Honestly I think ego is a bigger factor. They spend so much time getting gassed up that they begin to believe their own hype.
General Elon Musk Fukkery Thread
- Thread starter Armchair Militant
- Start date
Honestly I think ego is a bigger factor. They spend so much time getting gassed up that they begin to believe their own hype.
Oh no doubt the ego is a HUGE part of it..
They just think they are smarter than everyone
The narcissism is through the roof
My apologies if I came across as disagreeing because I don't. I know you were responding directly to nap questioning his scientific credentials.
This man is out here arguing that the repetitive ads are an engineering issue and not a "Twitter ran out of ad stock because companies are running away from putting ads on Twitter due to Elon being a loudmouth neo-Nazi failson" issue.
Must might be a bigger a narcissist than Trump and Kanye combined.
The fact that he thinks he knows more than professionals with years of experience in IT managers, Engineers, Marketing, Sales etc is fukking laughable.
I’ve been in IT management for 15 years. I would never dream of arguing with programmers and engineers on the specifics of how they do their shyt.
Dillah810
Flat Girther
null
...
but he is not a great one and definitely not a great physicist. astrophysics is one of the easiest branches of physics. the real world changing work is being done in theoretical / quantum physics and that is something that tyson himself does not have a great understanding of, not that he himself makes that clear. his job now is manager as much as it is scientist.
and that is the core of the problem that some people have with him. his profile and public reach are far greater than his scientific background should merit. that is partially down to his personality and personal qualities. he is a jock in a jock-less profession. he is charming and charismatic to a fault, in a field led by the more socially limited. he is a great communicator and shares a passion for science which interfaces well with broader society. because of these factors (and more) people tend to give his words weight that they often do not deserve even when he speaks within fields.
as a physicist tyson ranks far behind other physicist brehs like professor clifford (so.cal) or henry gates, much less current greats like suskind but tyson's remarks on social issues carry far more weight than any of these in the arena of public discourse.
tyson has a public profile somewhat similar to chomsky but chomsky solely created modern linguistics before he branched out to similarly excel in geopolitics. tyson has not really moved the needle at all when it comes to changing physics and unlike chomsky has not (in isolation) demonstrated a unique talent for social sciences/tech.
in this instance tyson was talking about technology and the contributions of musk. tyson is very much a company man, is a manager (not a scientist), is not counter-cultural and is a public figure whose words influence his position as science-guru and whose position influences his words. in the broadest sense in the scope of his mission to further science (not muddy the waters) it is understandable why he might make the comment that he did about elon's achievements (without mentioning his failures).
i'm sure that tyson who like elon benefits somewhat from a cult-ette of personally, knows deep down that the discoveries that matter will most likely be made by a faceless/lower profile scientist in a lab somewhere (see nuclear fission example) not elon. BUT he also knows that a public figure like elon has a critical role to play in setting the stage for said scientist in pushing the technological movement forward (science/tech/marketing/industry/investment/production) at all levels and that is something that no faceless scientist can achieve. in this sense it can be said, that despite failures, even elon's BS serves some purpose, in dragging broader society into the future.
do I agree with what tyson said? no, because i am counter-cultural and i am factoring in race.
Last edited:
All true, but this really doesn't bother me because good theoretical scientists (see Stephen Hawking) are fukking idiots when it comes to social issues as well. I mean there's literally a term known as "Nobel Disease" for when scientists who win Nobel Prizes end up spouting ignorance on other issues (William Shockley, James Watson, Kary Mullis, etc.). I'm not going to trust a great particle physicist to speak wisdom on any of these issues either. Hell, someone might come up with the Grand Unified Theory of everything and that doesn't mean I'll trust them on climate change.
I went to college with hundreds of the greatest scientific minds in the county, and 2/3 of them didn't know jack shyt about the outside world. Most were basically apolitical, and the ones who did have strong political/social opinions didn't always have good ones. I don't think any physicist should be trusted outside of physics until they prove themselves knowledgeable in that particular field. It doesn't matter if they're just an average grad or the leading luminary of their age, their opinion on social/political issues should be considered no more valid than any other.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson is a legitimate astrophysicist, and not all that many people can say that. He deserves respect for reaching that level in a STEM field, and his opinion on astrophysics issues carries more weight than 99.99% of the country. In terms of social opinion, he hasn't proven that he knows jack shyt.
Yeah, Chomsky's an alien. He created modern linguistics, he's one of the founders of cognitive science, he pretty much destroyed the leading branch of psychology at the time (behavorism), he's a major philosopher of his era, he created a language for media criticism that still resonates 50 years later, and he's been influential in both history and politics.
The difference between Chomsky and the other intellectuals we're talking about is that Chomsky earned his stripes in the relevant fields, by researching deeply and proving he knew what the fukk he was talking about. He didn't just step in with a hot take opinion for the press without putting the work in first.
null
...
that's true.
sub-standard involvement in other fields carries the risk of disproportionate push-back, but if you operate in the economy of unearned assumed sagacity (as does tyson) that is a risk.
no one here is contesting that.
he is on the list of high achievers but not as high as his public persona would suggest.
we need more people in the positions so i am not criticising that.
but he benefits from unearned credit in other fields. that is the point. that's why some people complain about him.
when he praises someone like musk, he is opening himself up to even greater scrutiny of his statements.
hence some of the comments on here and elsewhere.
we all know that and so should he.
Can we get back to shytting on Must’s musty ass and leave the good brother from BX alone. Just off his contribution in evangelizing science, he deserves respect.
Okay, back to Musk's collapse. 
Hmm. Twitter's Trends are down, I can't see what is trending. 
wild100sboy
:mjpls:
I can’t see them eitherHmm. Twitter's Trends are down, I can't see what is trending.
I can’t see them either
Either it's broken... or Elmo sabo'd them because it was breaking his little wittle heart
At least we know what’s trending downwardsHmm. Twitter's Trends are down, I can't see what is trending.
8.8% today to be exact