• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Elon Musk: "Having pronouns in a fantasy video game is totally unacceptable". "Stop killing art with woke propaganda"

Status
Not open for further replies.

PandaOk

Member
Woke isn't the inclusion of gay or trans people. Woke means forced inclusion with an agenda to push an ideological point of view (identity politics).
You already have other examples. What you’re suggesting is not true. There was an interview with the director of the movie Twisters and right on the first page, heck it might have been the OP, someone called him a DEI hire with no proof whatsoever… because he’s Asian. You need to take a hard look at what this ‘anti-woke’ movement actually is. It’s all well and good to believe there’s some moderate middle ground truth (I made that mistake with GamerGate initially), but you should really consider why so many people on the anti woke side seem to misunderstand your interpretation as you describe it. Good luck finding your way out, if you ever want to talk feel free.
 
Last edited:

ZoukGalaxy

Member
Damn, I can't believe I agree with this dumbass. The whole wokeness in videogames in beyond ridiculous.

Shocked Uh Oh GIF
 

Boss Man

Member
What else bothers you that we should have toggles for?
Funny phrasing considering the entire topic of pronouns exists in order for an online community of mentally ill men comprising less than 1% of the population to force and threaten the other 99% to pretend that they’re women.

These are the same people who literally tried to remove gender from foreign languages because it bothers them that the concept universal. We can reject this woowoo shit in our video games the same way that Spanish speakers rejected LatinX.
 
Last edited:

LRKD

Member
So that just shows you that having pronouns in fantasy RPG's both can be acceptable and don't kill art with 'wokeism' 🤷‍♂️
I've spelled it out here before. You are kinda right, but also wrong it's not that it is acceptable, it's that it is tolerable. These are "tolerated", you do not tolerate something that is good, you enjoy it. Tolerance is not a good thing, just to be clear.

Let's say you have a good pie, you aren't tolerating it, you are enjoying it. But you might tolerate a pie with a piece of hair in it, because the pie otherwise was really good! But you wouldn't suddenly go buying pies with hairs in them. You didn't enjoy the hair. In that same regard people enjoyed Baldurs Gate. They didn't enjoy the woke slop, they enjoyed the game inspite of it, but people will only tolerate so much. If you have a bad pie with hair in it, people won't tolerate it. If you have a dogshit game (Dragon Age Veilgard) with wokeslop, suddenly it isn't tolerable.

People have been brainwashed to tolerate for damn near 100 years now in America. TV, school, it's been everywhere for as long as I've been alive, a slow boil, like frogs in a pot, of tolerance. And only two kinds of people think that this is a good thing, the people who are boiling the pot, and people who have been in the pot so long their minds have melted.
 
This definitely isn't a case of "things were better in my day", it's a simple case of questioning whether or not shite like pronouns helps us advance civilization in a meaningful way.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how pronouns and ideologies such as gender fluidity will help advance society.
If it helps some people feel more comfortable in their skin and accepted, is it a detriment to society? I'd call that progress.
The notion of a distracted West has never been more true. There are other areas of the world who pay no mind to any of this, and it's no coincidence that they are advancing at breakneck speed. No coincidence that many of the best videogames products are coming out of countries not preoccupied by this nonsense as well. It's not only wrecking economic output, it's also wrecking your entertainment products.
All of these rapidly growing economies are rapidly growing to catch up to the US, which still far outstrips any and all of them in every meaningful capacity.
Yes the rate of growth is incredible, but its easy to grow fast, when you're starting off small. There's also the fact that India and China each have 4 times the population of the USA, which plays a massive role in economic output and growth. And yet, they are not as productive as the US.
We'll see where this goes long term.

When it comes to entertainment, maybe? But how many Bollywood films and TV shows do you consume? Aside from 1 recent high-profile game from China; Wukong (which incidentally sold most strongly in China), how many Chinese video games do you play? How much Chinese media do you consume? Its easy to say that they're "wrecking" the West, but are they? The most played game in the world is Fortnite which is decidedly American.

I understand what you're trying to suggest don't get me wrong, but I don't think any of these companies are outstripping western games by any stretch. You could maybe argue Japanese games are the most influential at the moment, but Japan's economy is completely torpedoed at the moment, so that doesn't exactly serve your argument.

You would think that at some point people would stop and question what is going on and why it's happening, but alas, the propaganda is too overwhelming for most.
I don't understand what the problem is with pronouns? Why is it such a cultural scourge?
And more to the point, why is it that the presence of pronouns or "wokeness" is an automatic indicator of game quality being bad? If you say because game developers use those things as a crutch to try and deflect criticism of the quality of the game? Sure I'd buy that. But stuff like pronouns in and of themselves aren't the reason games are bad, if they're just used to mask other problems.

And don't insult my intelligence by attempting to equate things like demanding pronouns and the rise of modern LGBT ideology to the civil rights act. People who get up in arms about pronouns - that's a self created "problem" on a voluntary basis, while those of us who are black didn't wake up one day, read some propaganda online (or in the "news") and decide that's the way things needed to be for ourselves.
I suppose demanding personhood and freedom is not exactly the same as demanding pronouns, but people who are gay or lesbian or heaven forbid, trans, definitely are demonised and/or victimised for simply wanting to be recognised for what they are. Thankfully we don't live in a world where those people would be lynched or enslaved for simply existing, but that doesn't mean they can't fight for what they believe in.
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is all that anyone ever really asks for.
 

SF Kosmo

Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Remember, Elon is the schmuk that thinks he can use the legal system to force companies to advertise on shitter. Dude is not right in the head.
He's also a guy who amassed the world's largest fortune largely on government subsidies paid by your tax dollars and has moved on to wholesale purchasing a new government office for himself where he gets to remove regulatory obstacles and direct more of your money into his pocket.

Elon's fortune isn't as automotive tycoon. The guy isn't the richest man in the world because he runs America's 8th most popular car manufacturer or because of a social media company with a 4:1 debt to asset ratio, he's just an evil kleptocrat, a gilded age robber baron for the modern era.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
I've spelled it out here before. You are kinda right, but also wrong it's not that it is acceptable, it's that it is tolerable. These are "tolerated", you do not tolerate something that is good, you enjoy it. Tolerance is not a good thing, just to be clear.

Let's say you have a good pie, you aren't tolerating it, you are enjoying it. But you might tolerate a pie with a piece of hair in it, because the pie otherwise was really good! But you wouldn't suddenly go buying pies with hairs in them. You didn't enjoy the hair. In that same regard people enjoyed Baldurs Gate. They didn't enjoy the woke slop, they enjoyed the game inspite of it, but people will only tolerate so much. If you have a bad pie with hair in it, people won't tolerate it. If you have a dogshit game (Dragon Age Veilgard) with wokeslop, suddenly it isn't tolerable.

People have been brainwashed to tolerate for damn near 100 years now in America. TV, school, it's been everywhere for as long as I've been alive, a slow boil, like frogs in a pot, of tolerance. And only two kinds of people think that this is a good thing, the people who are boiling the pot, and people who have been in the pot so long their minds have melted.

I gotta ask, have you played Veilguard?

Cause aside from the one specific character whose personal questline is about gender identity, there's no ideology or forced stuff like that in the game. The game also looks and plays pretty nicely.

I feel like a fair percentage of people railing against DA: V here have little to no hands on experience and are only basing opinions on the entire game just based on that Barv clip. *

* Yes, I know about the top-scars in the character creation, and the one choice very early on in the game to make your character be trans, but again, those are things that don't factor into it outside of their specific instances.
 
Last edited:

Boss Man

Member
free speech by trying to shut somebody else's down
Someone will make a mod that removes the pronouns and it will get taken down.

 
Last edited:

Hohenheim

Member
In addition to being an extremely average game, it had insufferable writing and characters. This has all been very well documented. Sounds like you have questionable taste.
Yeah, it sure does.
I take it back. I hate that pile of shit-game. 85 on metacritic? What a bunch of losers, all of them.
Didn't they all get the note saying it was extremely average?? How dare they have another opinion!
 

Boss Man

Member
I agree it's stupid to ban somebody for speaking their mind. It's also stupid to suggest somebody is ruining their own art. who the fuck are you to say they're killing art, it's their art.
What do you think is behind the discrepancy between critic and audience receptions in both movies and games?
 
Last edited:

Humdinger

Gold Member
You already have other examples. What you’re suggesting is not true. There was an interview with the director of the movie Twisters and right on the first page, heck it might have been the OP, someone called him a DEI hire with no proof whatsoever… because he’s Asian. You need to take a hard look at what this ‘anti-woke’ movement actually is. It’s all well and good to believe there’s some moderate middle ground truth (I made that mistake with GamerGate initially), but you should really consider why so many people on the anti woke side seem to misunderstand your interpretation as you describe it. Good luck finding your way out, if you ever want to talk feel free.

The fact that some people misuse the word based on either a misunderstanding, lack of reflection, or just knee-jerk impulsivity is not a contradiction to what I am saying. It is an illustration of what I am saying.

The misuse of the word is based on a misunderstanding of what (intelligent, informed) people are objecting to. They are not objecting to having gay people or black people in their games. That would be ludicrous. That would be overtly racist and homophobic. That is not what is being objected to. If you think it is, or if someone is objecting simply on the basis of a game including gay or black characters, you are both nuts. You have completely lost the plot.

To say it a third time, (intelligent, informed) people who object to a game being "woke" are objecting to modern politics (specifically, identity politics and the liberal/progressive agenda that goes with it) being shoved into their games. They are not objecting to gay or black people in videogames, for goodness sake.
 

Denton

Member
Musk going so hard against far-leftist BS is a great thing, shifts the overton window to make it possible for more people to feel some courage to speak against it. Hopefully the momentum keeps going and this nonsense can be buried once and for all, together with all the leftist BS dogma (diversity is our strength etc).
 

PandaOk

Member
The fact that some people misuse the word based on either a misunderstanding, lack of reflection, or just knee-jerk impulsivity is not a contradiction to what I am saying. It is an illustration of what I am saying.

The misuse of the word is based on a misunderstanding of what (intelligent, informed) people are objecting to. They are not objecting to having gay people or black people in their games. That would be ludicrous. That would be overtly racist and homophobic. That is not what is being objected to. If you think it is, or if someone is objecting simply on the basis of a game including gay or black characters, you are both nuts. You have completely lost the plot.

To say it a third time, (intelligent, informed) people who object to a game being "woke" are objecting to modern politics (specifically, identity politics and the liberal/progressive agenda that goes with it) being shoved into their games. They are not objecting to gay or black people in videogames, for goodness sake.
Language gains meaning through use not through a fixed definition.

You’ve been given examples of people doing exactly that, and their motivations even ones so charitably given, do not change the effect it has. Yes people frequently object to the mere presence of minorities in games and use the term woke to describe it. Their misunderstanding relative to yours is functionally irrelevant, because someone that goes out of their way like you do to draw a sort of distinction is the distinct minority and more than drowned out.

Do you understand the term prescriptive fallacy? Because that’s what you are committing. You can say ’woke actually means X’ all you want. Language evolves over time not because of the minority elites but because of how words are used by the masses. To claim authoritative definition over such a culturally charged evolving term is facetious. If you truly think that you’re going to win authorship over how woke is applied simply by saying ‘oh it’s not that’ well you’ve already lost. You can attempt to convince yourself that you’re gate keeping its usage, but you saying this means nothing when the majority of people using it are freely and openly using it to object to minorities of any type being featured prominently.

In another thread a poster referred to Alan Wake as Alan Woke… why should your interpretation matter versus the actual pervasive usage and its influence over others and culture.

Your interpretation of the term versus its contextual usage and by those interpreting said usage, functionally, does not matter. Period. It’s an intellectual dead end.
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
What do you think is behind the discrepancy between critic and audience receptions in both movies and games?
A difference of opinion and a higher percentage of LGBTQ writers? Don't know, but not sure that's important to what ruins art. Much like how WW movies get high ratings but I find them very boring. Just because I don't like certain art doesn't mean I can say they've "ruined art" though with their art. It's their art, I don't need to like it.
 

Kacho

Gold Member
Yeah, it sure does.
I take it back. I hate that pile of shit-game. 85 on metacritic? What a bunch of losers, all of them.
Didn't they all get the note saying it was extremely average?? How dare they have another opinion!
Nice meltdown

No one cares if you like bad games. You’re entitled to that.
 

Boss Man

Member
A difference of opinion and a higher percentage of LGBTQ writers? Don't know, but not sure that's important to what ruins art. Much like how WW movies get high ratings but I find them very boring. Just because I don't like certain art doesn't mean I can say they've "ruined art" though with their art. It's their art, I don't need to like it.
It’s not a question about you specifically, but about audiences in general.

Inasmuch as art can be ruined, creating something that people like and then adding one widely-known and overused modern element that everyone hates is a pretty good example of it.

It feels like this to most people:
KEEjxR4.jpeg


Absurd, too overtly political, preachy, cheap, one-dimensional, obsessed, unsophisticated, short-sighted, and ugly.
 
Last edited:

Rat Rage

Member
He's not wrong, but he's still a huge asshole. I can't stand this dude. A good bit of autism, quite a bit of narcissism and waaay to much money - that's a terrible combination.
 

SF Kosmo

Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Elon is the only person uncancellable enough to say something like this and survive
Hard to cancel someone who produces fucking nothing and who doesn't own a single business that makes its profit through commerce. He makes his money from government subsidies and wanton corruption. To cancel him you would need to reform the whole government.
 
Last edited:

Boss Man

Member
Hard to cancel someone who produces fucking nothing and who doesn't own a single business that makes its profit through commerce. He makes his money from government subsidies and wanton corruption. To cancel him you would need to reform the whole government.
The venn diagram of people who think Elon Musk is not an impressive entrepreneur and that men can get pregnant is a circle.🫃
 
Last edited:

Humdinger

Gold Member
Language gains meaning through use not through a fixed definition.

You’ve been given examples of people doing exactly that, and their motivations even ones so charitably given, do not change the effect it has. Yes people frequently object to the mere presence of minorities in games and use the term work to describe it. Their misunderstanding relative to yours is functionally irrelevant, because someone that goes out of their way like you do to draw a sort of distinction is the distinct minority and more than drowned out.

Do you understand the term prescriptive fallacy? Because that’s what you are committing. You can say ’woke actually means X’ all you want. Language evolves over time not because of the minority elites but because of how words are used by the masses. To claim authoritative definition over such a culturally charged evolving term is facetious. If you truly think that you’re going to win authorship over how woke is applied simply by saying ‘oh it’s not that’ well you’ve already lost. You can attempt to convince yourself that you’re gate keeping its usage, but you saying this means nothing when the majority of people using it are freely and openly using it to object to minorities of any type being featured prominently.

In another thread a poster referred to Alan Wake as Alan Woke… why should your interpretation matter versus the actual pervasive usage and its influence over others and culture.

Your interpretation of the term versus its contextual usage and by those interpreting said usage, functionally, does not matter. Period. It’s an intellectual dead end.

Thanks for the lecture on linguistics. /s

If you're trying to convince me that "woke" now means "we don't want no black people or gay people in our videogames," based on a couple of instances where you believe people were using it that way, then you're barking up the wrong tree. I think that's ludicrous.

Stepping back, though, every politically charged word gets misused. Look at how your own side has misused and abused words like sexist, racist, misogyny, hate, fascism, Nazi, homophobic, transphobic, fat phobic, white supremacy, etc. etc.. These words get weaponized and then overplayed, overextended, stretched beyond all measure, misapplied so often that they lose meaning and impact.

Maybe that will happen with the word "woke" eventually. I suppose that's one reason I wanted to point out the misuse/misunderstanding, because that's what leads to the term losing currency (as it has for Nazi, etc.). But if that happens, no big deal. People will just move on to another term. Before "woke" it was "social justice warrior." Before that we talked about "political correctness." It's all the same thing, just different labels. As long as that issue remains, people will find a word to point to it.

That's all from me. I've made my point. Further discussion doesn't seem worthwhile.
 
Last edited:

sachos

Member
Don't you guys have a weird feeling you are trying to be manipulated by a troll farm each time you read a tweet? Either by direct or indirect means.
 

FunkMiller

Gold Member
Hard to cancel someone who produces fucking nothing and who doesn't own a single business that makes its profit through commerce. He makes his money from government subsidies and wanton corruption. To cancel him you would need to reform the whole government.

He also seems to spend most of his time playing Diablo 4... which I guess makes his opinions on what's happening in gaming more valid? :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
This is a non-serious problem for non-serious people, IMO. 🤷‍♂️

If a game is instructing players on the importance of using non-standard pronouns, or trying to convince players to use alternate pro-nouns, you've potentially come across a valid point of concern. A game with pronouns in character bios or the option to set them in a character creator is literally nothing. That's just you wanting to use the standards and trying to enforce your view on others. Have your thoughts, let other people have theirs.

Calling out "fantasy" games in particular is extra ridiculous, you could literally be creating fish people or something and this is somehow a concern. The fact that this is what Musk cares about is just mind blowing to me.
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
Hard to cancel someone who produces fucking nothing
----------
You said:

Someone on the internet just claimed that Elon Musk "produces fucking nothing." Can you provide a full rebuttal, if you believe the claim to be false.

ChatGPT said:​


The claim that Elon Musk "produces nothing" is inaccurate and dismissive of his contributions to industries like automotive, space exploration, energy, and technology. Here is a detailed rebuttal highlighting his tangible impact:

1. Tesla, Inc.

  • Core Contributions:
    • Tesla has revolutionized the electric vehicle (EV) market, shifting global attention to sustainable transportation.
    • Under Musk’s leadership, Tesla produces millions of vehicles annually, including the Model S, Model 3, Model X, and Model Y, as well as energy products like the Powerwall and solar panels.
    • Tesla's Gigafactories are physical facilities that manufacture batteries and EVs on a massive scale.
  • Impact:
    • Tesla's innovations in battery technology, charging infrastructure, and vehicle design have set benchmarks for the automotive industry.
    • The company's production numbers and profitability demonstrate its tangible output.

2. SpaceX

  • Core Contributions:
    • SpaceX manufactures reusable rockets like the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, the Dragon spacecraft, and the Starship system.
    • SpaceX has transported astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) and launched thousands of Starlink satellites.
  • Impact:
    • The company’s reusable rocket technology has significantly reduced the cost of space travel.
    • Starlink, a satellite internet service, provides high-speed connectivity to underserved regions globally.

3. The Boring Company

  • Core Contributions:
    • The Boring Company designs and constructs underground tunnels for transportation solutions, such as the Las Vegas Loop.
    • It also produces consumer goods like the flamethrower that went viral in 2018.
  • Impact:
    • The company aims to solve urban congestion through innovative tunneling technology.

4. Neuralink

  • Core Contributions:
    • Neuralink is developing brain-machine interfaces to help people with disabilities and, eventually, enhance human cognitive abilities.
  • Impact:
    • Though in its early stages, Neuralink has already demonstrated technology with potential applications in medicine and beyond.

5. OpenAI and AI Development

  • While Musk is no longer directly involved with OpenAI, he co-founded the organization and contributed to advancing public awareness and research in artificial intelligence.

6. Advocacy for Renewable Energy and Sustainability

  • Musk has been a vocal advocate for renewable energy, pushing industries and governments toward adopting sustainable technologies.
  • The Tesla Solar Roof and energy storage solutions are physical products that contribute to reducing reliance on fossil fuels.

Counter to "Produces Nothing"

  • Physical Production: Musk’s companies produce millions of cars, rockets, satellites, batteries, and more. These are measurable, tangible outputs.
  • Economic Contributions: His ventures employ tens of thousands of people globally and contribute significantly to their respective industries.
  • Long-Term Vision: Musk's projects aim to address significant global challenges, including climate change, space colonization, and sustainable energy, all of which involve the production of cutting-edge technologies.
While criticisms of Musk’s management style or business practices are valid topics for debate, claiming he “produces nothing” dismisses the immense material contributions and transformative impact of his ventures.
----------
 

Kacho

Gold Member
----------
You said:

Someone on the internet just claimed that Elon Musk "produces fucking nothing." Can you provide a full rebuttal, if you believe the claim to be false.

ChatGPT said:​


The claim that Elon Musk "produces nothing" is inaccurate and dismissive of his contributions to industries like automotive, space exploration, energy, and technology. Here is a detailed rebuttal highlighting his tangible impact:

1. Tesla, Inc.

  • Core Contributions:
    • Tesla has revolutionized the electric vehicle (EV) market, shifting global attention to sustainable transportation.
    • Under Musk’s leadership, Tesla produces millions of vehicles annually, including the Model S, Model 3, Model X, and Model Y, as well as energy products like the Powerwall and solar panels.
    • Tesla's Gigafactories are physical facilities that manufacture batteries and EVs on a massive scale.
  • Impact:
    • Tesla's innovations in battery technology, charging infrastructure, and vehicle design have set benchmarks for the automotive industry.
    • The company's production numbers and profitability demonstrate its tangible output.

2. SpaceX

  • Core Contributions:
    • SpaceX manufactures reusable rockets like the Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy, the Dragon spacecraft, and the Starship system.
    • SpaceX has transported astronauts to the International Space Station (ISS) and launched thousands of Starlink satellites.
  • Impact:
    • The company’s reusable rocket technology has significantly reduced the cost of space travel.
    • Starlink, a satellite internet service, provides high-speed connectivity to underserved regions globally.

3. The Boring Company

  • Core Contributions:
    • The Boring Company designs and constructs underground tunnels for transportation solutions, such as the Las Vegas Loop.
    • It also produces consumer goods like the flamethrower that went viral in 2018.
  • Impact:
    • The company aims to solve urban congestion through innovative tunneling technology.

4. Neuralink

  • Core Contributions:
    • Neuralink is developing brain-machine interfaces to help people with disabilities and, eventually, enhance human cognitive abilities.
  • Impact:
    • Though in its early stages, Neuralink has already demonstrated technology with potential applications in medicine and beyond.

5. OpenAI and AI Development

  • While Musk is no longer directly involved with OpenAI, he co-founded the organization and contributed to advancing public awareness and research in artificial intelligence.

6. Advocacy for Renewable Energy and Sustainability

  • Musk has been a vocal advocate for renewable energy, pushing industries and governments toward adopting sustainable technologies.
  • The Tesla Solar Roof and energy storage solutions are physical products that contribute to reducing reliance on fossil fuels.

Counter to "Produces Nothing"

  • Physical Production: Musk’s companies produce millions of cars, rockets, satellites, batteries, and more. These are measurable, tangible outputs.
  • Economic Contributions: His ventures employ tens of thousands of people globally and contribute significantly to their respective industries.
  • Long-Term Vision: Musk's projects aim to address significant global challenges, including climate change, space colonization, and sustainable energy, all of which involve the production of cutting-edge technologies.
While criticisms of Musk’s management style or business practices are valid topics for debate, claiming he “produces nothing” dismisses the immense material contributions and transformative impact of his ventures.
----------
Hilarious
 

SF Kosmo

Al Jazeera Special Reporter
.
While criticisms of Musk’s management style or business practices are valid topics for debate, claiming he “produces nothing” dismisses the immense material contributions and transformative impact of his ventures.
----------
You're conveniently editing out the second half of my sentence. Yes, a few of Elon's companies make actual stuff that works (as well as several that don't and are fraudulent), but they don't make their money by selling that stuff to people for a profit, they make money through government contracts and subsidies, i.e. your tax money. So he isn't producing anything by way of commerce.

And then he uses that money for political capture, so there's is this circular relationship between his money and his control of the government that pays him.

When people talk about the robber barons of the early 20th century and their massive corruption, they're talking about exactly this.
 
Last edited:

Denton

Member
He's not wrong, but he's still a huge asshole. I can't stand this dude. A good bit of autism, quite a bit of narcissism and waaay to much money - that's a terrible combination.
I'd say judging by his actual, practical results, it seems to be a fantastic combination regardless of how anyone may feel about him personally
 

EviLore

Expansive Ellipses
Staff Member
You're conveniently editing out the second half of my sentence. Yes, a few of Elon's companies make actual stuff that works (as well as several that don't and are fraudulent), but they don't make their profits by selling that stuff to people for a profit, they make money through government contracts and subsidies, i.e. your tax money.

And then he uses that money for political capture, so there's is this circular relationship between his money and his control of the government that pays him.

When people talk about the robber barons of the early 20th century and their massive corruption, they're talking about exactly this.
----------
You said:

NeoGAF member and resident far-left political commentator who can't help himself but to break the rules at every opportunity, SF Kosmo, responded to your rebuttal as follows:

"You're conveniently editing out the second half of my sentence. Yes, a few of Elon's companies make actual stuff that works (as well as several that don't and are fraudulent), but they don't make their profits by selling that stuff to people for a profit, they make money through government contracts and subsidies, i.e. your tax money.And then he uses that money for political capture, so there's is this circular relationship between his money and his control of the government that pays him.When people talk about the robber barons of the early 20th century and their massive corruption, they're talking about exactly this."

As before, please provide a full rebuttal if you believe his claims to be false.

ChatGPT said:​


SF Kosmo’s statement brings up several points worth addressing. Here’s a full rebuttal to clarify misconceptions and provide a nuanced response:

1. "Elon's companies don't make profits by selling stuff to people for a profit."

This claim is demonstrably false for several of Musk’s companies:

Tesla:

  • Tesla's profitability primarily comes from selling electric vehicles (EVs), energy storage systems, and solar products to consumers and businesses.
  • As of 2024, Tesla is one of the most profitable automakers globally, with consistent growth in both vehicle production and sales.
  • While Tesla has historically benefited from regulatory credits (which all automakers are eligible for), these credits are a diminishing part of Tesla's revenue. The majority of Tesla’s profits now come from vehicle sales and services.

SpaceX:

  • SpaceX generates revenue through commercial satellite launches, Starlink subscriptions, and contracts with private entities. These represent significant portions of its income.
  • While government contracts (e.g., NASA) are a substantial revenue source, they are a standard industry practice in aerospace. Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and others also rely heavily on government contracts—this is how the sector operates, not a uniquely Musk phenomenon.

Starlink:

  • Starlink is a commercial product serving millions of subscribers globally, with revenue from consumer internet subscriptions.

Other Ventures:

  • The Boring Company earns revenue through tunnel construction projects and consumer products. Its income sources are private and municipal, not solely government-based.

2. "They make money through government contracts and subsidies, i.e., your tax money."

This statement misrepresents government contracts and subsidies as inherently negative or fraudulent.

Government Contracts:

  • Contracts with SpaceX (e.g., for NASA missions or military satellite launches) are earned competitively through bidding processes. SpaceX’s cost-effective technologies have saved taxpayers billions compared to traditional aerospace providers.
  • Government contracts are not handouts but payments for services rendered. SpaceX, for example, successfully performs critical tasks like ferrying astronauts to the ISS—tasks previously outsourced at much higher costs to Russia.

Subsidies and Incentives:

  • Subsidies for Tesla have included tax incentives for EV buyers, which are offered to all automakers producing EVs—not just Tesla. Tesla was simply better positioned to capitalize on them early.
  • Tesla no longer qualifies for many subsidies because it has surpassed production caps, a sign of its success in the private market.
  • EV subsidies align with national priorities like reducing greenhouse gas emissions, meaning their intent is to foster public benefit, not to favor a specific company.

Comparison to Competitors:

  • Government support for SpaceX and Tesla is no different than subsidies received by legacy automakers, oil companies, and traditional aerospace firms, which have long benefited from substantial taxpayer support.
  • Boeing, for instance, has received far more in government funding than SpaceX. Why single out Musk for criticism when this is industry standard?

3. "He uses that money for political capture."

The accusation of “political capture” lacks substantial evidence:

Elon Musk’s Political Influence:

  • Musk has publicly expressed political views, sometimes controversially, but this is not unique among billionaires or corporate leaders.
  • The accusation implies improper conduct, yet there is no concrete evidence Musk is uniquely corrupt or uses his money in ways distinct from other major business leaders lobbying for their interests.

Reality of Lobbying:

  • Lobbying for favorable policies is standard for any major industry player. Musk’s lobbying efforts for renewable energy, space exploration funding, or EV subsidies align with broader societal goals, such as combating climate change or advancing technology.
  • Unlike industries like Big Oil or Big Pharma, which have a history of lobbying to perpetuate environmental harm or exploitative practices, Musk’s advocacy supports forward-looking technologies.

4. "This is like the robber barons of the early 20th century."

This analogy is flawed in several respects:

Robber Barons vs. Musk:

  • Early 20th-century robber barons (e.g., Rockefeller, Carnegie, Vanderbilt) exploited monopolistic practices, crushed competition through unethical means, and amassed wealth by hoarding resources or exploiting labor.
  • Musk’s companies compete in highly regulated and competitive markets. Tesla broke into an entrenched automotive industry dominated by giants like GM, Ford, and Toyota. SpaceX disrupted traditional aerospace dominated by Boeing and Lockheed Martin.
  • Musk’s businesses focus on innovation and efficiency, not monopolistic control or worker exploitation.

Public vs. Private Benefit:

  • The robber barons often operated without regard for public benefit. In contrast, Musk’s ventures (EVs, renewable energy, space exploration, internet access) align with global challenges and public good.

5. Fraud Allegations

  • Claims of fraud, often leveled at Tesla and SpaceX by detractors, have not held up in court or regulatory investigations.
  • Tesla’s delivery delays or overambitious timelines reflect growing pains typical of innovative companies, not systematic fraud.
  • SpaceX’s consistent delivery of services and technological milestones (e.g., reusability) disproves fraud allegations.

In Summary:

  • Musk’s companies are innovative producers of tangible products that align with global priorities (e.g., sustainability, space exploration).
  • Government contracts and subsidies are standard in the industries where his companies operate and are not inherently corrupt or unique to Musk.
  • Allegations of "political capture" and comparisons to robber barons are speculative and ignore the competitive, transformative nature of Musk’s contributions to technology and society.
While Musk is a polarizing figure and open to fair criticism, the narrative presented by SF Kosmo overgeneralizes, ignores context, and conflates standard industry practices with wrongdoing.
----------
 

TheTurboFD

Member
You're conveniently editing out the second half of my sentence. Yes, a few of Elon's companies make actual stuff that works (as well as several that don't and are fraudulent), but they don't make their profits by selling that stuff to people for a profit, they make money through government contracts and subsidies, i.e. your tax money.

And then he uses that money for political capture, so there's is this circular relationship between his money and his control of the government that pays him.

When people talk about the robber barons of the early 20th century and their massive corruption, they're talking about exactly this.
Yea but no one cares about the Oligarchy that's forming, they care he plays Diablo and hates "Woke".
 

Bernardougf

Member
He is right .. but in the end its a personal choice... I wont touch any game wich I consider to have woke elements ... everyone can make their choices.. and meanwhile a lot of asian developers are LoLing their way back to the top.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom