[gchokov]

The guy behind the article is bashing on Musk on constant basis. What a biased, one sided, bullshit article. You can also check his also rantings. I guess.. he wanted to work for Musk, but was never able to? Why the hate?

He even deleted my comments when trying to argue on some of his statements. Lol.

[BriggyDwiggs42]

I didn’t think the article really had any issues. I actually thought it was pretty well-written.

[blueredmodern]

Yeah, it seemed pretty balanced and well thought out:

"Ploy for credibility, retreating even deeper into fantasy, pretense of reality, pure fantasy, contained within a world of fantasy, retreating into misinformation-fuelled fantasy world, runaway ego, less palatable, self-soothing fantasy bubble, fake statistics, blown deadlines, litany of bullshit, chronic inability, unprecedented publish delusion or deception, having drawn a poor hand, financial-cognitive nightmare, it’s hard to imagine anyone seriously believing that a night of delusional Disney Adult cringe, too childish to call a fraud, Musk’s increasingly-degenerate gambling run is slouching toward one last big coinflip"

[egeozcan]

Facts sprinkled with personal interpretation, a normal, albeit not an extraordinary, blog post?

I admire some of the things Elon Musk has made happen, but the guy has obvious ego issues and acts often like a villain from a child superhero movie. If a blog post is "biased, one sided, bullshit" for calling this behavior and all the accompanying unkept promises, what they are, together with some creative words and interpretation, why do we have blog posts in the first place?

[BriggyDwiggs42]

Yeah well-written unironically

[natch]

It's not that bad. He's one of the rare people criticizing Musk while not exhibiting the delusion that Musk's predictions are "promises." So he avoids some of the more clueless mistakes although he still does manage to miss that the point of the event was just the unveiling of a product (the robo taxi), not its final delivery.

[arp242]

"This critique of X is invalid because it's from someone who critiques X"

This is of course completely fallacious non-logic. Of course criticism comes from people critical of a thing.

Is there a name for this? I've seen this quite regularly, especially on Musk and Trump.

[financetechbro]

Shall we coin it as the “Trusk Fallacy” perhaps?