Elon Musk: Tech Genius! Green Warrior! Biz King! Good Oligarch?

[luke wilson]

Re: Elon Musk

Goodness gracious, I've never heard of this guy before. He seems pretty remarkable. One cant underestimate his level of achievements. They are pretty self evident if you ask me.

However, one also cant argue against some of the red flags. I don't think you can do a direct comparison with Putin. For one, Putin is a statesman and Musk operates in a profit driven business environment. Without profit and being able to make money, his businesses and research into new technology would not even be possible. Also Musk operates in the West and has to align with the predominant ideology at least regarding the core tenets... So you cant expect him to come out and say radical things that threaten the survival of the pre-eminent institutions. Putin is a leader of a whole major nation, which he has managed to unite behind him, he can call upon way more resources and capabilities than a mere business owner and/or inventor. These 2 people operate in different spheres and face different obstacles.

Putin's great, no doubt... But Putin won't be coming up with next generation technology... Looks like it's people like Musk who do that.

 

[BHelmet]

Re: Elon Musk

I don't consider Musk a villain - just more along the lines of a news anchor reading his lines or an actor on the big stage playing a scripted part. Here are some more aspects and questions about his supposed bio/history:

1. At age 24, right out of college, Musk invested $28,000 of his dad's money in a company called Zip2. It is said this company developed an internet city guide for newspapers then going online in 1995. It is difficult if not impossible to start a company with $28,000, and then sell it four years later for $341 million to Compaq. Zip2 “provided online publishing for media companies” and had a contract with the New York Times, but the NYT had been computerized since 1976 and online since 1981. By 1995 it would have already had all the “customized portals” it needed. Compaq also had no use for internet city guides and online publishing portals in 1999, so this sale looks very fishy. C,mon - is an online database which is not patentable or really unique worth 340 mil to a tech company?

2. The Zip2 story seems told to explain the genesis of Musk's fortune. The same could be said for Musk's alleged involvement with Paypal. At age 28 Musk founded another company, using 10 million from his 22 million profit from selling Zip2. This company, X.com, immediately (in one year) merged with Confinity, which contained Paypal. So Musk had absolutely nothing to do with founding Paypal, and even according to the mainstream story was only used for his money. He came in on the merger and was only 28 and was made CEO - why?! He was also later ousted - also why? He left the merger just three years later with $165 million. (three-year ROI of 1500%). With big early investors like Deutsche Bank and Nokia, why would Confinity allow Musk to waltz in and soak up a large part of the profits? With money from a source like Deutsche Bank, why did they need Musk's measly 10 million anyway? Don't forget the Snowden documents reveal a close connection between Paypal and the NSA.

3.The valuation of SpaceX is also questionable. According to the mainstream story, Musk invested 100 million. Founders Fund invested another 20 million. The first launch was estimated by Musk to happen in 2003, just 15 months after the company started (which is pretty absurd), but there was still no launch in early 2012, nine years later. Despite that, the value of the company in early 2012 was said to have ballooned to 1.3 billion. Based on what? After the alleged launch in May of 2012, the company's value ballooned again, to 2.4 billion. But SpaceX is a private company, the only profit for which is made in supplying the International Space Station. Why would NASA hire a private company to do that? NASA didn't put the ISS into semi-permanent orbit without a way to supply the astronauts with food, right? Weren't they getting food before 2012? Yes. So why should the federal government give huge subsidies to a private company to form, so that this company could do what NASA was already doing? Maybe this is why Musk is pro-Thatcher who was all about privatization. (selling public assets for pennies on the dollar to your financial cronies who then end up charging the public more for the same job)

Lastly is the way these events are spun and glossed by the media - like he was the genius founding creator dude behind Paypal and Tesla - which he wasn't.

Again, I don't see Musk as a mastermind villain, but more of a front-man for an agenda. I think you have to kind of read between the lines of his story and ask if it seems real or like a magical fairy tale.

Ok I am pretty much done wasting time on this guy. Over and out.

 

[luke wilson]

Re: Elon Musk

Thanks BHelmet. Very useful info.

In your last post, you asked some questions as you went along... what do you think the answers are?

Compaq also had no use for internet city guides and online publishing portals in 1999, so this sale looks very fishy. C,mon - is an online database which is not patentable or really unique worth 340 mil to a tech company?

Well Compaq paid the money... so surely they thought it was worth that much? How else would you explain it?

According to this guy... lots of big tech companies were taking risks buying start ups for ridiculous money back then (and I believe they still do today)... some of which later turn out to be junk...

_https://www.quora.com/Given-that-Elon-Musks-first-company-Zip2-was-shut-down-by-Compaq-without-ever-earning-a-profit-would-that-be-considered-either-a-lucky-dot-com-era-sale-or-a-failure

Elon was one of those lucky dot com era guys -- just like Mark Cuban who sold a company for a lot of money that was worthless. Yahoo paid $6 billion for Mark Cuban's company and shut it down worthless a few years later. Microsoft did the same spending $6 billion for aquantive and then also shut it down. These entrepreneurs were lucky and the purchasers not smart.

So Musk had absolutely nothing to do with founding Paypal, and even according to the mainstream story was only used for his money.

Well... according to the interwebs, paypal was founded in 1998 as confinity which would pre-date Musk.

_https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PayPal

PayPal was established in December 1998 as Confinity,[12] a company that developed security software for handheld devices[13] founded by Max Levchin, Peter Thiel, Luke Nosek and Ken Howery.[12][14] PayPal was developed and launched as a money transfer service at Confinity in 1999, funded by John Malloy from BlueRun Ventures.

In March 2000, Confinity merged with X.com, an online banking company founded by Elon Musk.[17] Musk was optimistic about the future success of the money transfer business Confinity was developing.[18] Musk and then-president and CEO of X.com, Bill Harris, disagreed on this point and Harris left the company in May 2000.[18] In October of that year, Musk made the decision that X.com would terminate its other Internet banking operations and focus on the PayPal money service.[19] The X.com company was then renamed PayPal in 2001,[20] and expanded rapidly throughout the year until company executives decided to take PayPal public in 2002.[14][21] as listed under the ticker PYPL at $13 per share and ended up generating over $61 million.

Also see the paypal mafia

_https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PayPal_Mafia

"PayPal Mafia" is a term used to indicate a group of former PayPal employees and founders who have since founded and developed additional technology companies[1] such as Tesla Motors, LinkedIn, Matterport, Palantir Technologies, SpaceX, YouTube, Yelp, and Yammer.[2] Most of the members attended Stanford University or University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign at some point in their studies. Several also attended the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy during high school. Three members, Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, and Reid Hoffman, have become billionaires.

So.... yeah... is Musk taking credit for being the originator of paypal? Is this what you are saying? It looks like he was heavily involved at one point with the company.

He came in on the merger and was only 28 and was made CEO - why?! He was also later ousted - also why? He left the merger just three years later with $165 million. (three-year ROI of 1500%). With big early investors like Deutsche Bank and Nokia, why would Confinity allow Musk to waltz in and soak up a large part of the profits?

Is there a rule against having a 28 year old CEO? Don't lots of these tech company start ups have young leaderships especially back then when they were popping up all over the place? Why would they allow him to waltz in and soak up a large amount of the profits?? Maybe because he had something they wanted?? Like X.Com or maybe some type of expertise or something?

The valuation of SpaceX is also questionable.

The valuation of many things are questionable... from companies to residential properties... financial markets are casinos where banks and investors look to profit from gambling...

Why would NASA hire a private company to do that?... So why should the federal government give huge subsidies to a private company to form, so that this company could do what NASA was already doing?

Why would any government department hire any private company to do anything for it? It happens all the time. Why would NASA be different? Another example.... from the military... why would they pay huge subsidies to private military contractors when they themselves have all the capabilities to do what the contractors can do?

I don't know why... but... my point is that it can and does happen in various arenas across the government... and not only in the US!

Finally,

Again, I don't see Musk as a mastermind villain, but more of a front-man for an agenda.

What's the agenda? I know it can only be speculative at this point in time but what do you think it is? Also who is he 'fronting' for?

Closing

You have said many interesting and critical things about Musk + haven't fallen for the hero/saviour worship. I personally had never heard of this guy before today but your posts piqued my interest. However.... despite what to me appears like knowing your stuff about this guy you seemed to stop mid-story i.e. for me, it's not conclusive that he is anything other than a dude who rolled 6's many times over. I'm sure you've heard the story about the infinite number of monkeys (or something like that) in a room each rolling dices... eventually you'll get one or even more than one that roll 6's consecutively many times over. Nothing special about those monkeys that hit 6's many times over... it was almost inevitable really. To bring it to the real world... if you have so many people trying to take advantage of the situation during the dot com era, you'll get at least one who gets the 6's many times over.... is Musk not such a guy? Why do we have to put special meaning to it... like he is a saviour or some villain or involved in some grand as of yet undetermined scheme.... he's just a dude rolling dices and hitting 6's + has an effective marketing team to sell his own brand.

Remember.... it's innocent until proven guilty... not the other way around. ;) Finish the story... come out with some conclusive stuff. Between the lines as you say, yeah, maybe there might be something there... maybe not. Who knows? More evidence required...

PS: It's not me attacking or disagreeing with what you are saying. :)

 

[Scottie]

Re: Elon Musk

I'm leaning towards "not so bright frontman + CIA venture capital"...

And anyway, for some reason which totally perplexes me, people like Steve Jobs and Elon Musk are always viewed as the Brilliant Genius behind every product their company makes. The reality is usually far from that.

The SpaceX rocket didn't land vertically because Musk did all the work, and the iPod didn't play music because Jobs designed it himself. The ingenuity in any of these things doesn't come from the CEO of the company. Even "vision" is usually stolen from someone else.

The genius comes from the people who work very long hours for not enough money. Then their rocket lands, and all they all start chanting, "USA! USA!" while their glorious CEO goes on TV and everybody swoons over how awesome he is.

Gimme a break...

I'll take Putin over those clowns any day, because what Putin does is literally changing the world and making it a better place in all the ways that actually count. If Musk wants to go live on Mars, let him, I say!

One of these days, humanity must learn that glorifying an image of someone is not the same as admiring a real man/woman for their real accomplishments that actually benefit other human beings on the planet. And by "real accomplishments", I'm talking about making the world a better place in terms of decreasing human suffering, decreasing the effects of psychopathy on the population, ending false flag terrorism, and getting us OUT of this incessant "must have more/cooler stuff" cycle that tortures and then kills our very souls.

And that's all I have to say about that!

 

[Pierre]

Re: Elon Musk

he's just a dude rolling dices and hitting 6's

Luck is certainly involved and usually underrated in successful entrepreneurship, that's the proverbial 'right place at the right time', which is even more critical in emerging markets/technologies where things change fast.

This being said, it seems unlikely to me that luck is the only factor explaining the recurring pattern one can notice when observing Musk career over the past 20 years.

One crucial aspect of successful entrepreneurship is the network (banks, venture capital funds, stock exchanges, politicians, large companies, research institutions, etc.) and 'support' from those entities doesn't allow much space for luck or benevolence.

 

[luke wilson]

Re: Elon Musk

he's just a dude rolling dices and hitting 6's

Luck is certainly involved and usually underrated in successful entrepreneurship, that's the proverbial 'right place at the right time', which is even more critical in emerging markets/technologies where things change fast.

This being said, it seems unlikely to me that luck is the only factor explaining the recurring pattern one can notice when observing Musk career over the past 20 years.

I was going to touch upon this but my post was getting quite long!

New POST! :D

Yeah, agreed with what you said! However, my thoughts, thinking as it would be on the ground, being Musk and all. So yeah all these stuff is happening around him... what does it mean? It means he is meeting people and amongst those people would be movers and shakers.... not only in the tech business but maybe even in other arenas. Also he is meeting people who have already 'made it' and others who 'will make it'... In addition, he's in an information highway... a lot of stuff is being said in the circles he is rolling in. Again... many other people are in this same situation as him but he is making choices and the particular choices he is making are leading him down a certain path where he meets more people, gets other info... all in a permutation that is unique to him for being in the situation he finds himself in + also coming from where he was prior. Over time, looking back... we see what we see today.

Looking from outside in, we are left to explain how did this happen? Is he a genius? Maybe... well... he isn't stupid, that's for sure. But also Scottie said that a person in his situation doesn't make themselves... he has propelled himself using the work of others. How can it be any other way? Again, would he have met some CIA/NSA types along the way? Well... thinking about it the other way.... wouldn't the CIA/NSA types be curious about this guy? So yes... most definitely he has rubbed shoulders with these types whether he knows it or he doesn't. Would he have done work for these types? Well, why not? All it takes is for them to go to him, give his company a job, lay out a contract, he signs and voila! he's done some stuff for them.

However, does any of that make him some sort of saviour/villain or some schmuck being used for some as of yet undetermined agenda? What agenda is this? The only thing I can think of is he (or maybe more accurately, his companies) makes tech that the US gov uses to rein terror on the rest of us. For sure it isn't anything like some grandmaster plan agenda... there would be many people and companies involved in feeding the beast in many different ways.

With his other private interests (SpaceX, Tesla etc).... maybe the guy is just a dreamer... + what he does is/was a niche market and he moved in on it and he's just doing it better than anyone else in the private sphere... if it wasn't Musk, it would be someone else (we'd be having a thread about Bob instead!). Why any of this would make him a villain/saviour/schmuck I have no idea... he's just a guy rolling 6s. Not pure luck... but a unique combination of various factors that have coalesced into what we are witnessing.

Plus anyways.... this guy won't even succeed in actually achieving his dreams... That much is pretty much guaranteed. Why? This isn't a sci-fi movie... it's the real world.

 

[BHelmet]

Re: Elon Musk

Well, I said I was done with this but I guess I am not. I feel like you deserve a reply.

In your last post, you asked some questions as you went along... what do you think the answers are?

I can't say for sure what any of the answers are. It is kind of like the matrix or alien agenda. Can anybody absolutely present irrefutable proof? Not really. Or the 4d STS/3D thing. Can I point to the man behind the curtain and say "There he is! See?" No, I can just see the shadows of actions and events and the players in the game. What I CAN do is analyze the data; do a gut check; search my feelings; refer to my experience and then make a best-guess. But do I absolutely know for sure? Not really. I am saying things to hopefully help balance the equation and add to the information field. Ultimately I am just speaking for myself and letting that be known. When 99% of the media spin and social gloss on a guy is positive goo-goo gaga, what a freaking genius, miracle-man it makes me pause and reflect.

Well Compaq paid the money... so surely they thought it was worth that much? How else would you explain it?

The explanation becomes conspiratorial, doesn't it? Remember, according to the C's we (Americans) are the most heavily propagandized people on the planet.

So Musk had absolutely nothing to do with founding Paypal, and even according to the mainstream story was only used for his money.

Right - that is what I was saying. But if you look up a random search on the web he generally gets credit for creating Paypal. Total unfounded hype, in other words.

[quote author=luke wilson]
Is there a rule against having a 28 year old CEO? Don't lots of these tech company start ups have young leaderships especially back then when they were popping up all over the place? Why would they allow him to waltz in and soak up a large amount of the profits?? Maybe because he had something they wanted?? Like X.Com or maybe some type of expertise or something?[/quote]

Certainly no rule against a 28 year old CEO.

[quote author=luke wilson]
The valuation of many things are questionable... from companies to residential properties... financial markets are casinos where banks and investors look to profit from gambling...[/quote]

In casinos the house always wins. The gamblers ultimately lose. The game is, in essence, rigged.

[quote author=luke wilson]
Why would any government department hire any private company to do anything for it? It happens all the time. Why would NASA be different? Another example.... from the military... why would they pay huge subsidies to private military contractors when they themselves have all the capabilities to do what the contractors can do?[/quote]

Consider the idea that there is a lot of payola involved. It doesn't make logical sense to make someone else rich and cost yourself more unless there is some backdoor payout arrangement in which the public gets scammed and the psychopaths in positions of power make out like bandits. This also goes on all the time. Somebody made a bundle off those 350.00 toilet seats and I would bet there was a kick-back to the government officials who ordered them.

[quote author=luke wilson]
What's the agenda? I know it can only be speculative at this point in time but what do you think it is? Also who is he 'fronting' for?
[/quote]

As for rolling sixes, I am kind of cynical, I admit it. Are George Soros and Warren Buffet just lucky and/or only astute? Like many have said: in politics and business, nothing ever happens by accident. How long has the NSA been in business? 1952? How many sleazy big-money deals have we witnessed since WWII? Arms deals, drug deals, bank bail-outs. Phony wars to appropriate riches for corporations by impoverishing whole nations. Rigged commodities markets, LIBOR, the list goes on and on. Corruption is rampant.

I guess I am speculating Musk is the feel-good, American-dream-is-alive-and-well, pseudo socially conscious "Hope is not Dead" Icon for the young and gullible who wish his squeaky-clean story is true. Oh, and "You CAN make a positive difference and be wildly successful/the system still works" Icon who diverts attention from worldly problems to boldly go where no mind has gone before.

Me? I am a cynical old fart "hater". LOL!!

[quote author=luke wilson]
Remember.... it's innocent until proven guilty... not the other way around. ;) Finish the story... come out with some conclusive stuff. Between the lines as you say, yeah, maybe there might be something there... maybe not. Who knows? More evidence required...PS: It's not me attacking or disagreeing with what you are saying. :)
[/quote]
No offense taken. And that is one of the key defense mechanisms of the psychopaths - plausible deniability - we will probably never have the concrete evidence to prove anything given how much happens behind closed doors and out of view.

 

[whitecoast]

Re: Elon Musk

There really seems to be an optimistic futurism in vogue in many circles of STEM academia and industry, which I think is exemplified by Elon Musk. From accounts it's quite clear he is a man with a mission and tons of insight and energy to help bring things to fruition.

I have a hypothesis about what all this means cryptogeographically. Let's start with SpaceX. If you look at the last explosion in genuine practical exploration in our civilization, it was the age of exploration in Europe. This was in part spurred by the expansion of the Ottoman empire cutting off trade to the orient, where valuable spices, silk, porcelain, and other valuables were produced. Europeans needed an alternative trade route.

I see a similar outcome for the West if this thing called Greater Eurasia takes off as an economic, military, and social bloc. It will have most of the population and most of the resources like fossil fuels and rare earth metals, which are essential for electronics and other high-end technologies. If all of these resources are pooled into enriching the Eurasian corporations and elites, those based out West will be cut off from competing in these industries, leading to technological and military lag. The science of geopolitics in the Anglosphere since the 1800's has pivoted entirely around spreading influence into Eurasia to strangle the indigenous powers there, including the Germanic, Slavic, and Chinese spheres. If the "big island" becomes its own master, the outskirts like Britain, North and Latin America, Australia, and Japan will be relegated to historic irrelevance.

The solution for the West, as it was for Europe in the early Renaissance, is to expand the resource gathering playing board. Only this time the New World is Outer Space. The reason Google-Alphabet is interested in space mining is because a single asteroid can potentially contain trillions of dollars worth of priceless metals. This reduces reliance on military ventures in mineral rich countries like Afghanistan or those watched by AFRICOM. Solar power harvested either in deserts on earth or from satellites in orbit could produce enough energy to buy independence from fossil fuel-rich nations like Russia, Iran, or the OPEC bloc. Advancement in AIs reduces reliance on people who require a lot of care and support in order to be workers, etc.

It's easy to interpret this all cynically - the West wants to control all the earth, but since they can't they want to just expand so they no longer feel the need to. On one hand, it would be nice for resource wars to be obsolete; on the other hand wars often are not hatched for economic reasons but rather for psychosocial and ponerogenic reasons.

Furthermore, it also seems like nature has other plans for the human race, with the up-tick in geological and meteorological catastrophes. Perhaps if humans were enlightened enough to handle the technology and infrastructure required for space colonization and extraction, nature would allow it. But as it stands, I am pessimistic about whether these pipe dreams will come about in the current social and political environment.

 

[axj]

Re: Elon Musk

I'm leaning towards "not so bright frontman + CIA venture capital"...

And anyway, for some reason which totally perplexes me, people like Steve Jobs and Elon Musk are always viewed as the Brilliant Genius behind every product their company makes. The reality is usually far from that.

The SpaceX rocket didn't land vertically because Musk did all the work, and the iPod didn't play music because Jobs designed it himself. The ingenuity in any of these things doesn't come from the CEO of the company. Even "vision" is usually stolen from someone else.

The focus on Musk is actually their marketing method, which saves especially Tesla millions of dollars. It has been noted that their success was achieved without the usual advertising budgets, but by focusing on viral marketing, word of mouth and free press.

Also, I don't think that many people actually think that Musk "does it all alone", although he is a workaholic and actually does hands-on work as an engineer.

The decision to create a private rocket company and the vision that it is possible to make going into space much cheaper is pretty much his doing, for which he deserves credit. It was, of course, heavily funded with government money through NASA etc.

Leaving aside the fact that any sort CIA connections are pure speculation, even if it were true doesn't mean that he has some kind of nefarious agenda. Using the connections that are available for the benefit of his goal is just as possible. Putin's KGB past hasn't hurt him either and instead probably provided him with some good tools and training.

I don't see any need to "pick" either Musk or Putin. Both are working in completely different fields, as you said yourself, and Putin's is certainly more important.

 

[BHelmet]

Re: Elon Musk

A little anecdote on so-called "optimistic futurism".

I remember going to Disneyland back in the 50's when I was a kid. In Tomorrowland (yeah right) there was an exhibit called "The House of the Future". During the pre-recorded blabbering it was said "The biggest problem mankind will face in 50 years will be what to do with all his spare time!!!"

Yup.

And I propose that the optimistic futurism of today is just another absurd Disney fantasy of yesteryear.

BTW, there was another weird ride in Tomorrowland. The ride went along and supposedly you were shrinking smaller and smaller down to a molecule and at the very end of the ride, you looked up and saw a big eye ball looking through a microscope at you.

It was called "Adventure Through Inner Space".

Both rides made by: (drumroll) ........ MONSANTO.

I kid you not.

(anybody else remember?)

The big difference between the 50's and today is basically that the BS was just so much easier to spot and more laughable in the 50's. It is so slick and more compelling these days.

But.... it is still bs

see, the fundamental issue is: the same guys are running the show today that were running it back then.

and i am sure it is their plan to be running things in another 50 too.

Just my opinion.

P.S. the hysterically dorky Monsanto Propaganda Theme Song runs from somewhere around 8:00/8:45 to 10:00 or so.

Lyrics: "Miracles from molecules are dawning every day. Discoveries for happiness in a fabulous array. A never-ending search is on by men who dare and plan. Making modern miracles from molecules for man. " etc

http://<iframe width="560" height="...9o" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[luke wilson]

Re: Elon Musk

Yeah, are we not meant to be having flying cars now and AIs for housemaids? Lol. Did Utopia come and go?

Same old story, same old lines.... Just different faces telling them.

For sure these are all pipe dreams, only because there is way more factors in play that they don't even acknowledge. And you know... When they say 'we' or 'humanity' will be in some form of utopia at some designated point in the future (e.g. 50 years)... Who is the 'we' and who is this Humanity.. Does it include the Palestinians or the starving kids in Africa? Hmmm....

And yeah, Bhelmet, Musk fits the bill of the icon who diverts from worldly problems. His story, the way it's told is sort of hypnotic.

 

[Scottie]

Re: Elon Musk

Leaving aside the fact that any sort CIA connections are pure speculation, even if it were true doesn't mean that he has some kind of nefarious agenda. Using the connections that are available for the benefit of his goal is just as possible. Putin's KGB past hasn't hurt him either and instead probably provided him with some good tools and training.

I don't see any need to "pick" either Musk or Putin. Both are working in completely different fields, as you said yourself, and Putin's is certainly more important.

My point is mainly that we're having an entire discussion here where some are seemingly saying that people like Musk are "interesting" or "great" or whatever, and yet in the grand scheme of things, what does it matter? Electric cars and fancy rockets do nothing to stop the very real earth changes, political insanity, etc. that currently threaten everybody on the planet.

In that broader sense, I personally think it's necessary to "choose" people like Putin over people like Musk in the sense that what we devote our time, energy, and thoughts towards may have a much larger effect than we think.

IOW, the world seems to "need" a Jobs or Musk to fawn over, when they'd do themselves and everyone else a much bigger favor by talking about people effecting real change, like Putin.

In still other words, people like Musk are a distraction right now, and I don't think that's an accident.

 

[Tigersoap]

Re: Elon Musk

To be frank, I had never heard about Elon Musk before. I just saw the thread title but I did not check it out.
I really thought it was a brand name for a deodorant, until I saw his biography in a book shop.

I fail to really understand what the fuss is all about but perhaps I should look a bit deeper into what he does.
Thus said, I agree with Scottie that for whatever Elon Musk is doing, other things are way more important at the moment.

 

[Yupo]

Re: Elon Musk

I really thought it was a brand name for a deodorant

That's good and understandable! I first heard of this guy on Quora, not that long ago. Lots of people asking questions about him there.

 

[Scottie]

Re: Elon Musk

To be frank, I had never heard about Elon Musk before. I just saw the thread title but I did not check it out.
I really thought it was a brand name for a deodorant, until I saw his biography in a book shop.

And who can blame you? That's what it sounds like!