[TrackerFF]

One important part of the story is in the very beginning: The founder’s motivation. To become wealthy.

You see this in the startup world a lot. Founders with 5+ failed startups in different sectors, because said founder picked the fields mainly by doing some market analysis. Not domain expertise.

There’s then a big mismatch between what the founder thinks is possible, and what the domain expert thinks is possible.

The defense is of course that some people can do that - Musk did it, so why not?

Another defense is that blindingly naïve optimism is sometimes needed to move the needle, as the concept “that can’t be done” simply doesn’t exist to some people.

I’ve sat through some pitches like that, where it is very obvious that the founder/CEO has limited knowledge and expertise in what they’re pitching, where the product is limited, but their enthusiasm is off the charts.

EDIT: The very latest happened only a couple of weeks ago. A startup had reached out to my employer as they’re developing a platform in our domain. Higher ups liked what they’d seen, enough to arrange a real meeting.

Startup is only 3 months old, and the moment I opened the platform I recognized a vibecoded (likely using clause) platform identical to almost all other launched on a daily basis.

So I probed a bit about data sources, serious questions regarding security, etc. but the guy was pretty fluent in consultant (turns out he had worked as a management consultant before launching), and the CTO was just nodding along.

In the end they wanted our data, and promised the moon on features - but as mentioned, I’m sure the whole product was entirely vibecoded.

[pseudohadamard]

> The founder’s motivation. To become wealthy.

Or, if they're an engineer, to design cool products while not having the faintest idea of how to run a business and manage people. Ran into far more of those than get-rich-quick types.

Having said that, I was also lucky enough to work for a company where the founder had a science degree but not in the field he was currently working in, was really good at sales, and recognised that others knew a lot more about the field than he did and was willing to listen to them. One of the lead tech guys could literally say to him "this is a stupid idea" and the idea would get changed. They muddled along for some years until he found the right people to run things, and have been doing pretty well ever since. Last I checked it was still a good place to work for.

[aryehof]

> pretty fluent in consultant

Thanks, gave me a chuckle. One to remember.

[thih9]

> they wanted our data, and promised the moon on features

I know a company that fits this so well that I almost want to check the names. It's older than 3 months though.

[kekqqq]

I also know a company that fits this very well. I wonder how many such companies are out there.

[thih9]

In a one electron universe[1] it might actually be the same company (with a very productive sales team).

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-electron_universe

[ErroneousBosh]

> Founders with 5+ failed startups in different sectors, because said founder picked the fields mainly by doing some market analysis. Not domain expertise.

You mean the moment when someone says "It's Facebook but for dogs! That should be easy, right? I had the idea, that's the hard bit, you just need to write it!"

[search_facility]

... Today its "Claude just needs to write it" and the "hard part" is the prompt :)

[overgard]

Musk strikes me as a guy that keeps succeeding despite his bad ideas because the system is so rigged that getting wealthy off one good bet can sustain you forever. I mean, his track record this entire decade is proposterously stupid (cybertruck, twitter, everything he says on twitter, the CSAM and deepfake creation engine known as grok, DOGE, etc.). When his companies succeed, its mostly because the people he's hired treat him like a toddler they need to appease while keeping him out of the important things. To me he's not a positive example, he's an embarassment that demonstrates that being rich does not require insight or intelligence.

[mlacks]

Why is it that people focus on the negatives. I'm not going to pick apart the whole comment but World's first self-landing rocket ship and best selling electric car in the world are not figments of a "system is rigged that getting wealthy off one good bet can sustain you forever".

[lobsterthief]

You’ve cherry-picked two successful examples but ignored all his failures. He wasn’t even solely responsible for those two successes. He didn’t found Tesla. He didn’t even found PayPal. He’s not an aerospace engineer. The number one predictor of future wealth and success is starting with wealth to begin with.

[Muhammad523]

> World's first self-landing rocket

The Buran, a soviet spaceplane very similar to the space shuttle, landed autonomously

[fragmede]

Suspiciously similar. Also, it didn't land like a rocket.

[overgard]

I focus on the negatives because they're so massive. Elon didn't even start Tesla, he was an investor that forced the founder out. I'll concede that SpaceX is a little better, but even then a lot of his ideas are profoundly stupid (while I think colonizing the solar system is worthwhile, doing it on Mars is very dumb. You'd need to build underground bunkers so people don't die of cancer from radiation, and there aren't that many useful natural resources there. The moon is much more useful from a practical standpoint of creating easier access to the rest of the solar system, and Titan makes a lot more sense for a sustainable colony. But Elon is a toddler so he just went "Mars!!")

Lets throw in a few more of Elon's failures, this time lets focus on the ones that are outright dangerous or killing people!

- In an accident, the Cybertruck has frequently trapped people inside the vehicle and caused them to burn to death when the batteries catch fire because they hid the manual release on the doors for aesthetic reasons, so people couldn't get out. Also the unbreakable glass means that people spent their final moments desperately trying to smash an unbreakable window while burning to death. People have died from this! It was totally predictable and preventable! https://www.ktvu.com/news/parents-woman-killed-cybertruck-cr...

- Fully self driving. Hasn't happened, and a lot of the danger is because he wanted to cheap out on lidar and brashly overpromised on its capabilities.

Lets also focus on some of the funny ones that came from his need for validation, like needing people to think he's a great gamer: https://www.theguardian.com/games/2025/jan/20/elon-musk-stan... (why would any adult not involved in E-Sports even want to convince their peers they're great at gaming? Like, who cares?!)

Even when he has a good idea like Starlink he ruins it by awful about it (shutting it off for entities he disagrees with).

This guy should not be anyone's hero.

[mlacks]

Hey thanks for the throrough response. I see your point, but I think anyone with their whole life on display would have plenty of failures to go with the successes. For FSD, I believe its done - see the following: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JwMlAj1tpQg

[overgard]

It is true that most of us wouldn't look great under a microscope, but the way I see it Elon very obviously wants attention, and he very obviously wants to change the world in dramatic ways that he should be accountable for (whether positive or negative), so scrutiny is entirely fair.

[fragmede]

The man's had failures and he's had successes. What did he do to you that you'd spend this much time and effort focusing on his failures instead of going out and building your own thing?

[overgard]

I am building my own things. But when someone is having a massively negative impact on society because they've bought way more influence than they really deserve, I think it's entirely fair to call them out on it. I mean, the dude bought twitter so he could shape online discourse. That's very worthy of scrutiny! Also the Musk fan club really needs a reality check.

[taneq]

I think he genuinely broke his brain during the Model 3 ramp up. They were in production hell for something like a year, and he hasn’t been quite right ever since. Maybe that was just the point at which he got rich enough to stop caring what other people think, though.

[m463]

I think Musk actually wasn't in it for the money.

He made all the money first the silicon valley way (paypal) and then decided to actually make and sell non-software/ip things that physically exist. I think that is actually hard. And if successful very valuable.

Although making software isn't easy, I think there are lots of silicon valley types who create IP, but enter a super-competitive market. IP can be valuable, but it might be quick and easy to spool up a competitor and/or copy it.

[smallnix]

> I’ve sat through some pitches like that, where it is very obvious that the founder/CEO has limited knowledge and expertise in what they’re pitching, where the product is limited, but their enthusiasm is off the charts.

And for all the talk of investing into people, what was your opinion?

[latexr]

Would you invest in a person with limited knowledge and expertise just because they’re enthusiastic? Might as well hire a literal clown; all the enthusiasm you might want and way cheaper.

[HumanOstrich]

Now this is the kind of honest snark I would hire.

[lionkor]

Not OP, but overconfidence is not a quality I would invest in.

[sph]

You must not be from California

[teiferer]

> The defense is of course that some people can do that - Musk did it, so why not?

If you think that Musk did his endeavors in order to become rich, you are likely mistaken.

[trinari]

What drives him then? Power?

[hobofan]

Seeking approval. It's apparent from everything he posts on X + the memeing + the whole "I am a elite Path of Exile"-saga.

[Shacklz]

> + the whole "I am a elite Path of Exile"-saga

That was the most "the emperor wears no clothes"-moment I've ever witnessed in my life. I play more PoE than I care to admit, and it was obvious within mere seconds that he has absolutely no clue what's going on.

It was absolutely surreal to watch.

[rustystump]

It started with d4 before poe and was painfully obvious then. Poe was just icing on the cake as it is not for the casual.

It is also so bizarre to brag about rankings for games where the grind to end game is a massive time sink. It wasnt like he was some LoL god where there is no grind only skill.

[thih9]

Interesting, I didn't know; context:

> His character, at the impressive level of 95, reflected not only a significant time investment but also a high degree of expertise.

> Musk’s performance has sparked skepticism about whether he genuinely leveled and equipped his character himself.

> The prevailing sentiment in the gaming community is that Musk doesn’t typically invest much time in video games, but instead leverages gaming achievements to draw media attention.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Elon-Musk-embarrasses-himself-...

[usefulcat]

I think "self promotion" is a better description than "seeking approval".

IMO people who are seeking approval tend to not go out of their way to be assholes quite so often ("pedo guy" incident, for example).

[sph]

> Seeking approval

Yea, that’s called narcissism. Their only drive in life is to be admired, and it’s much easier to lie and deceive to reach that goal, than doing something that’s truly praiseworthy

[youngtaff]

More posts about British politics than SpaceX recently!

[TacticalCoder]

Some people are just driven. A friend of mine who failed at a first startup (in a domain in which he had lots of expertise) then succeeded with his second startup: very nice exit but that's not why he was doing it.

He's an action junkie.

In both cases he saw inefficiencies and just wanted to spend the energy he's always been overflowing with to improve things. I don't know about Musk but my friend hates mediocrity and saw everything as something he can improve.

In another case I was in car, for a long trip, with someone else (who was working to become an... Ambassador: hardly the tech type!) and that person would constantly comment on what could be done enhanced.

Something something about personality types, the builders, etc.

Those who only ever want to spend the money of --and benefit from the wealth created by-- others are going to dismiss it all as "people who are after money" but it's more complicated than that and you can't generalize people.

I know several doctors for example: two of them are clearly money-driven (one of them literally told me "I'd never ever teach medicine, I'm in this only for the money") but most of the others I know are just happy to help people be more healthy.

I've got another friend, not rich at all, he's working an additional job as a firefighter: sure it brings some money, but that's not the reason. He's also an action junkie. He was there driving ambulances during Covid: to be helpful, for the action, etc.

It's not all about money. Thinking it's only about money is a mindset that often comes from those who want the money of others (through taxes).

[AlexeyBelov]

> Thinking it's only about money is a mindset that often comes from those who want the money of others (through taxes).

Thanks for your agenda, was really looking forward to it.

[actionfromafar]

You made me lol

[californical]

I don’t hear this perspective too often in my bubbles and it does make a lot of sense - the money of these people would be a means to an end. Sure they might want more money to enable their goals, but the money itself isn’t the goal.

Thanks for sharing, it’s nice to be reminded of potential other motivations of people who outwardly seem to just want to accumulate money.

[actionfromafar]

It's the same in the "through taxes" camp. You have the action junkies there too, they were just airdropped into some political context for some circumstantial reason.

[teiferer]

Though this action drive (and the means he has) could be used for so much better. Humankind's top 10 problems don't include the issue of being confined to a single planet. That far down the list. The actual stuff gets you less attention from the tech crowd. Hunger. Poverty. Wars. Droughts. Mass extinctions. Climate change. Transmittable diseases. Cancer. Alzheimers. It's beyond me how one can reasonably argue (or defend somebody who does) that we really ought to focus on becoming multi-planetary.

[sscaryterry]

Spreading his seed.

[teiferer]

A charitable response would be the desire to push the boundaries of what is (or is considered) possible.

A less charitable response would be the desire for attention and approval to fill some kind of deeply rooted inferiority complext.

The latter view would also illustrate a similarity to Trump.

[philipallstar]

Going to Mars.

[stickfigure]

I'm convinced this is a schtick. Not that he doesn't genuinely want that, but it's not the root motivation. I suspect it's something more like wanting to be perceived as a real-world Tony Stark. The cave rescue capsule episode is illustrative. The guy likes attention.

[fragmede]

Armchair analysis would also mention that Jeff Bezos is going for the Moon with his space, and how do you beat that guy with that ambition? Get to Mars, first. From a scientific perspective, the Moon makes more sense, but if we frame it as billionaires trying to out do one another, what comes after who's got the bigger yacht? So a competition between billionaires on who's better also makes sense as his true motivation.

End of the day though, why does it matter his true motivation? If I was working at one of his companies, as long as the paycheck cashes and the stock options are legally mine, if his motivation is money-based or attention-based or he's a true believer, I'm getting money and I can feed my kids.

It's not like I'm going to get the chance to talk with him personally and get to know him and sus out what it is, either, so it's all just pointless theorizing. What we, the general public "know" is a result of various people with their own agenda pushing their owna viewpoints? Does the man know anything at all, is he a total charlatan, or is he smart and gets it? Hit refresh on a different subreddit and get a different answer.

[latexr]

> End of the day though, why does it matter his true motivation?

Are you asking why the motivations of one of the richest (and thus most influential) people on the planet matter? He’s actively influencing domestic and foreign elections to further his own goals. He gutted government aid programs, leading to millions of deaths. He shares propaganda to a massive audience. Of course his motivations matter.

> If I was working at one of his companies, as long as the paycheck cashes and the stock options are legally mine, if his motivation is money-based or attention-based or he's a true believer, I'm getting money and I can feed my kids.

Yeah, until the world he creates is one where you can’t. The reason the world is in its current fucked-up state is that too many people think like that. Until the leopard eats their face and they’re surprised, but by then it’s too late.

[philipallstar]

> The cave rescue capsule episode is illustrative

That seems an incredibly minor thing in the grand scheme of Elon Musk's life to judge him on it. I think it was stupid and unnecessary, and betrays a deficiency of character, but it's so tiny compared to dragging the world into car electrification, satellite internet, not just recreating the US rocket industry but making reusable rockets, online payments, and conservative opinions like "trans women aren't women" no longer being a bannable offence on the world's main discussion platform.

[akskjdj]

That's not just a conservative opinion, it's a view widely held across the political spectrum.

Janice Raymond, left-wing radical feminist, wrote a book making that point in the 1970s.

[paytonjjones]

> wanting to be perceived as a real-world Tony Stark

The thing is, he _had_ this. He had all of Reddit worshipping him. He had the press. He had the tech-internet.

Then he knowingly blew it all up overnight to ally with Trump.

I think the reasons why are pretty clear: a son-who-loves-me became a daughter-who-despises-me and his companies got repeatedly hamstrung by California Democrats.

But if his root motivation was truly just approval, he would have taken it on the chin and accepted slower growth of his other ambitions. So it's a little more complicated than that.

[otterley]

> Then he knowingly blew it all up overnight to ally with Trump.

He blew it up years before that with his "pedo guy" false accusation drama.

[philipallstar]

> Then he knowingly blew it all up overnight to ally with Trump.

It's true. Nothing the American left hates more than an ex-Democrat. If only they hadn't made being a centrist a Republican position.

[stickfigure]

> Then he knowingly blew it all up overnight to ally with Trump.

This is speculation, but I am guessing that he didn't do this knowingly. He's probably surrounded with yes-men who didn't challenge his fever dream of swooping in, fixing the government, and being lauded as a hero.

[ashishb]

Listen to any on the Elon Musk interviews, he knows more technical intricacies of his 1000+ employee companies than your average startup founder with 10 employees.

[FireBeyond]

Or can sound like it. Like when he talked on an investor call about one of the myriad reasons for vision only: “we are good with rain and fog because our cameras do photon counting and can account for it”.

Except… they don’t.

You need a different type of camera - one not optimized for “vision” (in the sense of “object discernment”) - one Teslas do not have.

And even if they did, to count photons you need an enclosed space in front of your lens, not the … open road.

Which is annoying: Teslas haven’t had that, and could never have that but he goes on an investor call and openly lies about it, and doesn’t get called out. It’s not even an “aspirational statement” it’s a lie that goes against the laws of physics.

He knows a lot, and he also knows enough to be able to be confidently wrong and pass the bullshit meter of people who don’t know any better. They are not the same thing.

[Georgelemental]

> The defense is of course that some people can do that - Musk did it, so why not?

Nope. Musk has been obsessed with rockets and electric cars, specifically, for a very long time