is going to fix all of humanity's most pressing problems is a very seductive idea. especially if you're a cucked nerd-type yourself. elon's people spend a lot of money to promote this very image.

but saying that elon musk is a 'genius', or even 'intelligent enough', is a bit like giving the medicis the credit for all of da vinci's findings and creations. musk didn't make shit, not even in the early paypal days. all of this can be readily accessed in 5 minutes of background reading, if you look outside of the glossy magazine puff-pieces and publicity astroturfing. there is a talent and a knack for being a silicon valley/tech/finance bro and leading such organizations, i'll give you that (though it just so happens that the boards/shareholders of both tesla and spacex are increasingly less happy with elon's performance in this very type of role). but it's a long way from polymathic, world-saving genius. 'rich kid spends life manoeuvring for places on corporate boards and pushing out founders and inventors, whilst aggrandizing every success to his own name' sure is a somewhat different order of talent from 'genius inventor, engineer, and scientific ubermensch'.

all of this really is about dilbert's deep-held emotional conviction that government and society generally could be sorted if we just turned it over to businessmen and engineers, his sort of 'hard-nosed' expert. it's reheated technocracy with a very partial and selective reading of the history of such ideas. he's probably so salty about the blair/new labour years because they were supposed to be about a politically agnostic, vaguely 'progressive', forward-looking technocratic form of government. britain fell for the trump 'the apprentice' myth of competency in its way too, you know, with the labour 'lord' alan sugar, of amstrad ... let's get problem-solving businessmen to run society! hence the bizarre non sequitur of mentioning boris johnson and 'humanities oxford grads' in response to any criticism of musk. he has a bugbear for this topic that goes way beyond the personal aptitudes, or lack thereof, of elon musk.

Musk has seen most things he has touched turn into literal gold
tesla is massively overvalued, but that's by the by. it came along during an era of capitalism when mass-funded SV ideas and platforms had money thrown at them, regardless of actual market performance or profitability. the CEOs of wework, uber, airbnb, etc, all fancy themselves as renaissance men, too, i'm sure, despite their businesses barely making a profit for 10 years. amazon is obviously the leader of this type of 'turning things into literal gold': tank a massive operating loss for a decade until you've emptied out the bottom of the market, then abscond on taxes and pay your zero-hours contracts workers a pittance. wow, genius! modern Midases, one and all.

It would probably take the collapse of his companies for Musk to reconsider acting like an insufferable know it all.
he tried to buy out twitter on an egotistical whim, thinking like he could fix the site's problems in a few weeks (like bots and fake accounts), as if it hadn't occurred to the current twitter management or boffins to tackle it before. as i said, for people like dilbert/musk, every problem encountered by other people or in other specialisms is a doddle that can be sorted in an afternoon, if you focus your god brain on it.

turns out he shackled himself to a terrible deal, an overvalued company that makes barely any profit and has deep structural issues with its technology/community. any reasonable investor or buyer would have taken this into account; but no, musk ploughed ahead. now he's had to try and save face because his 'business genius' saw him commit to a purchase price for a company whose share value had dropped 30% in 2 weeks. this is impressive business acumen, how, exactly?
Good lord.


don't let actual historical fact get in the way of your fanboyism.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,783|5480|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

some of the best UK prime ministers of all time had humanities educations.
Its a pretty low bar, I can't think of a good PM
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,783|5480|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

don't let actual historical fact get in the way of your fanboyism.
Couldn't care les about Musk, he's good at spotting opportunities and exploiting them, and building companies.

At least he tries to use science, its better than the alternative.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uziq
Member
+470|2827
that's because you never read any books. no surprises there.

disraeli? son of a literary scholar and part-time novelist? bet he hated humanities.

gladstone? classics and mathematics grad? bet he thought there was a huge culture war between 'STEM' and 'humanities'.

how about the post-war PMs or politicians who delivered the welfare state and NHS, of which you have benefited so greatly? attlee? bevan? modern history graduate and a self-educated man who wrote for the political press? bet they loathed humanities.

and, again, even by your own narrow criterion of who should lead society well -- the UK's business elite have a majority humanities education. or are you going to suggest the FTSE100 is being led off a cliff?

sorry but you really have to fix your piss-poor analysis. that's it. the salient fact about bojo's brand of tory is they they're a tiny inherited elite who have contempt for the rest of the country. that extends even to withdrawing support for ordinary people to even study humanities.
uziq
Member
+470|2827

Dilbert_X wrote:

uziq wrote:

don't let actual historical fact get in the way of your fanboyism.
Couldn't care les about Musk, he's good at spotting opportunities and exploiting them, and building companies.

At least he tries to use science, its better than the alternative.
almost every smart and intelligent person i know recognises the importance of science. no arts or humanities graduate is going to dismiss the utility and benefits of science. can you stop with these teenage straw-man arguments? we get it, you don't like people with different interests or skillsets to you. there there, mummy will cook you dinner. turn that frown upside down young man!

as you have just acknowledged your fucking self, to be successful and a leader seldom requires actual use of 'hard skills' from theoretical or applied sciences. it involves business acumen, foresight/wisdom, 'soft skills' in leadership and managing people. that's why so many business leaders precisely have non-STEM backgrounds. musk isn't where he is in life because of his undergraduate physics degree from a small canadian university. you literally contradict your own specious arguments. it's ridiculous! learn basic analytical skills.

Last edited by uziq (2022-06-28 04:04:48)

Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,783|5480|eXtreme to the maX

uziq wrote:

withdrawing support for ordinary people to even study humanities.
OK good.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2022 Jeff Minard