Anyway, 2 blistering articles about the utterly shameful silence and denial by too many human rights and feminist groups and other self-important commentators with no moral compass (yes, Owen, that means you) of the sexual violence inflicted on women and girls on 7 October.
There is an absurd silence about what Hamas did. No, worse, utter denial. Hamas can't have abducted and raped and beheaded because they are the victims.
What has happened to the self-righteous morality that so many have spent so long refining and broadcasting? Jews - very literally - don't count. "But how dare you call us anti-semites" they say.
Rape in war is much harder to explain away than killing is. Killing of civilians can always be an accident/collateral damage/overreaction etc.
Rape, on the other hand, is deliberately callous, and in no sense, is it an act of war.
Hence, the need to pretend that it never happened.
I am not sure anyone other than the worst kind of apologists ever claimed it didn't happen. No doubt there is some fog of war and propaganda in the reporting as there always is in wartime but I believe it was widely reported at the time and is an accepted part of the narrative. As you say, sadly sexual violence is extremely common in wartime. I'm not sure it should be surprising, war is hell as Sherman said.
No I haven't seen many denying the horror of what Hamas did. Indeed it's that which partly explains the slack being extended by so many to the (by any objective measure disproportionate and indiscriminate) Israeli response. Slack which to an extent applies to me btw before anybody leaps to conclusions.
War: I think somebody once that anybody who has a full and true appreciation of what it really entails will be a pacifist.
Yes there is a lot of willful ignorance of what war is really like because sometimes it's necessary and so we want to present it in sanitised form. In reality it is hell, the unleashing of the very worst in human nature. This is why starting a war unnecessarily is the absolute worst crime a leader can commit.
if you fool around with Electoral Calculus, it's not difficult to come up with a scenario in which the LDs become the Official Opposition - and the assumptions don't have to be wildly implausible, either.
The Tories have been losing about 5% a year in the polls. They're averaging 25% at the moment. By October next year it could be 21%. Plug that into Electoral Calculus with 20% tactical voting and you get the Lib Dems beating the Tories 52 seats to 48. There can be no more ironic election result than that.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
Politics is volatile. No one can predict accurately what will happen in five years time. After the 2019 election, you’d be hard pressed to predict where we are today.
One of the myriad scenarios in the future is a Lib Dem revival. They quietly destroyed the Tories round here this year.
It’s time to watch and listen I think.
Yes. None of us have a clue. I believe they are very focused in their targeting currently, particularly after last time so they might not win too many. This is correct strategy if the Tories do not crash and burn. Not the correct strategy if the Tories do.
If they only win 20 - 30 seats they may again stay irrelevant in national politics. If they win 30+, particularly if they get around 50 or more they then become relevant once more and get media attention and become a bucket for those disaffected.
If Labour wins an overall majority and the Tories look embarassing, then the LDs will be the natural place to go for people who expected Labour to be amazing but economic reality dictated otherwise. A problem will be to pivot from "only LDs can beat the Tories here" to "only LDs can beat Labour here" without losing most of the tactical votes from the former stance. I think they do need a core of positive support to build on with some distinctive policies (Rejoin the EU? No to building on Green Belt? Wealth tax?) , rather than only counting on the tactical voting wave, which as we saw in mid-Beds can be illusory.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
Really? That sounds like a variation of the old Glenn Hoddle urban legend.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
Really? That sounds like a variation of the old Glenn Hoddle urban legend.
An interview with a SpaceX engineer
“After reading Cantrell's response in the Quora thread "How did Elon Musk learn enough about rockets to run SpaceX?," we asked him to share some insights into his time with Musk.
Below, he explains the two-part learning process that Musk used to teach himself rocket science.
"He is the smartest guy I've ever met, period," Cantrell tells us. "I know that sounds overblown. But I've met plenty of smart people, and I don't say that lightly. He's absolutely, frickin' amazing. I don't even think he sleeps."
Cantrell tells us that he soon discovered that he and Musk shared an affinity for applied knowledge, and he loaned him some textbooks to study (they "were never returned, by the way!" Cantrell says). The books were "Rocket Propulsion Elements," "Aerothermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Propulsion," "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics," and the "International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems."
(There is much more)
Cantrell is currently working on a book about the early days at SpaceX, and he thinks that Musk's genius blend of capitalism, curiosity, and motivation will make him a true pioneer.
"He's used a billion dollars to do what NASA couldn't do with $27 billion," Cantrell says. "Boy, it's inspiring."”
Izzard on the Labour short list for Brighton Pavillion:
Thank you once again for your support. With a 20,000 majority to overturn in less than a year, we need a candidate who is known across Brighton Pavilion and can win. I am that candidate and I hope you will support me.
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
Well 1997, 2001, and 2005 proves that is not true.
Izzard on the Labour short list for Brighton Pavillion:
Thank you once again for your support. With a 20,000 majority to overturn in less than a year, we need a candidate who is known across Brighton Pavilion and can win. I am that candidate and I hope you will support me.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
There's a big problem in the fact that Musk sells. Which is why Eric Berger - once a reputable journalist who I praised - has turned into a Musk Fanboi since he started writing books about SpaceX. Because if he ciriticised Musk, the fanbois would call him a hater and not buy the books. Also, Musk allegedly trades access for favourability. Just ask Ashlee Vance...
So yeah, if I potentially had to risk a career (present or future) with Musk, I would praise him highly. Because he's a man-child who has shown time and time again that he doesn't take criticism well.
Back in the Usenet days there were all these rumours that Bill Gates read every line of code MS produced. It was obvious b/s for several reasons: to read every line of code in a company that large, let alone understand the code, would take too long - and it wasn't his job to do that. It wasn't an efficient use of his time.
I can imagine back in the early days of MS, when they had a few employees, he did so. Perhaps he even looked at random bits of code occasionally for enjoyment, but they myth he read every line of code in the mid to late 1980s was debunked, I think by Gates himself. Hilariously, I even saw the claim repeated *after* he left MS.
We like heroes, and we like bigging our heroes up into things they are not. It happened to Gates. It happened to Jobs. It's now happening with Musk. The difference is that Musk revels in it.
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
I hear that the Lib Dems are considering rebranding themselves as Dem Libs to appeal to the young.
Dem Libs - Yo bros, future's in our hands.
Could work.
The sad truth is that real liberalism is dying on its feet.
And the Liberal Democrats are doing nothing to stop it.
Izzard on the Labour short list for Brighton Pavillion:
Thank you once again for your support. With a 20,000 majority to overturn in less than a year, we need a candidate who is known across Brighton Pavilion and can win. I am that candidate and I hope you will support me.
Anyway, 2 blistering articles about the utterly shameful silence and denial by too many human rights and feminist groups and other self-important commentators with no moral compass (yes, Owen, that means you) of the sexual violence inflicted on women and girls on 7 October.
There is an absurd silence about what Hamas did. No, worse, utter denial. Hamas can't have abducted and raped and beheaded because they are the victims.
What has happened to the self-righteous morality that so many have spent so long refining and broadcasting? Jews - very literally - don't count. "But how dare you call us anti-semites" they say.
Am I the only PBer who read about the rapes (and murders and kidnappings) at the time, and not a month and a half later?
Well all the supposedly morally upstanding organisations have had plenty of time to comment in the time since 7 October. And yet they have not.
Izzard on the Labour short list for Brighton Pavillion:
Thank you once again for your support. With a 20,000 majority to overturn in less than a year, we need a candidate who is known across Brighton Pavilion and can win. I am that candidate and I hope you will support me.
The local candidate has far more Union/affiliate/councillor recommendations.
Definitely someone who could add colour and humour to the Commons. Very, err, Brighton.
If as seems likely we’re losing the sole Green in the next election then it does make sense to replace with someone a bit different. Izzard is still funny when he wants to be too, so could be an entertaining addition to the commons.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
Really? That sounds like a variation of the old Glenn Hoddle urban legend.
An interview with a SpaceX engineer
“After reading Cantrell's response in the Quora thread "How did Elon Musk learn enough about rockets to run SpaceX?," we asked him to share some insights into his time with Musk.
Below, he explains the two-part learning process that Musk used to teach himself rocket science.
"He is the smartest guy I've ever met, period," Cantrell tells us. "I know that sounds overblown. But I've met plenty of smart people, and I don't say that lightly. He's absolutely, frickin' amazing. I don't even think he sleeps."
Cantrell tells us that he soon discovered that he and Musk shared an affinity for applied knowledge, and he loaned him some textbooks to study (they "were never returned, by the way!" Cantrell says). The books were "Rocket Propulsion Elements," "Aerothermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Propulsion," "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics," and the "International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems."
(There is much more)
Cantrell is currently working on a book about the early days at SpaceX, and he thinks that Musk's genius blend of capitalism, curiosity, and motivation will make him a true pioneer.
"He's used a billion dollars to do what NASA couldn't do with $27 billion," Cantrell says. "Boy, it's inspiring."”
"100% this. When I worked with a company and he came around I was told ,"DO NOT contradict him or saying anything he might not like...." This right here say everything you need to know about the company and the leadership.
The engineers do 95% of lifting and the upper management make decisions which, "would be marketing coup!" (actual words i heard in a meeting).
I won't even get into the issues of the company and how they treat people. Suffice to say, i won't work with them if I have a choice."
Good morning everyone. 1 minute to 12 so just OK as a greeting.
An interesting but not unusual property transaction. Auctioning off the airspace above a house in Battersea - termed "hope value" by the seller. Guide price 10k. It's one of PB's beloved Georgian speculative developments by the look of it.
Ref eg the airspace above railway stations and tracks. A couple of adjacent properties are developed upwards.
Looks like high legal fees and survey fees as a proportion to make sure it can be done practically, so that the selling LL does not have the buyers' balls in a nutcracker waiting to be squeezed.
The interesting question is why the seller has not gone for PP first.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
There's a big problem in the fact that Musk sells. Which is why Eric Berger - once a reputable journalist who I praised - has turned into a Musk Fanboi since he started writing books about SpaceX. Because if he ciriticised Musk, the fanbois would call him a hater and not buy the books. Also, Musk allegedly trades access for favourability. Just ask Ashlee Vance...
So yeah, if I potentially had to risk a career (present or future) with Musk, I would praise him highly. Because he's a man-child who has shown time and time again that he doesn't take criticism well.
Back in the Usenet days there were all these rumours that Bill Gates read every line of code MS produced. It was obvious b/s for several reasons: to read every line of code in a company that large, let alone understand the code, would take too long - and it wasn't his job to do that. It wasn't an efficient use of his time.
I can imagine back in the early days of MS, when they had a few employees, he did so. Perhaps he even looked at random bits of code occasionally for enjoyment, but they myth he read every line of code in the mid to late 1980s was debunked, I think by Gates himself. Hilariously, I even saw the claim repeated *after* he left MS.
We like heroes, and we like bigging our heroes up into things they are not. It happened to Gates. It happened to Jobs. It's now happening with Musk. The difference is that Musk revels in it.
I have a young relative, with a growing rep in space stuff (satellites more than rockets) who has had some dealings with him when he worked for SpaceX - quite liked him, didn't recognise the iconoclastic/scary image, but didn't see him as a Second Coming either. Elon likes to magnify his traits for publicity - like Trump, he thrives on being The Story.
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
Politics is volatile. No one can predict accurately what will happen in five years time. After the 2019 election, you’d be hard pressed to predict where we are today.
One of the myriad scenarios in the future is a Lib Dem revival. They quietly destroyed the Tories round here this year.
It’s time to watch and listen I think.
Yes. None of us have a clue. I believe they are very focused in their targeting currently, particularly after last time so they might not win too many. This is correct strategy if the Tories do not crash and burn. Not the correct strategy if the Tories do.
If they only win 20 - 30 seats they may again stay irrelevant in national politics. If they win 30+, particularly if they get around 50 or more they then become relevant once more and get media attention and become a bucket for those disaffected.
The key number is one more MP than the SNP. That gives Davey or his successor 2 questions at PMQs each week instead of one every blue moon.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
Really? That sounds like a variation of the old Glenn Hoddle urban legend.
An interview with a SpaceX engineer
“After reading Cantrell's response in the Quora thread "How did Elon Musk learn enough about rockets to run SpaceX?," we asked him to share some insights into his time with Musk.
Below, he explains the two-part learning process that Musk used to teach himself rocket science.
"He is the smartest guy I've ever met, period," Cantrell tells us. "I know that sounds overblown. But I've met plenty of smart people, and I don't say that lightly. He's absolutely, frickin' amazing. I don't even think he sleeps."
Cantrell tells us that he soon discovered that he and Musk shared an affinity for applied knowledge, and he loaned him some textbooks to study (they "were never returned, by the way!" Cantrell says). The books were "Rocket Propulsion Elements," "Aerothermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Propulsion," "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics," and the "International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems."
(There is much more)
Cantrell is currently working on a book about the early days at SpaceX, and he thinks that Musk's genius blend of capitalism, curiosity, and motivation will make him a true pioneer.
"He's used a billion dollars to do what NASA couldn't do with $27 billion," Cantrell says. "Boy, it's inspiring."”
"100% this. When I worked with a company and he came around I was told ,"DO NOT contradict him or saying anything he might not like...." This right here say everything you need to know about the company and the leadership.
The engineers do 95% of lifting and the upper management make decisions which, "would be marketing coup!" (actual words i heard in a meeting).
I won't even get into the issues of the company and how they treat people. Suffice to say, i won't work with them if I have a choice."
i am well aware there is this subgenre - and an actual subreddit - of engineers - who absolutely loathe and diminish Musk. I’ve read some of it, much of it is completely batshit, some of it is basic jealousy, some of it is peevishness turned into an idea fixe
The fact is, Musk is probably the richest man in the world (depending on XRates), probably the most powerful human in the world (outside politics ) - he is able to change the direction of wars (eg Ukraine with Starlink), he is a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies in the world - EVs, SpaceX, AI. And now he owns TwitterX, making him also a social media mogul of global importance
You simply don’t get all the way there by being “a good sales guy”, and it strikes me as a minor madness to claim this. He is clearly extremely intelligent, imaginative, hard working, and audacious
He is also obviously quite a bit of a twat (like Jobs), sociallly inept, says stupid things, and rubs people up the wrong way. And is weirdly thin skinned and vain. So was Leonardo Da Vinci, as it happens
Morning all. Sorry to go off-topic already, but there has been a horrific incident overnight on the East Coast Mainline. Cheapo Thatcher electrification brought down again again again south of Retford and it produced delays I have never seen before.
Single line working was put in place at Retford with 10mph trundling through the affected section happening very slowly, trying to clear several in each direction at at time.
My boss was on a train which finally arrived into York at 03:49 - a mere 392 minutes late. And that wasn’t even his booked train (which should have been earlier away from London and was cancelled).
That train was full and standing! Another southbound was terminated into Retford gone 1am as the driver was out of hours. Another full and standing train turfed out onto Platform 2 at 01:bungle into -2. Barely enough room to stand on the platform - which was the only open track in both directions.
So their train had to be cleared so anything else could run. Meanwhile there is an awful lot of people barely able to find space to stand in sub-zero temperatures for over half an hour until the train behind them could pick them up.
I’m sure the LNER and NR staff were doing everything they could and were being creative about how to work the problem. But instead of cancelling the lot and sticking people in nice warm hotels they tried to push through because today is a strike day…
The wiring on the east coast route appears to increasingly be made of cheese. Notoriously done on the cheap and unreliable ever since, these dewiring incidents happen with increasing frequency. What can be done?
Another shambles caused by the cheapo knitting.
BTW, good to see your use of "01:bungle". Wor Lass always fails to comprehend when I use this terminology.
Izzard on the Labour short list for Brighton Pavillion:
Thank you once again for your support. With a 20,000 majority to overturn in less than a year, we need a candidate who is known across Brighton Pavilion and can win. I am that candidate and I hope you will support me.
The local candidate has far more Union/affiliate/councillor recommendations.
Definitely someone who could add colour and humour to the Commons. Very, err, Brighton.
If as seems likely we’re losing the sole Green in the next election then it does make sense to replace with someone a bit different. Izzard is still funny when he wants to be too, so could be an entertaining addition to the commons.
It will be an interesting focus for debate is one thing I'll say.
Another is that (admitting not following him in detail so I may nor be quite correct) Izzard's position on trans-questions is very similar to the Green position, which personally I find a little obsessive.
Will that open opportunities for other candidates?
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
Politics is volatile. No one can predict accurately what will happen in five years time. After the 2019 election, you’d be hard pressed to predict where we are today.
One of the myriad scenarios in the future is a Lib Dem revival. They quietly destroyed the Tories round here this year.
It’s time to watch and listen I think.
Yes. None of us have a clue. I believe they are very focused in their targeting currently, particularly after last time so they might not win too many. This is correct strategy if the Tories do not crash and burn. Not the correct strategy if the Tories do.
If they only win 20 - 30 seats they may again stay irrelevant in national politics. If they win 30+, particularly if they get around 50 or more they then become relevant once more and get media attention and become a bucket for those disaffected.
The key number is one more MP than the SNP. That gives Davey or his successor 2 questions at PMQs each week instead of one every blue moon.
Izzard on the Labour short list for Brighton Pavillion:
Thank you once again for your support. With a 20,000 majority to overturn in less than a year, we need a candidate who is known across Brighton Pavilion and can win. I am that candidate and I hope you will support me.
The local candidate has far more Union/affiliate/councillor recommendations.
Definitely someone who could add colour and humour to the Commons. Very, err, Brighton.
If as seems likely we’re losing the sole Green in the next election then it does make sense to replace with someone a bit different. Izzard is still funny when he wants to be too, so could be an entertaining addition to the commons.
There's a 20,000 majority to overturn and a large student population in that constituency so I wouldn't be too sure....
Say what you like about the BBC I don't know what I'd do without Radios 3 and 6 on Saturday mornings. Record Review on R3 and then switch over to Huey Morgan on R6 thereafter. Weekends on both stations generally has first class programming. I might renew my licence.
Just to correct myself it appears the UN has now belatedly started to raise the issue of sexual violence on 7 October. Only two months after the date.
And in the context of resumed hostilities:
We deeply regret that military operations have resumed in Gaza, and we reiterate that all women, Israeli women, Palestinian women, as all others, are entitled to a life lived in safety and free from violence.
We unequivocally condemn the brutal attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7 October. We are alarmed by the numerous accounts of gender-based atrocities and sexual violence during those attacks. This is why we have called for all accounts of gender-based violence to be duly investigated and prosecuted, with the rights of the victim at the core.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Indeed. Jobs was very impressive at what he did, although, of course, he would be alive today were it not for his “genius”, which led him to ignore his doctors’ recommendations when he had a largely treatable cancer.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
Really? That sounds like a variation of the old Glenn Hoddle urban legend.
An interview with a SpaceX engineer
“After reading Cantrell's response in the Quora thread "How did Elon Musk learn enough about rockets to run SpaceX?," we asked him to share some insights into his time with Musk.
Below, he explains the two-part learning process that Musk used to teach himself rocket science.
"He is the smartest guy I've ever met, period," Cantrell tells us. "I know that sounds overblown. But I've met plenty of smart people, and I don't say that lightly. He's absolutely, frickin' amazing. I don't even think he sleeps."
Cantrell tells us that he soon discovered that he and Musk shared an affinity for applied knowledge, and he loaned him some textbooks to study (they "were never returned, by the way!" Cantrell says). The books were "Rocket Propulsion Elements," "Aerothermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Propulsion," "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics," and the "International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems."
(There is much more)
Cantrell is currently working on a book about the early days at SpaceX, and he thinks that Musk's genius blend of capitalism, curiosity, and motivation will make him a true pioneer.
"He's used a billion dollars to do what NASA couldn't do with $27 billion," Cantrell says. "Boy, it's inspiring."”
"100% this. When I worked with a company and he came around I was told ,"DO NOT contradict him or saying anything he might not like...." This right here say everything you need to know about the company and the leadership.
The engineers do 95% of lifting and the upper management make decisions which, "would be marketing coup!" (actual words i heard in a meeting).
I won't even get into the issues of the company and how they treat people. Suffice to say, i won't work with them if I have a choice."
i am well aware there is this subgenre - and an actual subreddit - of engineers - who absolutely loathe and diminish Musk. I’ve read some of it, much of it is completely batshit, some of it is basic jealousy, some of it is peevishness turned into an idea fixe
(Snip)
You simply don’t get all the way there by being “a good sales guy”, and it strikes me as a minor madness to claim this. He is clearly extremely intelligent, imaginative, hard working, and audacious
(Snip)
Perhaps those engineers know what they're talking about? What are your qualifications to tell that it is 'completely batshit' when it's about engineering matters?
I didn't say he was just a good sales guy. Just that the stuff like "I probably know more about production lines than anyone alive" stuff is typical of his hilariously wrong self-aggrandisement. Which you readily slurp up. And he does it all the time.
If nothing else, that makes SpaceX bulletproof in any antitrust stuff - they have launched or are going to launch satellites for pretty much all their rivals in the internet-from-space game.
This is a trial order, partly to placate shareholders and also to try and get good will from the FCC when Amazon miss their deployment deadline.
Be honest: was anybody surprised? Amazon is a paper company: very good at getting contracts, very good at getting lawyers, very bad at making rocket go now.
The question arises as to what Elon Musk would have to do to convince people, especially low level geeks and engineers, that he’s “actually quite good at engineering”
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
Really? That sounds like a variation of the old Glenn Hoddle urban legend.
An interview with a SpaceX engineer
“After reading Cantrell's response in the Quora thread "How did Elon Musk learn enough about rockets to run SpaceX?," we asked him to share some insights into his time with Musk.
Below, he explains the two-part learning process that Musk used to teach himself rocket science.
"He is the smartest guy I've ever met, period," Cantrell tells us. "I know that sounds overblown. But I've met plenty of smart people, and I don't say that lightly. He's absolutely, frickin' amazing. I don't even think he sleeps."
Cantrell tells us that he soon discovered that he and Musk shared an affinity for applied knowledge, and he loaned him some textbooks to study (they "were never returned, by the way!" Cantrell says). The books were "Rocket Propulsion Elements," "Aerothermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Propulsion," "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics," and the "International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems."
(There is much more)
Cantrell is currently working on a book about the early days at SpaceX, and he thinks that Musk's genius blend of capitalism, curiosity, and motivation will make him a true pioneer.
"He's used a billion dollars to do what NASA couldn't do with $27 billion," Cantrell says. "Boy, it's inspiring."”
"100% this. When I worked with a company and he came around I was told ,"DO NOT contradict him or saying anything he might not like...." This right here say everything you need to know about the company and the leadership.
The engineers do 95% of lifting and the upper management make decisions which, "would be marketing coup!" (actual words i heard in a meeting).
I won't even get into the issues of the company and how they treat people. Suffice to say, i won't work with them if I have a choice."
i am well aware there is this subgenre - and an actual subreddit - of engineers - who absolutely loathe and diminish Musk. I’ve read some of it, much of it is completely batshit, some of it is basic jealousy, some of it is peevishness turned into an idea fixe
(Snip)
You simply don’t get all the way there by being “a good sales guy”, and it strikes me as a minor madness to claim this. He is clearly extremely intelligent, imaginative, hard working, and audacious
(Snip)
Perhaps those engineers know what they're talking about? What are your qualifications to tell that it is 'completely batshit' when it's about engineering matters?
I didn't say he was just a good sales guy. Just that the stuff like "I probably know more about production lines than anyone alive" stuff is typical of his hilariously wrong self-aggrandisement. Which you readily slurp up. And he does it all the time.
So go on then, what would it take to convince you that Musk is actually extremely bright and good at engineering? What ELSE does he have to do? What would make you grudgingly admit his talent?
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
I thought it was a good idea, and it seems to have soothed things with Greece somewhat who saw the funny side. Personally I want to see good relations with Greece and don't want that jeopardised simply because Rishi made a fool of himself with a botched culture-war stunt. The King was speaking for the nation here - not Rishi or the Tory Party - which is absolutely his job.
The question arises as to what Elon Musk would have to do to convince people, especially low level geeks and engineers, that he’s “actually quite good at engineering”
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
I'm not disputing that he's good at engineering. He doesn't understand media, specifically social media, though. TwiTX's 13% decline in regular US users and 19% decline in revenue does not scream business genius and gives ammunition to his detractors. If he stuck to what he's good at and knew when to STFU occasionally (not suggesting completely) then he would be a far less polarising figure.
The question arises as to what Elon Musk would have to do to convince people, especially low level geeks and engineers, that he’s “actually quite good at engineering”
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
"Maglev to Neptune" is actually an interesting one, given the brain-dead Hyperloop idea, which has now been abandoned. And which was only proposed to try to kill off US HSR...
I'd also point at Tesla's 'Autopilot', which is nowhere near his grandiose claims - and even behind that of other manufacturers. Where's the coast-to-cast autonomous drive he promised back in 2016?
Besides, I'm not saying he isn't “actually quite good at engineering”. Just that he's nowhere near the genius engineer that so many people make him out to be. He's much better at the business and people side.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
In my experience too many law exams test memory and little else. Few required you to actually think.
The question arises as to what Elon Musk would have to do to convince people, especially low level geeks and engineers, that he’s “actually quite good at engineering”
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
Iron Man and Bruce Wayne has fewer billions than Elon Musk, they were better engineers/geeks and thus they became superheroes, Musk is a glorified troll.
If Musk was truly a genius he wouldn't have agreed to overpay for Twitter, lest we forget he tried to get out of that purchase.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
In my experience too many law exams test memory and little else. Few required you to actually think.
My God, Bangkok is perfect on December nights like this
Warm, soft, buzzing, vivid, laughing, boozy, the tropic moon shines down on the chattering mango sellers, and the gogo girls walk from the Skytrain past the skyscrapers to the sky bars in the dulcet night, and all is promise, promise, promise
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
That would be a bit weird.
In my experience, engineers love to talk about their specialisation. Especially in the direction of just how far things can go and what they'd do if they had the resource constraints off.
That just feels like - well, you know movies when the Hollywood writers come up with their view of what a very intelligent person is like?
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
There are an awful lot of plodding second and third rate lawyers out there. Being a good lawyer is not about passing exams. Knowing the law is the least of it. The one quality which good lawyers have is good judgment. Good judgment requires some ethical/moral standards. That is what has been lacking in all these people.
Singh isn't stupid. He isn't intelligent either but he is cunning. He knew perfectly well what he was doing while he was giving his evidence - deliberately obfuscating to cover up the fact that he knew fuck all about the criminal law and what the rules are intended to achieve, did the bare minimum in a tick the box way, did whatever his bosses wanted him to and what would be good for him personally. He didn't give a toss about having a fair trial or anything else.
And his only objective in giving his evidence was to avoid all responsibility for his actions, even at the price of making himself look daft because he knows perfectly well that if he took responsibility he would have to admit that he utterly failed to comply with any of his legal or professional obligations and was complicit in the perversion of justice.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
Really? That sounds like a variation of the old Glenn Hoddle urban legend.
An interview with a SpaceX engineer
“After reading Cantrell's response in the Quora thread "How did Elon Musk learn enough about rockets to run SpaceX?," we asked him to share some insights into his time with Musk.
Below, he explains the two-part learning process that Musk used to teach himself rocket science.
"He is the smartest guy I've ever met, period," Cantrell tells us. "I know that sounds overblown. But I've met plenty of smart people, and I don't say that lightly. He's absolutely, frickin' amazing. I don't even think he sleeps."
Cantrell tells us that he soon discovered that he and Musk shared an affinity for applied knowledge, and he loaned him some textbooks to study (they "were never returned, by the way!" Cantrell says). The books were "Rocket Propulsion Elements," "Aerothermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Propulsion," "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics," and the "International Reference Guide to Space Launch Systems."
(There is much more)
Cantrell is currently working on a book about the early days at SpaceX, and he thinks that Musk's genius blend of capitalism, curiosity, and motivation will make him a true pioneer.
"He's used a billion dollars to do what NASA couldn't do with $27 billion," Cantrell says. "Boy, it's inspiring."”
"100% this. When I worked with a company and he came around I was told ,"DO NOT contradict him or saying anything he might not like...." This right here say everything you need to know about the company and the leadership.
The engineers do 95% of lifting and the upper management make decisions which, "would be marketing coup!" (actual words i heard in a meeting).
I won't even get into the issues of the company and how they treat people. Suffice to say, i won't work with them if I have a choice."
i am well aware there is this subgenre - and an actual subreddit - of engineers - who absolutely loathe and diminish Musk. I’ve read some of it, much of it is completely batshit, some of it is basic jealousy, some of it is peevishness turned into an idea fixe
(Snip)
You simply don’t get all the way there by being “a good sales guy”, and it strikes me as a minor madness to claim this. He is clearly extremely intelligent, imaginative, hard working, and audacious
(Snip)
Perhaps those engineers know what they're talking about? What are your qualifications to tell that it is 'completely batshit' when it's about engineering matters?
I didn't say he was just a good sales guy. Just that the stuff like "I probably know more about production lines than anyone alive" stuff is typical of his hilariously wrong self-aggrandisement. Which you readily slurp up. And he does it all the time.
So go on then, what would it take to convince you that Musk is actually extremely bright and good at engineering? What ELSE does he have to do? What would make you grudgingly admit his talent?
What do you mean by "good at engineering"? Good at (say) welding, or good at high-level engineering project management? Both? Something else?
And I've never said he isn't 'extremely bright'. Just not as bright as he and his fans make out.
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
I thought it was a good idea, and it seems to have soothed things with Greece somewhat who saw the funny side. Personally I want to see good relations with Greece and don't want that jeopardised simply because Rishi made a fool of himself with a botched culture-war stunt. The King was speaking for the nation here - not Rishi or the Tory Party - which is absolutely his job.
I thought it a bit cheeky, but lets face it, only one of them is going to be in the same job this time next year.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
I have mentioned before but I worked with a very clever sociopath/psychopath in the 90s. He was a salesman. It took months before I (or anyone else) was aware. It was only after I left that the full scale of the complexity and dishonesty became apparent. The manipulation was very complex. He was unlucky in that I left to set up a pressure group representing a lot of the customers of our previous employer and gradually saw inconsistencies and deduced what he was up to. I immediately shopped him to my previous employer.
The level of detail was huge. How he could keep the multiple lies in his head was beyond me. Some schemes panned out over months.
It always struck me that he could have done just as well if not better doing his job honestly. He worked very hard at being a crook.
I once had a slightly less bright client who had stolen from his employer by creating false invoices to explain missing stock. He lost control and it was costing him a fortune. His relief when the cops came knocking was palpable.
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He is a genuinely remarkable man, the closest we have to a Renaissance polymath like Da Vinci. Like Da Vinci he suffers from too many ideas and not enough time or poor execution - which he admits
I heartily recommend it. Even if you hate him or his mad cars or whatever
He's not a Renaissance polymath.
He's a bullshitter.
Yes, dear, of course
Watch the interview
I already have.
edit: It was pretty much a waste of an hour.
Fair enough
But I simply don’t understand now anyone can come away with that reaction, unless you already hate Elon so much (and many do) you are wilfully blind to his virtues (of course he has major flaws as well)
To me he is possibly the most interesting man on the planet at the moment. I like the bit where he tells teens not to read Nietzsche and Schopenhauer
Try Douglas Adams instead. Good advice for quite a few
He also has a proper sense of humour hidden away in the Aspergery awkwardness (and he is a self identified Aspie)
Also fascinating on the origins of OpenAI. Like it or not he has been a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies of the age - SpaceX/starlink/ Tesla and EVs/AGI and OpenAI
One of the most interesting interviews of recent years - for me
I come away with that reaction because I spent years working in tech, know a load of techies (and am married to a brilliant one), and know sub-techie bullshit when I see it.
Yes. Of course. Elon musk. “Sub techie”
I suggest we leave it there
Think about this a little. Musk is an *evangelist*; a bit in the Steve Jobs mould. But Steve Jobs never really claimed any technical proficiency or genius; and indeed, techies like Woz and others were highly regarded by Jobs (until they became inconvenient...) Instead, Jobs' genius lay elsewhere, in product design, marketing and in getting the best out of people. The RDF and all that stuff.
Musk claims to have the same sort of Jobs' genius, but also technical proficiency (like his "I know more about production lines than anyone alive" b/s). Yet people who have seen his code are... well, let's just say they are unimpressed.
A company I worked for had a CEO who was a brilliant salesman; he could sell anything to anyone. The firm was in tech, but he had little knowledge of the technical side. What he was brilliant at was people, and at detecting b/s. This meant he put people he could trust, who were techies, in positions of power. If you told him a problem, he would ask for a solution(s), then take you through them from a business perspective (cost, time, risks etc). But he would expect you to tell him the reality, not hype. That was to be left to him and the marketroids.
And woe betide you if you lied to him...
Sure, you believe that. I feel it is confirmation bias but whatever - up to you!
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
That would be a bit weird.
In my experience, engineers love to talk about their specialisation. Especially in the direction of just how far things can go and what they'd do if they had the resource constraints off.
That just feels like - well, you know movies when the Hollywood writers come up with their view of what a very intelligent person is like?
That.
Yes, I thought someone like you might say something like that
It’s a genuine anecdote, I might try and dig it out
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
Politics is volatile. No one can predict accurately what will happen in five years time. After the 2019 election, you’d be hard pressed to predict where we are today.
One of the myriad scenarios in the future is a Lib Dem revival. They quietly destroyed the Tories round here this year.
It’s time to watch and listen I think.
Yes. None of us have a clue. I believe they are very focused in their targeting currently, particularly after last time so they might not win too many. This is correct strategy if the Tories do not crash and burn. Not the correct strategy if the Tories do.
If they only win 20 - 30 seats they may again stay irrelevant in national politics. If they win 30+, particularly if they get around 50 or more they then become relevant once more and get media attention and become a bucket for those disaffected.
The key number is one more MP than the SNP. That gives Davey or his successor 2 questions at PMQs each week instead of one every blue moon.
I agree that is probably the really key break point, but the more the better as far as media profile is concerned. If they are on 20 but ahead of the SNP that is clearly not as good as being on 50 and ahead of the SNP which will put them back in the media and therefore a receptacle for NOTA which should move them back to their old poll ratings.
The really big one of course (but very unlikely) is if the Tories really crash and burn and the LDs become the opposition. Now that, as Casino said, is wishful thinking.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
I have mentioned before but I worked with a very clever sociopath/psychopath in the 90s. He was a salesman. It took months before I (or anyone else) was aware. It was only after I left that the full scale of the complexity and dishonesty became apparent. The manipulation was very complex. He was unlucky in that I left to set up a pressure group representing a lot of the customers of our previous employer and gradually saw inconsistencies and deduced what he was up to. I immediately shopped him to my previous employer.
The level of detail was huge. How he could keep the multiple lies in his head was beyond me. Some schemes panned out over months.
It always struck me that he could have done just as well if not better doing his job honestly. He worked very hard at being a crook.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
In my experience too many law exams test memory and little else. Few required you to actually think.
Is that professional exams or academic exams?
Both. Arguably more the latter than the former as the professional exams tended to be slightly more problem based but the ability to memorise lots of precedent and sections remained key to a pass.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
There are an awful lot of plodding second and third rate lawyers out there. Being a good lawyer is not about passing exams. Knowing the law is the least of it. The one quality which good lawyers have is good judgment. Good judgment requires some ethical/moral standards. That is what has been lacking in all these people.
Singh isn't stupid. He isn't intelligent either but he is cunning. He knew perfectly well what he was doing while he was giving his evidence - deliberately obfuscating to cover up the fact that he knew fuck all about the criminal law and what the rules are intended to achieve, did the bare minimum in a tick the box way, did whatever his bosses wanted him to and what would be good for him personally. He didn't give a toss about having a fair trial or anything else.
And his only objective in giving his evidence was to avoid all responsibility for his actions, even at the price of making himself look daft because he knows perfectly well that if he took responsibility he would have to admit that he utterly failed to comply with any of his legal or professional obligations and was complicit in the perversion of justice.
That's about my take. The stupidity was, as SeanF suggested, something of a charade, but not wholly.
I suspect it won't work in his case though. The complicity in sending innocents to jail is so obvious in his case that a PoJ charge looks inevitable.
Its the fourth election, five if you count in 2010 as well. Virtually impossible to get elected again, simply the swing of the pendulum. Anything else is simply whistling in the wind.
The question arises as to what Elon Musk would have to do to convince people, especially low level geeks and engineers, that he’s “actually quite good at engineering”
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
I'm not disputing that he's good at engineering. He doesn't understand media, specifically social media, though. TwiTX's 13% decline in regular US users and 19% decline in revenue does not scream business genius and gives ammunition to his detractors. If he stuck to what he's good at and knew when to STFU occasionally (not suggesting completely) then he would be a far less polarising figure.
Yes I agree with much of that
Contrary to the absurd claims of @JosiasJessop I actually think Musk is quite BAD at the business stuff (hence his botched deal for Twitter) and he is definitely bad at the people stuff. He’s an Aspie. He says insulting and stupid things even if he doesn’t quite mean to
He IS a genius inventor, entrepreneur and engineer, something of a visionary, who should hire a better PR team and stop tweeting so much, especially about contentious politics
Anyway, my attempted trip to town utterly failed. We are snowed in. 20 cms of snow outside the door. No cars moving.
I have to get on a train to London by Monday. Eek!
Sorry to hear that - you also have to contend with strikes and overtime bans in the next few days.
RMT have called off theirs and there are trains running, assuming they are not cancelled. It's getting from the house to the train station I'm bothered about.
Just to correct myself it appears the UN has now belatedly started to raise the issue of sexual violence on 7 October. Only two months after the date.
And in the context of resumed hostilities:
We deeply regret that military operations have resumed in Gaza, and we reiterate that all women, Israeli women, Palestinian women, as all others, are entitled to a life lived in safety and free from violence.
We unequivocally condemn the brutal attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7 October. We are alarmed by the numerous accounts of gender-based atrocities and sexual violence during those attacks. This is why we have called for all accounts of gender-based violence to be duly investigated and prosecuted, with the rights of the victim at the core.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
I have mentioned before but I worked with a very clever sociopath/psychopath in the 90s. He was a salesman. It took months before I (or anyone else) was aware. It was only after I left that the full scale of the complexity and dishonesty became apparent. The manipulation was very complex. He was unlucky in that I left to set up a pressure group representing a lot of the customers of our previous employer and gradually saw inconsistencies and deduced what he was up to. I immediately shopped him to my previous employer.
The level of detail was huge. How he could keep the multiple lies in his head was beyond me. Some schemes panned out over months.
It always struck me that he could have done just as well if not better doing his job honestly. He worked very hard at being a crook.
I once had a slightly less bright client who had stolen from his employer by creating false invoices to explain missing stock. He lost control and it was costing him a fortune. His relief when the cops came knocking was palpable.
Teeming and lading (does it still happen these days?) is a classic fraud that requires concentration on what you have done and are doing and invariable leads to a loss of control and discovery. Always be suspicious of accounting clerks who don't take holidays or go off sick.
EdmundinTokyo once said something to the effect that Musk was a bullshitter who occasionally delivers. For a long time that was pretty much everything one needed to know about him. Since then Musk had added far-right enabling fuckpig to his CV but EiT's pithy five word sketch is still accurate.
FYI - I'm not really here this weekend, so if anything major does happen this weekend, I'm not ignoring it I'm just knackered.
Ive just become a grandfather again does that count as major ?
Congratulations (and yes it does.)
It was pointed to me that I could legally be a grandfather in just over two years, that made me feel officially middle aged.
Its just ageing
Ive had a wonderful fortninght. Went to Ireland for my brothers 60th, he then gave me Covid, which when I came back I passed on the Mrs B who now eyes me suspiciously that she cant see her gransdon today as she;s still testing positive.
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
Anyway, 2 blistering articles about the utterly shameful silence and denial by too many human rights and feminist groups and other self-important commentators with no moral compass (yes, Owen, that means you) of the sexual violence inflicted on women and girls on 7 October.
Got another conviction for yet another rape yesterday (as prosecutor to prevent the usual jokes). Quite bizarre really. Out for drinks with workmates and literally dragged into the bushes and raped. I mean, WTAF? What goes through these men's heads? They are so selfish, so self interested, so uninterested in anyone else's feelings, happiness or bodily integrity. It's really quite sick.
Just catching up. You are doing a worthwhile and valuable job. We are dealing with the entitled generation and the effects of unregulated social media.
Just to correct myself it appears the UN has now belatedly started to raise the issue of sexual violence on 7 October. Only two months after the date.
And in the context of resumed hostilities:
We deeply regret that military operations have resumed in Gaza, and we reiterate that all women, Israeli women, Palestinian women, as all others, are entitled to a life lived in safety and free from violence.
We unequivocally condemn the brutal attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7 October. We are alarmed by the numerous accounts of gender-based atrocities and sexual violence during those attacks. This is why we have called for all accounts of gender-based violence to be duly investigated and prosecuted, with the rights of the victim at the core.
The question arises as to what Elon Musk would have to do to convince people, especially low level geeks and engineers, that he’s “actually quite good at engineering”
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
I'm not disputing that he's good at engineering. He doesn't understand media, specifically social media, though. TwiTX's 13% decline in regular US users and 19% decline in revenue does not scream business genius and gives ammunition to his detractors. If he stuck to what he's good at and knew when to STFU occasionally (not suggesting completely) then he would be a far less polarising figure.
Yes I agree with much of that
Contrary to the absurd claims of @JosiasJessop I actually think Musk is quite BAD at the business stuff (hence his botched deal for Twitter) and he is definitely bad at the people stuff. He’s an Aspie. He says insulting and stupid things even if he doesn’t quite mean to
He IS a genius inventor, entrepreneur and engineer, something of a visionary, who should hire a better PR team and stop tweeting so much, especially about contentious politics
"...he is definitely bad at the people stuff."
Again, it depends on definitions. I've little doubt he can be poor on a personal basis, but he can be very good at choosing and keeping talent. Mueller and Shotwell being two brilliant examples. If he was 'bad' at the people stuff, that wouldn't happen.
I'd also point out that he may have changed over time, and as his wealth increased.
"...is quite BAD at the business stuff"
I'd suggest the way he kept both SpaceX and Tesla afloat during their hideous year in 2008 shows he is very good at business. Or used to be.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
I have mentioned before but I worked with a very clever sociopath/psychopath in the 90s. He was a salesman. It took months before I (or anyone else) was aware. It was only after I left that the full scale of the complexity and dishonesty became apparent. The manipulation was very complex. He was unlucky in that I left to set up a pressure group representing a lot of the customers of our previous employer and gradually saw inconsistencies and deduced what he was up to. I immediately shopped him to my previous employer.
The level of detail was huge. How he could keep the multiple lies in his head was beyond me. Some schemes panned out over months.
It always struck me that he could have done just as well if not better doing his job honestly. He worked very hard at being a crook.
I once had a slightly less bright client who had stolen from his employer by creating false invoices to explain missing stock. He lost control and it was costing him a fortune. His relief when the cops came knocking was palpable.
Teeming and lading (does it still happen these days?) is a classic fraud that requires concentration on what you have done and are doing and invariable leads to a loss of control and discovery. Always be suspicious of accounting clerks who don't take holidays or go off sick.
Hence many companies having a policy of enforced, minimum length, yearly holidays. As in “you have to take at least one 2 week holiday a year”.
Just to correct myself it appears the UN has now belatedly started to raise the issue of sexual violence on 7 October. Only two months after the date.
And in the context of resumed hostilities:
We deeply regret that military operations have resumed in Gaza, and we reiterate that all women, Israeli women, Palestinian women, as all others, are entitled to a life lived in safety and free from violence.
We unequivocally condemn the brutal attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7 October. We are alarmed by the numerous accounts of gender-based atrocities and sexual violence during those attacks. This is why we have called for all accounts of gender-based violence to be duly investigated and prosecuted, with the rights of the victim at the core.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
I have mentioned before but I worked with a very clever sociopath/psychopath in the 90s. He was a salesman. It took months before I (or anyone else) was aware. It was only after I left that the full scale of the complexity and dishonesty became apparent. The manipulation was very complex. He was unlucky in that I left to set up a pressure group representing a lot of the customers of our previous employer and gradually saw inconsistencies and deduced what he was up to. I immediately shopped him to my previous employer.
The level of detail was huge. How he could keep the multiple lies in his head was beyond me. Some schemes panned out over months.
It always struck me that he could have done just as well if not better doing his job honestly. He worked very hard at being a crook.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
In my experience too many law exams test memory and little else. Few required you to actually think.
Is that professional exams or academic exams?
Both. Arguably more the latter than the former as the professional exams tended to be slightly more problem based but the ability to memorise lots of precedent and sections remained key to a pass.
The builder doing work on my house dropped out of a law degree. Probably makes more than most lawyers anyway, but, when I asked why, he said -
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
Politics is volatile. No one can predict accurately what will happen in five years time. After the 2019 election, you’d be hard pressed to predict where we are today.
One of the myriad scenarios in the future is a Lib Dem revival. They quietly destroyed the Tories round here this year.
It’s time to watch and listen I think.
Yes. None of us have a clue. I believe they are very focused in their targeting currently, particularly after last time so they might not win too many. This is correct strategy if the Tories do not crash and burn. Not the correct strategy if the Tories do.
If they only win 20 - 30 seats they may again stay irrelevant in national politics. If they win 30+, particularly if they get around 50 or more they then become relevant once more and get media attention and become a bucket for those disaffected.
The key number is one more MP than the SNP. That gives Davey or his successor 2 questions at PMQs each week instead of one every blue moon.
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
Politics is volatile. No one can predict accurately what will happen in five years time. After the 2019 election, you’d be hard pressed to predict where we are today.
One of the myriad scenarios in the future is a Lib Dem revival. They quietly destroyed the Tories round here this year.
It’s time to watch and listen I think.
Yes. None of us have a clue. I believe they are very focused in their targeting currently, particularly after last time so they might not win too many. This is correct strategy if the Tories do not crash and burn. Not the correct strategy if the Tories do.
If they only win 20 - 30 seats they may again stay irrelevant in national politics. If they win 30+, particularly if they get around 50 or more they then become relevant once more and get media attention and become a bucket for those disaffected.
The key number is one more MP than the SNP. That gives Davey or his successor 2 questions at PMQs each week instead of one every blue moon.
That seems quite likely on current polling.
One more than the Tories would really be cat, meet some pigeons!
Anyway, my attempted trip to town utterly failed. We are snowed in. 20 cms of snow outside the door. No cars moving.
I have to get on a train to London by Monday. Eek!
Sorry to hear that - you also have to contend with strikes and overtime bans in the next few days.
RMT have called off theirs and there are trains running, assuming they are not cancelled. It's getting from the house to the train station I'm bothered about.
Anyway, 2 blistering articles about the utterly shameful silence and denial by too many human rights and feminist groups and other self-important commentators with no moral compass (yes, Owen, that means you) of the sexual violence inflicted on women and girls on 7 October.
Got another conviction for yet another rape yesterday (as prosecutor to prevent the usual jokes). Quite bizarre really. Out for drinks with workmates and literally dragged into the bushes and raped. I mean, WTAF? What goes through these men's heads? They are so selfish, so self interested, so uninterested in anyone else's feelings, happiness or bodily integrity. It's really quite sick.
Just catching up. You are doing a worthwhile and valuable job. We are dealing with the entitled generation and the effects of unregulated social media.
No. It is not the entitled generation and unregulated social media we are dealing with.
I was raped in very similar circumstances to the ones described by @DavidL - who is indeed doing an immensely worthwhile job - but it was decades ago before social media and the bastard concerned was a lawyer.
Every single generation of males contains bastards - and not as small a minority as many would like to think - who treat women like shit.
The question arises as to what Elon Musk would have to do to convince people, especially low level geeks and engineers, that he’s “actually quite good at engineering”
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
I'm not disputing that he's good at engineering. He doesn't understand media, specifically social media, though. TwiTX's 13% decline in regular US users and 19% decline in revenue does not scream business genius and gives ammunition to his detractors. If he stuck to what he's good at and knew when to STFU occasionally (not suggesting completely) then he would be a far less polarising figure.
Yes I agree with much of that
Contrary to the absurd claims of @JosiasJessop I actually think Musk is quite BAD at the business stuff (hence his botched deal for Twitter) and he is definitely bad at the people stuff. He’s an Aspie. He says insulting and stupid things even if he doesn’t quite mean to
He IS a genius inventor, entrepreneur and engineer, something of a visionary, who should hire a better PR team and stop tweeting so much, especially about contentious politics
Big question is- where does human progress come from? One or two geniuses in a generation, the top one percent, the top ten percent? Or more broadly than that? How much is it about being smart enough and very lucky to be in the right place at the right time faced with the right question? Someone wrote of Crick and Watson that yes they were clever, but they were lucky to stumble across something to be clever about.
And linked to that, something Scott Adams said before he went down the Trumpite rabbit hole. The key job of managers is to eliminate the assholes. No amount of technical skill outweighs acting badly to your colleagues. Had he not started with quite so much money (which, after all, is a company's real most valuable asset), that would have been Musk's epitaph.
Just to correct myself it appears the UN has now belatedly started to raise the issue of sexual violence on 7 October. Only two months after the date.
And in the context of resumed hostilities:
We deeply regret that military operations have resumed in Gaza, and we reiterate that all women, Israeli women, Palestinian women, as all others, are entitled to a life lived in safety and free from violence.
We unequivocally condemn the brutal attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7 October. We are alarmed by the numerous accounts of gender-based atrocities and sexual violence during those attacks. This is why we have called for all accounts of gender-based violence to be duly investigated and prosecuted, with the rights of the victim at the core.
I don't think Hamas raped and murdered women and children because of their "gender" - but because of their "sex".
TERF! :LOL:
There is a sick joke about a Hamas member discovering that….
No, I think I have found a limit.
TBF, through history male rape has also been common in warfare. Although not much talked about, sadly. e.g.:
"While most victims of sexual offences perpetrated by US servicemen during the Second World War were women and girls, rape and sexual assault of men and boys were not uncommon. 75 such cases are examined here. "
The question arises as to what Elon Musk would have to do to convince people, especially low level geeks and engineers, that he’s “actually quite good at engineering”
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
I'm not disputing that he's good at engineering. He doesn't understand media, specifically social media, though. TwiTX's 13% decline in regular US users and 19% decline in revenue does not scream business genius and gives ammunition to his detractors. If he stuck to what he's good at and knew when to STFU occasionally (not suggesting completely) then he would be a far less polarising figure.
Yes I agree with much of that
Contrary to the absurd claims of @JosiasJessop I actually think Musk is quite BAD at the business stuff (hence his botched deal for Twitter) and he is definitely bad at the people stuff. He’s an Aspie. He says insulting and stupid things even if he doesn’t quite mean to
He IS a genius inventor, entrepreneur and engineer, something of a visionary, who should hire a better PR team and stop tweeting so much, especially about contentious politics
He’s not an inventor. His ability seems to be more leading a push up the TRL levels.
EdmundinTokyo once said something to the effect that Musk was a bullshitter who occasionally delivers. For a long time that was pretty much everything one needed to know about him. Since then Musk had added far-right enabling fuckpig to his CV but EiT's pithy five word sketch is still accurate.
lol
A bullshitter who occasionally delivers is the twat down the pub who tells endless lies but occasionally sells a car for a decent profit, or is able to flip a house to make a tidy sum, once in a while
Musk is the richest man in the world, who decides the fate of wars, via his very own satellite network. That’s a bit more than “occasionally delivering”
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
Well 1997, 2001, and 2005 proves that is not true.
It's 2023.
So. You made a statement that was palpable incorrect. Nobody knows what will happen in the future (as @Jonathan pointed out) and I acknowledge your betting prediction skills (as you know), but it is clearly common sense that if (a big if) the LDs do well in the election (say 30 - 50 seats), they will get more publicity. If they get more publicity it logically becomes more likely they are a receptacle for dissatisfied voters. Of course that may not happen.
However you said it only happens when Labour aren't competitive. I gave you 3 relatively recent elections where exactly the opposite happened and it is the last 3 times Labour actually won.
I mean they are the last 3 times the scenario you described actually happened and in each case the result contradicts what you said. That of course is not to say it will happen again.
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
Sorry, but I have to disagree. There is nobody better than the King to reassure Greece, and the rest of the world, that Britain is not the nasty, small minded, racist country that the Tories would make them think we are.
Just to correct myself it appears the UN has now belatedly started to raise the issue of sexual violence on 7 October. Only two months after the date.
And in the context of resumed hostilities:
We deeply regret that military operations have resumed in Gaza, and we reiterate that all women, Israeli women, Palestinian women, as all others, are entitled to a life lived in safety and free from violence.
We unequivocally condemn the brutal attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7 October. We are alarmed by the numerous accounts of gender-based atrocities and sexual violence during those attacks. This is why we have called for all accounts of gender-based violence to be duly investigated and prosecuted, with the rights of the victim at the core.
I don't think Hamas raped and murdered women and children because of their "gender" - but because of their "sex".
TERF! :LOL:
There is a sick joke about a Hamas member discovering that….
No, I think I have found a limit.
TBF, through history male rape has also been common in warfare. Although not much talked about, sadly. e.g.:
"While most victims of sexual offences perpetrated by US servicemen during the Second World War were women and girls, rape and sexual assault of men and boys were not uncommon. 75 such cases are examined here. "
Prediction: inside 24 months Labour will be down at 30-32% in the polls again, and the Greens riding very high. Maybe even into the high teens. The Tories will be there or thereabouts with Reform in the low teens.
There is no money and both main parties have very exposed flanks.
The LD poll rating after the election should be interesting. Currently nothing is getting them out of the 9 - 14% range. If however the Tories do really slump and the LDs get quite a few seats they might again become the bucket for none of the above once more. For this to happen I reckon they need a minimum of 30 seats, ideally 50 to get any momentum.
Sorry, but I think this is wishful thinking.
The LDs have a place as a NOTA and a non-Tory alternative where Labour aren't competitive but are otherwise a busted flush.
Politics is volatile. No one can predict accurately what will happen in five years time. After the 2019 election, you’d be hard pressed to predict where we are today.
One of the myriad scenarios in the future is a Lib Dem revival. They quietly destroyed the Tories round here this year.
It’s time to watch and listen I think.
Yes. None of us have a clue. I believe they are very focused in their targeting currently, particularly after last time so they might not win too many. This is correct strategy if the Tories do not crash and burn. Not the correct strategy if the Tories do.
If they only win 20 - 30 seats they may again stay irrelevant in national politics. If they win 30+, particularly if they get around 50 or more they then become relevant once more and get media attention and become a bucket for those disaffected.
The key number is one more MP than the SNP. That gives Davey or his successor 2 questions at PMQs each week instead of one every blue moon.
What is the procedure if the Lib Dems and the SNP have an equal number of MPs? One question each?
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
Sorry, but I have to disagree. There is nobody better than the King to reassure Greece, and the rest of the world, that Britain is not the nasty, small minded, racist country that the Tories would make them think we are.
And his Daddy was Phil the Greek! Maybe that's why he chose a Greek tie!
PB’s mulish determination that Elon Musk is just some “bullshitting” sales guy who got lucky is one of its more amusing quirks. Long may it continue; it fills the awkward space between the first and second gin and tonic quite perfectly
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
Sorry, but I have to disagree. There is nobody better than the King to reassure Greece, and the rest of the world, that Britain is not the nasty, small minded, racist country that the Tories would make them think we are.
And his Daddy was Phil the Greek! Maybe that's why he chose a Greek tie!
I *think* that King Charles could claim Greek citizenship via Phil.
Which would mean that denying him the right to display mild Greek sympathies would probably breach his human rights.
Anyway, 2 blistering articles about the utterly shameful silence and denial by too many human rights and feminist groups and other self-important commentators with no moral compass (yes, Owen, that means you) of the sexual violence inflicted on women and girls on 7 October.
Got another conviction for yet another rape yesterday (as prosecutor to prevent the usual jokes). Quite bizarre really. Out for drinks with workmates and literally dragged into the bushes and raped. I mean, WTAF? What goes through these men's heads? They are so selfish, so self interested, so uninterested in anyone else's feelings, happiness or bodily integrity. It's really quite sick.
Just catching up. You are doing a worthwhile and valuable job. We are dealing with the entitled generation and the effects of unregulated social media.
No. It is not the entitled generation and unregulated social media we are dealing with.
I was raped in very similar circumstances to the ones described by @DavidL - who is indeed doing an immensely worthwhile job - but it was decades ago before social media and the bastard concerned was a lawyer.
Every single generation of males contains bastards - and not as small a minority as many would like to think - who treat women like shit.
I’m starting to wonder whether it’s not a minority, but a majority, of males who are bastards? Mysogynists, Post Office managers and lawyers. Russian, Israeli and Hamas leaders. The list goes on.
My impression of him - and I think I met a number like him in my professional career - is that he had very limited abilities but was good at bullshitting his way through life and made himself useful to others by doing what they wanted without questioning the worth or morality of his actions.
It speaks volumes of the Post Office that it would actually employ such an individual in a position of authority.
He's still more competent than Amanda Spielman.
Admittedly, that's a low bar.
So's my daughter's pet hamster.
And he's dead.
Singh had a legal practice on the side he was carrying on while working for the Post Office. So his criminal prosecution work was probably being done off the side of the desk. Apparently the Post Office approved this arrangement.
There is something curious about this because according to Law Society records the dates he has given the inquiry and the dates given to them don't match. Which suggests that he may have been carrying on an unregulated legal practice and/or taking money from people under false pretences. Fraud, in other words. Oh the irony .....
Someone at the Solicitors' Regulation Authority needs to take a close look at his evidence .....
This bloke must have passed some Law exams at some point, Ms C. I'd always thought they must be difficult, but if a goon like Singh can get through them just how tough are they?
Dare one suggest that Lawyers are not necessarily the high-powered super-brainy professionals they purport to be? (Present company excepted, of course.)
Law exams are difficult (I've done them). But, all they test is legal ability. They don't test ethics or morals.
High intelligence is no bar to being evil. In fact, it just enables one to be evil more effectively.
In my experience too many law exams test memory and little else. Few required you to actually think.
Isn’t that the situation with many (?most) professional exams? I don’t know about the law, but pharmacy has a post-degree professional experience year before qualification, when a mentor is supposed to instruct the trainee in good professional practice. Unfortunately it’s then examined, and I’m not now sure about how relevant the exam is. Or can be.
PB’s mulish determination that Elon Musk is just some “bullshitting” sales guy who got lucky is one of its more amusing quirks. Long may it continue; it fills the awkward space between the first and second gin and tonic quite perfectly
Ah, my second gin and tonic!
I don't think it's necessary to say he's nothing but a bullshitter or that he is a super genius. Isn't it enough to notice that he has definitely achieved a lot of things, but that he also definitely does bullshit a lot? The guy's comments on twitter alone make it abundantly clear he is not a deep thinker about a lot of issues. I don't mean that he agrees with things I do not, I mean he reads something, goes 'Wow, that's amazing' and just buys it completely, when we teach kids not to believe everything they read online.
Add to that he definitely overhypes stuff, which is what a sales guy does, and I don't really understand why some people get so touchy about criticism of him on that basis. Does some of it go a bit far? Well, maybe. But like Elon himself he has fans who get very upset at even a suggestion he's not as great as he thinks he is, and basically go 'Look, he's really rich, he cannot be a fool about anything', which I doubt gets applied to others, even other tech bros.
Just to correct myself it appears the UN has now belatedly started to raise the issue of sexual violence on 7 October. Only two months after the date.
And in the context of resumed hostilities:
We deeply regret that military operations have resumed in Gaza, and we reiterate that all women, Israeli women, Palestinian women, as all others, are entitled to a life lived in safety and free from violence.
We unequivocally condemn the brutal attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7 October. We are alarmed by the numerous accounts of gender-based atrocities and sexual violence during those attacks. This is why we have called for all accounts of gender-based violence to be duly investigated and prosecuted, with the rights of the victim at the core.
I don't think Hamas raped and murdered women and children because of their "gender" - but because of their "sex".
TERF! :LOL:
There is a sick joke about a Hamas member discovering that….
No, I think I have found a limit.
TBF, through history male rape has also been common in warfare. Although not much talked about, sadly. e.g.:
"While most victims of sexual offences perpetrated by US servicemen during the Second World War were women and girls, rape and sexual assault of men and boys were not uncommon. 75 such cases are examined here. "
Thank goodness he was on message and didn't go "I've voted Conservative for 92 years, but no longer!". He did say he hadn't been sure about Sunal admittedly.
What gets me is that on today's Modern Dynamic Thrusting Railway there is zero coordination. I can almost understand the "fuck you" lack of ticket acceptance by LNER of cancelled (and stranded) Lumo and Grand Central services. But Network Rail?
I can see 5 delayed services arriving overnight into Kings Cross. 02:15, 02:54, 03:05, 03;46, 04:17. Network Rail manage the station which is closed overnight. And yep - they kept it closed.
5 trains of exhausted people arriving painfully late (more than 6 hours in 1 case), being first locked inside the station and then thrown out onto the street by security. Including the refugees who had ben thrown out onto the platform at Retford earlier.
This country is broken.
The country’s not broken.
There is just now accountability or sense of responsibility to end clients in large parts of the public or quasi-public sector
In this case it sounds like there was no one with the authority to open the station on the ground. Fair enough.
So there should have been an escalation procedure. The station manager should have come in to oversee a solution.
There nothing fundamentally broken - but a need for a complete cultural overhaul (which is - to be fair - about the hardest change to implement!)
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
Sorry, but I have to disagree. There is nobody better than the King to reassure Greece, and the rest of the world, that Britain is not the nasty, small minded, racist country that the Tories would make them think we are.
And his Daddy was Phil the Greek! Maybe that's why he chose a Greek tie!
I'm glad that Charles is continuing the Queen's tradition of gently winding people up with stuff like this. Noticed he also goes for very pale suits to stand out, a bit like her bright dresses.
PB’s mulish determination that Elon Musk is just some “bullshitting” sales guy who got lucky is one of its more amusing quirks. Long may it continue; it fills the awkward space between the first and second gin and tonic quite perfectly
Ah, my second gin and tonic!
Curiously though Bill Gates was the richest man on earth for many years, but I don't ever remember anyone claiming him to be a technological super-brain and maverick entrepreneurial genius. In fact his 'getting lucky' (thanks to some short-sighted blunders by IBM) is the stuff of legend.
The question arises as to what Elon Musk would have to do to convince people, especially low level geeks and engineers, that he’s “actually quite good at engineering”
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
I'm not disputing that he's good at engineering. He doesn't understand media, specifically social media, though. TwiTX's 13% decline in regular US users and 19% decline in revenue does not scream business genius and gives ammunition to his detractors. If he stuck to what he's good at and knew when to STFU occasionally (not suggesting completely) then he would be a far less polarising figure.
Yes I agree with much of that
Contrary to the absurd claims of @JosiasJessop I actually think Musk is quite BAD at the business stuff (hence his botched deal for Twitter) and he is definitely bad at the people stuff. He’s an Aspie. He says insulting and stupid things even if he doesn’t quite mean to
He IS a genius inventor, entrepreneur and engineer, something of a visionary, who should hire a better PR team and stop tweeting so much, especially about contentious politics
Big question is- where does human progress come from? One or two geniuses in a generation, the top one percent, the top ten percent? Or more broadly than that? How much is it about being smart enough and very lucky to be in the right place at the right time faced with the right question? Someone wrote of Crick and Watson that yes they were clever, but they were lucky to stumble across something to be clever about.
And linked to that, something Scott Adams said before he went down the Trumpite rabbit hole. The key job of managers is to eliminate the assholes. No amount of technical skill outweighs acting badly to your colleagues. Had he not started with quite so much money (which, after all, is a company's real most valuable asset), that would have been Musk's epitaph.
See discussion a few days ago involving myself and @Sean_F (we were agreeing). Although it looks like the one or two geniuses in a generation it is not. With most big discoveries there are several others in parallel, or just behind (or even in front, but who don't get the breaks). Obvious examples that spring to mind are Evolution, Calculus, Flight, etc. In business it can often be down to marketing and luck. I am aware of an operating system at the time that knocked DOS into a cocked hat. Where is it now? Well dead because the supplier was so convinced they had the best product they kept it proprietary to their machines. DOS went on the PC and hey presto we have Microsoft.
I have no idea what the percentage is though, but I suspect still quite small even after what I have said.
What a stupid decision by King Charles to wear a Greek tie to the COP summit. I simply don't believe it was a coincidence. Wherever his sympathies may lie in the current debate he should not be making public statements. Unlike the rest of us he gets to meet the PM every week where he can air his views IN PRIVATE.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
Maybe King Charles was re-asserting his claim to the Greek throne?
Comments
Contrarily, I have heard and read multiple anecdotes saying the exact opposite. And not from Musk fanboys
One story is of a tech bro going around one factory with Elon (Tesla? Starlink? Dunno) and the bro noticed that all the engineers looked terrified of Elon and avoided him
The bro presumed Elon was some awful tyrant so he quietly went back and asked them why they shrank away and they said “no, he’s fine, it’s just that he knows everything - all the engineering - and he asks terrifying questions we can’t answer”
“After reading Cantrell's response in the Quora thread "How did Elon Musk learn enough about rockets to run SpaceX?," we asked him to share some insights into his time with Musk.
Below, he explains the two-part learning process that Musk used to teach himself rocket science.
"He is the smartest guy I've ever met, period," Cantrell tells us. "I know that sounds overblown. But I've met plenty of smart people, and I don't say that lightly. He's absolutely, frickin' amazing. I don't even think he sleeps."
Cantrell tells us that he soon discovered that he and Musk shared an affinity for applied knowledge, and he loaned him some textbooks to study (they "were never returned, by the way!" Cantrell says). The books were "Rocket Propulsion Elements," "Aerothermodynamics of Gas Turbine and Rocket Propulsion," "Fundamentals of Astrodynamics," and the "International Reference Guide to Space
Launch Systems."
(There is much more)
Cantrell is currently working on a book about the early days at SpaceX, and he thinks that Musk's genius blend of capitalism, curiosity, and motivation will make him a true pioneer.
"He's used a billion dollars to do what NASA couldn't do with $27 billion," Cantrell says. "Boy, it's inspiring."”
https://www.businessinsider.com/how-elon-musk-learned-rocket-science-for-spacex-2014-10
Thank you once again for your support. With a 20,000 majority to overturn in less than a year, we need a candidate who is known across Brighton Pavilion and can win. I am that candidate and I hope you will support me.
https://x.com/EddieIzzardLab/status/1730892011463438468?s=20
The local candidate has far more Union/affiliate/councillor recommendations.
None of us know the full details of what went on in this 'spat' but I was surprised to see George Osborne suggest the PM had a 'hissy fit'. Still George is well known for his grudges (remember what he said about Teresa May) and is hardly the most trustworthy figure. He's always had a snarky, snide aspect to him and I suspect that the man who saw himself as the central figure in the senior prefect's study is less than happy having been stepped over by a junior boy.
So yeah, if I potentially had to risk a career (present or future) with Musk, I would praise him highly. Because he's a man-child who has shown time and time again that he doesn't take criticism well.
Back in the Usenet days there were all these rumours that Bill Gates read every line of code MS produced. It was obvious b/s for several reasons: to read every line of code in a company that large, let alone understand the code, would take too long - and it wasn't his job to do that. It wasn't an efficient use of his time.
I can imagine back in the early days of MS, when they had a few employees, he did so. Perhaps he even looked at random bits of code occasionally for enjoyment, but they myth he read every line of code in the mid to late 1980s was debunked, I think by Gates himself. Hilariously, I even saw the claim repeated *after* he left MS.
We like heroes, and we like bigging our heroes up into things they are not. It happened to Gates. It happened to Jobs. It's now happening with Musk. The difference is that Musk revels in it.
And the Liberal Democrats are doing nothing to stop it.
He will fail. His record at politics is truly dire.
"100% this. When I worked with a company and he came around I was told ,"DO NOT contradict him or saying anything he might not like...." This right here say everything you need to know about the company and the leadership.
The engineers do 95% of lifting and the upper management make decisions which, "would be marketing coup!" (actual words i heard in a meeting).
I won't even get into the issues of the company and how they treat people. Suffice to say, i won't work with them if I have a choice."
https://www.reddit.com/r/engineering/comments/myok92/experienced_engineers_whats_your_opinion_of_elon/
An interesting but not unusual property transaction. Auctioning off the airspace above a house in Battersea - termed "hope value" by the seller. Guide price 10k. It's one of PB's beloved Georgian speculative developments by the look of it.
Ref eg the airspace above railway stations and tracks. A couple of adjacent properties are developed upwards.
Looks like high legal fees and survey fees as a proportion to make sure it can be done practically, so that the selling LL does not have the buyers' balls in a nutcracker waiting to be squeezed.
The interesting question is why the seller has not gone for PP first.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-67575318
Previously the Ground Rent rights have been sold, so I'd say a freeholder looking for marginal gains or needing money to get out of a pickle.
https://www.allsop.co.uk/lot-overview/A-Freehold-Ground-Rent-Investment-in-London/R170720-091
The fact is, Musk is probably the richest man in the world (depending on XRates), probably the most powerful human in the world (outside politics ) - he is able to change the direction of wars (eg Ukraine with Starlink), he is a pivotal figure in three of the most important technologies in the world - EVs, SpaceX, AI. And now he owns TwitterX, making him also a social media mogul of global importance
You simply don’t get all the way there by being “a good sales guy”, and it strikes me as a minor madness to claim this. He is clearly extremely intelligent, imaginative, hard working, and audacious
He is also obviously quite a bit of a twat (like Jobs), sociallly inept, says stupid things, and rubs people up the wrong way. And is weirdly thin skinned and vain. So was Leonardo Da Vinci, as it happens
Another is that (admitting not following him in detail so I may nor be quite correct) Izzard's position on trans-questions is very similar to the Green position, which personally I find a little obsessive.
Will that open opportunities for other candidates?
We deeply regret that military operations have resumed in Gaza, and we reiterate that all women, Israeli women, Palestinian women, as all others, are entitled to a life lived in safety and free from violence.
We unequivocally condemn the brutal attacks by Hamas on Israel on 7 October. We are alarmed by the numerous accounts of gender-based atrocities and sexual violence during those attacks. This is why we have called for all accounts of gender-based violence to be duly investigated and prosecuted, with the rights of the victim at the core.
https://www.unwomen.org/en/news-stories/statement/2023/12/un-women-statement-on-the-situation-in-israel-and-gaza
I don't think Hamas raped and murdered women and children because of their "gender" - but because of their "sex".
I didn't say he was just a good sales guy. Just that the stuff like "I probably know more about production lines than anyone alive" stuff is typical of his hilariously wrong self-aggrandisement. Which you readily slurp up. And he does it all the time.
Build a Maglev to Neptune? Turn himself into a seventeen kilometre high trillionaire tungsten zombie hybrid able to create Black Holes with his testicles? Defeat Death with a Sinclair Spectrum?
Because if what he’s done so far isn’t enough then he must feel, quite frankly, like giving up
I'd also point at Tesla's 'Autopilot', which is nowhere near his grandiose claims - and even behind that of other manufacturers. Where's the coast-to-cast autonomous drive he promised back in 2016?
https://www.theregister.com/2023/01/25/ford_gm_tesla_consumer_reports/
Besides, I'm not saying he isn't “actually quite good at engineering”. Just that he's nowhere near the genius engineer that so many people make him out to be. He's much better at the business and people side.
If Musk was truly a genius he wouldn't have agreed to overpay for Twitter, lest we forget he tried to get out of that purchase.
Warm, soft, buzzing, vivid, laughing, boozy, the tropic moon shines down on the chattering mango sellers, and the gogo girls walk from the Skytrain past the skyscrapers to the sky bars in the dulcet night, and all is promise, promise, promise
In my experience, engineers love to talk about their specialisation. Especially in the direction of just how far things can go and what they'd do if they had the resource constraints off.
That just feels like - well, you know movies when the Hollywood writers come up with their view of what a very intelligent person is like?
That.
Singh isn't stupid. He isn't intelligent either but he is cunning. He knew perfectly well what he was doing while he was giving his evidence - deliberately obfuscating to cover up the fact that he knew fuck all about the criminal law and what the rules are intended to achieve, did the bare minimum in a tick the box way, did whatever his bosses wanted him to and what would be good for him personally. He didn't give a toss about having a fair trial or anything else.
And his only objective in giving his evidence was to avoid all responsibility for his actions, even at the price of making himself look daft because he knows perfectly well that if he took responsibility he would have to admit that he utterly failed to comply with any of his legal or professional obligations and was complicit in the perversion of justice.
And I've never said he isn't 'extremely bright'. Just not as bright as he and his fans make out.
Whatever next?
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2023/dec/02/ofsted-misled-inquest-death-teacher-ruth-perry-training-claim
I have to get on a train to London by Monday. Eek!
It’s a genuine anecdote, I might try and dig it out
The really big one of course (but very unlikely) is if the Tories really crash and burn and the LDs become the opposition. Now that, as Casino said, is wishful thinking.
I suspect it won't work in his case though. The complicity in sending innocents to jail is so obvious in his case that a PoJ charge looks inevitable.
It was pointed to me that I could legally be a grandfather in just over two years, that made me feel officially middle aged.
Contrary to the absurd claims of @JosiasJessop I actually think Musk is quite BAD at the business stuff (hence his botched deal for Twitter) and he is definitely bad at the people stuff. He’s an Aspie. He says insulting and stupid things even if he doesn’t quite mean to
He IS a genius inventor, entrepreneur and engineer, something of a visionary, who should hire a better PR team and stop tweeting so much, especially about contentious politics
Ive had a wonderful fortninght. Went to Ireland for my brothers 60th, he then gave me Covid, which when I came back I passed on the Mrs B who now eyes me suspiciously that she cant see her gransdon today as she;s still testing positive.
Remember, trans lesbians are lesbians too.
Let's uplift and honour EVERY expression of love and identity!
Happy International #LesbianDay!
@free_equal
https://x.com/UN_Women/status/1711048869637697685?s=20
Again, it depends on definitions. I've little doubt he can be poor on a personal basis, but he can be very good at choosing and keeping talent. Mueller and Shotwell being two brilliant examples. If he was 'bad' at the people stuff, that wouldn't happen.
I'd also point out that he may have changed over time, and as his wealth increased.
"...is quite BAD at the business stuff"
I'd suggest the way he kept both SpaceX and Tesla afloat during their hideous year in 2008 shows he is very good at business. Or used to be.
No, I think I have found a limit.
“the law is a system of rules, without morality.”
I was raped in very similar circumstances to the ones described by @DavidL - who is indeed doing an immensely worthwhile job - but it was decades ago before social media and the bastard concerned was a lawyer.
Every single generation of males contains bastards - and not as small a minority as many would like to think - who treat women like shit.
And linked to that, something Scott Adams said before he went down the Trumpite rabbit hole. The key job of managers is to eliminate the assholes. No amount of technical skill outweighs acting badly to your colleagues. Had he not started with quite so much money (which, after all, is a company's real most valuable asset), that would have been Musk's epitaph.
"While most victims of sexual offences perpetrated by US servicemen during the Second World War were women and girls, rape and sexual assault of men and boys were not uncommon. 75 such cases are examined here. "
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022009420925874
+others.
This is not to take anything away from rape of women and girls; just that it is somewhat more complex than that.
A bullshitter who occasionally delivers is the twat down the pub who tells endless lies but occasionally sells a car for a decent profit, or is able to flip a house to make a tidy sum, once in a while
Musk is the richest man in the world, who decides the fate of wars, via his very own satellite network. That’s a bit more than “occasionally delivering”
Now go back to your Box Set of Mrs Brown’s Boys
However you said it only happens when Labour aren't competitive. I gave you 3 relatively recent elections where exactly the opposite happened and it is the last 3 times Labour actually won.
I mean they are the last 3 times the scenario you described actually happened and in each case the result contradicts what you said. That of course is not to say it will happen again.
"On Sunday 3 December, Avanti West Coast will not be running any services on their routes."
https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/service-disruptions/awc-industrial-action-20231121/
Ah, my second gin and tonic!
Which would mean that denying him the right to display mild Greek sympathies would probably breach his human rights.
PB Lawyers?
Best solution may be a 2cv.
Unfortunately it’s then examined, and I’m not now sure about how relevant the exam is. Or can be.
Add to that he definitely overhypes stuff, which is what a sales guy does, and I don't really understand why some people get so touchy about criticism of him on that basis. Does some of it go a bit far? Well, maybe. But like Elon himself he has fans who get very upset at even a suggestion he's not as great as he thinks he is, and basically go 'Look, he's really rich, he cannot be a fool about anything', which I doubt gets applied to others, even other tech bros.
No one likes to talk of it because it was “our” side
The stories are indescribably horrific
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marocchinate
A "dream came true" for a 110-year-old man who met the PM after being invited to attend Parliament by his local MP.
John Farringdon, from Cubbington, Warwickshire, met Rishi Sunak at 10 Downing Street after attending Prime Minister's Questions (PMQs).
The lifelong Conservative voter, one of the UK's oldest people, was invited to watch the session by Jeremy Wright.
"I've seen it on TV so many times and it seems so different, it's such a large room," Mr Farringdon said.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-67582938
Thank goodness he was on message and didn't go "I've voted Conservative for 92 years, but no longer!". He did say he hadn't been sure about Sunal admittedly.
There is just now accountability or sense of responsibility to end clients in large parts of the public or quasi-public sector
In this case it sounds like there was no one with the authority to open the station on the ground. Fair enough.
So there should have been an escalation procedure. The station manager should have come in to oversee a solution.
There nothing fundamentally broken - but a need for a complete cultural overhaul (which is - to be fair - about the hardest change to implement!)
I have no idea what the percentage is though, but I suspect still quite small even after what I have said.