Elon Musk says he will move X and SpaceX headquarters to Texas in response to California gender law

scavengerspc said:

While I still haven't helped you determine the difference between company wealth and personal net worth...

Click to expand...

In the case of Musk, the two are closely correlated. For instance, Musk owns 43% of SpaceX. Meaning when SpaceX rises in value by $90B, Musk gains nearly $40B. The math is very simple.

scavengerspc said:

, I must point out you referenced the Forbes article I mentioned, and you said:
"And Forbes' story wasn't true even when printed"

Click to expand...

Even if we ignore the fact that Musk has regained nearly all that wealth since the article was originally printed, the fact remains that at the time of printing their methodology was problematic. It failed entirely to account for the gain in SpaceX holdings. It also has the long-standing problem that the "paper" value of a large stockholder is largely illusory. If you own 20, 30, or 40% of a large corporation like this, you cannot simply sell those shares on the open market and realize anywhere near their paper price. Such large sales or purchases almost always go for substantially above or below market rates. I can explain the topic further if you wish, but the fact remains that these key investors are not truly gaining or losing large sums evey time the market swings up or down.

Endymio said:

The phrase "it's well known" is used to present falsehoods and misinformation. At heart, an EV is a simple device, one invented more than a century ago. What sets Tesla apart are the innovations that Musk himself bet the firm on, innovations that, at the time, industry observers said were gambles destined to fail, e.g. the "gigapress" manufacturing technique and the "gigafactory" decision to produce their own batteries, rather than purchasing from a dedicated Li-Ion battery specialist firm.

Musk also made the highly controversial decision to "open source" all of Tesla's patents, allowing them to be used by other automakers. This was another gamble that the "experts" called insane at the time -- but yet again, it paid off in spades.

I don't recall anyone ever calling Musk a scientific or engineering prodigy. His genius lies in business entrepeneurship. Anyone can hire top-notch talent to spew out ideas like fireworks. Musk's acumen lies in recognizing the ones that have value -- and backing them to the hilt.


All the more reason Tesla -- rather than "firing him" as you suggest -- should pay Musk an unprecedented sum to keep him as CEO.

Luckily, Tesla agrees with you. The shareholders overwhelmingly voted to back the Board's decision, and restore Musk's $56B payout.

Click to expand...

Go look it up yourself. You speak many words that have no meaning especially since you think everyone is going to take your word for it because you speak with an "authoritarian voice."

Your words are empty without any references to back them up. OOOOOPPPPPSSSSSS!

Here man since you seem too lazy and too much of an authoritarian to back up your words. But maybe that's only because your words are empty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Tesla,_Inc. Even this reference from wikipedia is more authoritative than you are. You are not in Russia any more where people take Uncle Putie's word - or else.

Gee, I wonder why there is no article, yet, on TS about this - https://fortune.com/2024/07/23/elon...s-he-doesnt-subscribe-to-cult-of-personality/

wiyosaya said:

Go look it up yourself.

Click to expand...

Thanks, I did. You're wrong. A quick search at uspto.gov shows hundreds of patents filed by Tesla which don't have Musk's name on them. How do you manage to be so reliably wrong on every issue?

Here, you can try it yourself, at:

https://www.uspto.gov/patents/search/patent-public-search.

Just enter Applicant Name "Tesla" and press 'search'.

Not that it matters, as you've failed to comprehend my initial post. Musk is not and has never claimed to be any sort of technical wizard. His genius doesn't lie in creating intellectual property, but rather separating the good ideas from the bad - then backing the viable ones to the hilt.

wiyosaya said:

Here man since you seem too lazy and too much of an authoritarian to back up your words. But maybe that's only because your words are empty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Tesla,_Inc. Even this reference from wikipedia is more authoritative than you are. You are not in Russia any more where people take Uncle Putie's word - or else.

Click to expand...

I'd be offended by your clumsy attempt at a personal insult, were your claims not so pathetically incorrect. Nothing in that Wiki article refutes my statements; in fact, it supports them. Next time try reading links before posting them.

Endymio said:

Thanks, I did. You're wrong. A quick search at uspto.gov shows hundreds of patents filed by Tesla which don't have Musk's name on them. How do you manage to be so reliably wrong on every issue?

Here, you can try it yourself, at:

https://www.uspto.gov/patents/search/patent-public-search.

Just enter Applicant Name "Tesla" and press 'search'.

Not that it matters, as you've failed to comprehend my initial post. Musk is not and has never claimed to be any sort of technical wizard. His genius doesn't lie in creating intellectual property, but rather separating the good ideas from the bad - then backing the viable ones to the hilt.


I'd be offended by your clumsy attempt at a personal insult, were your claims not so pathetically incorrect. Nothing in that Wiki article refutes my statements; in fact, it supports them. Next time try reading links before posting them.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the informative post, Endy. At least you are not trying to claim someone is saying something they are not like you did with Water Vapor.

Invariably, Musk articles on TS end up with people like me making attempts, pathetic or not, to point out to people who believe that Musk is some sort of genius exercising Herculean efforts to single-handedly build the EV industry from the ground up, transform the space industry, save the Earth, give them back their "free speech" and various other efforts by their God when all he really is is a rich person who happened to be in the right place at the right time.

I'm not bothering to search for the patents. It is public information who invented the Tesla EVs and how the company was founded. Despite what Musk himself might say about it, I tend to believe the public accounts because no one, typically, likes to paint themselves in poor lighting, and especially Musk which is exemplified by his need to call someone who had first-hand experience a "pedo" likely because he was peeved that the person with first-hand experience rejected his "savior" tech.

So by confirming, at least indirectly, that Musk's name is not on the patents for the Tesla EVs, you have, as I see it, confirmed what myself and @scavengerspc have been saying all along: Musk is not some sort of modern-genius, savior of all mankind, and know it all that many people think he is because he has one thing they don't - a ****-load of money. Money does not make genius.

Take Bill Gates for instance. For all his money, Gates has done some Dumb-*** **** like propose a multi-million dollar sewage plant which would have taken millions more in infrastructure to solve the sewage problems in India and then someone came along and said to Bill, "Hey Bill, don't you think composting toilets would be a better solution given the economic conditions in India?" Composting toilets - who would have thunk it? Not Gates.

Speaking of Bill Gates, if anything, as I see it, Musk's involvement in Tesla is similar to what Bill Gates did with DOS. He came in, pumped a lot of money into the company, and essentially built the company on the backs of others - without whom, there would be no Tesla. I already know Musk tells the "story" differently.

And SpaceX is similar in that Musk has royalty free access to the entire library of NASA IP - without which, I doubt that Musk would be getting very far. Heck, Starship has yet to successfully stay in the air without exploding, and I question NASA placing so much dependence on SpaceX for Starship for future moon missions.

I'm not sure you know, but Hyperloop is now dead. Musk likely pulled the idea out of the TV show Babylon 5, knew it was not patentable, and said "have at it everyone" and the Musk worshiping fools had at it only to subsequently fail because the God of Mars' idea was untenable.

To me, at this point, Musk seems more like Sisyphus than Hercules.

ChrisH1 said:

America being what it is, I would advise against that on purely pragmatic grounds. There will undoubtedly be some unfortunate children who go through the difficult and painful process due to one form of pressure or another, then in their late teens or early twenties realize it was not a good idea for them specifically, and those people will then sue the asses off the schools and government. There may even be some who are quite happy with the results, but broke, who will pretend to not be happy and hop on the compensation bandwagon.

Click to expand...

The damage is not reservable. Yes, I believe that someone who makes this choice himself would still get a lot of money and be happy with the outcome. But unfortunately, plenty of young people will just wish they could get their real body back.
Every one of those who think they are helping these poor kids
lacks the very basic ability to see, they are stealing from them.
And when, undoubtedly, the scales tilt to the other side, these "helpers" will just
stay quiet, living in shame, and some fear of personal lawsuits.
They are doing evil, that is all.

ScottSoapbox said:

This is why states are a better system.

Don’t like policies? Move.

It makes state governments compete with each other.

Click to expand...

Very good point.

wiyosaya said:

So by confirming, at least indirectly, that Musk's name is not on the patents for the Tesla EVs, you have, as I see it, confirmed what myself and @scavengerspc have been saying all along: Musk is not some sort of modern-genius...

Click to expand...

So, immediately upon being proven wrong, instead of admitting your error you claim it's "what I was saying all along"? And your new statement is just as false as your original. Musk's genius isn't in the science itself, but in a far more rare realm: business.

Musk didn't invent the idea to replace poor-performing geosynchronous comm satellites with a highly-elliptical LEO constellation -- but he was the first to make it work, when countless naysayers said it could never be feasible. Musk didn't invent rocket ships -- but he was the first to launch them three times a week, when NASA was lucky to do so three times a year, despite an exponentially larger budget. And Musk didn't invent batteries and electric motors -- but he is still the only person on earth able to combine them into a profitable electric vehicle.

Given your past record, I don't expect you to admit your error this time around. But hey -- you just might surprise us all.

Endymio said:

So, immediately upon being proven wrong, instead of admitting your error you claim it's "what I was saying all along"? And your new statement is just as false as your original. Musk's genius isn't in the science itself, but in a far more rare realm: business.

Click to expand...

I can't help that you don't get that "Thanks for the informative post" is an admission of being wrong.

Have it your way. We know you are always right.

And I'm just proving that your insults are just as pathetic as you think other people's insults are.

Something has you peeved, and you just can't resist pushing your pathetic viewpoint when the opportunity arises.

It isn't my fault that you prove my point - Musk isn't as smart as people think he is.

And by the way, where was your admission of being wrong on that "Water Vapor" issue????