<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Marcus -</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I can't disagree with your points about Musk's *effectiveness*
and those (stodgy or incompetent or narrowly ambitious) he has
eclipsed over and over again in a couple of decades (or less), any
more than I can his (apparent) *intentions*. Tony Stark is a fun
fictional character for technophiles (including me) and I can see
why some want to overlay that onto the Elon... but for all my
fascination with fictions and stories, I don't mistake the Marvel
Universe for the one I actually live in... <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>It is patently NOT my place to tell Musk what to do (beyond any
financial stake I might hold in his company(ies) as a
stakeholder), though it IS my place to join Citizens of the
(community, county, shire, state, nation-state, earth) to discuss
and consider what could/should be treated as "the commons" and how
therefore we manage them (or more relevantly, how we decide how to
shape the landscape of forces that effectively
manage/regulate/define them)... emergent, collective phenomena
ultimately dominate, no matter what the myriad stripes of linear
conspiracy theorists may try to demonstrate.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>For my purposes, Musk is a force of nature, a Titan in our modern
pantheon of "influencers" with a megaphone/lever ($200B + beaucoup
media exposure) as large as any we've seen in a long time.
Bezos' influence seems anemic next to his, yet it also is not
trivial, and Zuckerberg seems also the thinnest of gruel, yet they
(and many others less singular or obvious) are the pivots or
fulcrums around which our future is being levered into a new
shape. The stories they tell or believe in is in many ways the
destiny which is manifesting through the "power" we apply to said
levers.. our $$, Tweets/Posts, votes, etc are directed by/through
those levers... <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I thought that the DLU tech prophet-billionaire was an
interesting mashup of Musk/Bezos/Zuck but with the (more subtle?)
reach of Google and perhaps the dreamy/breathy spirituality of
Marianne Williamson. It was a powerful caricature, though I can't
see much I can do with it, except unplug Alexa/SIRI/HeyGoogle with
my kneejerk, re-install TOR, and #DEFINE Google to be replaced
with DuckDuckGo in all instances. <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I already buy most of my books through a local Indie and *try* to
check my local Hardwares (still chain affiliates, if not big-box)
for the things I'm tempted to order-in via Amazon (after all they
do organize my purchases for repeat buys, easy returns,
significantly useful reviews, offer one-click purchases, batching
orders into single-day deliveries, etc.). I even try to swing by
the espanola ReStore and a couple of thrift stores on the off
chance I don't need to buy something brand-new, depleting whatever
supply chain everyone else might be clamoring about. If I ever
buy a Tesla it will probably be heavily damaged and it will be to
move the power-train to my '49 dumptruck, though my Gen1, Year0
GM-Volt is a more likely candidate. I won't sign up for Starlink
until they remove their clause requiring me to thereby endorse the
privatization of Mars to "first comers"... SpaceX is likely to
become/spawn the equivalent of the Hudson Bay or East India Co of
the 18/19C on the Moon and Mars, no matter what I think/say/do...
but I cringe at the thought of openly endorsing a new "land
rush"... <br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>I suppose that thinking that any of this matters to anyone but me
is typical hippy/yuppy-elitist western hubris...</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>- Steve<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 1/28/22 10:05 AM, Marcus Daniels
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:BYAPR11MB3830841F1E222CA555957297C5229@BYAPR11MB3830.namprd11.prod.outlook.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;">P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;}</style>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
I can sort of see why Musk is annoying to scientists because he
tends to use ideas and technology that already exist. </div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
So, what is he really adding? Neuralink is in this category.
That company is making the technology work at a larger scale
and at lower power and making the surgery repeatable. The
company (not him) is making it practical and approaching it like
a product. Some scientists are prone to thinking that
engineering is a not a thing or that a product mindset is just
superficial. Or even that money doesn't matter.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
I'm less enamored with Musk's futurism than I am appalled at
tunnel vision, overspecialization, and risk aversion of so many
others. The annoyance people have at Musk can only be because
they must acknowledge his influence. And seeing that influence
they conclude he is somehow responsible for the world in the way
that, say, Joe Biden is responsible for the world. Or as
Feynman put it, “You have no responsibility to live up to what
other people think you ought to accomplish. I have no
responsibility to be like they expect me to be. It's their
mistake, not my failing.” What would be the point of being a
billionaire if you couldn't at least be the dork you want to
be? </div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Before Space X had customers and a track record, there were all
the NASA old fogies saying he'd be killing people and he could
not possibly do it. Am I glad to see them so wrong? Yes. It
is not because he is the best or some Tony Stark. It is
because they are the worst.</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
Marcus</div>
<div style="font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;
font-size: 12pt; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
...<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:BYAPR11MB3830841F1E222CA555957297C5229@BYAPR11MB3830.namprd11.prod.outlook.com">
<div id="divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr">
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="x_moz-cite-prefix">On 1/27/22 10:01 PM, Marcus
Daniels wrote:</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span style=""><br>
</span></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span style="">< Musk is trying to kick our cans from
fossil fuel extraction/combustion/spills to Lithium (and
heavy metals) extraction/discarding as well as the can of
an out of-balance biosphere on earth to terraforming Mars
(with care and thoughtful intention and no unexpected
side-effects?). ></span><br>
</div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span style=""><br>
</span></div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;
font-size:12pt; color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<span style=""><a
href="https://www.xprize.org/prizes/elonmusk#prize-activity"
id="LPNoLPOWALinkPreview" class="x_moz-txt-link-freetext
moz-txt-link-freetext" moz-do-not-send="true">https://www.xprize.org/prizes/elonmusk#prize-activity</a><br>
</span></div>
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>yes to electrolizing water into hydrogen (and even creating
ammonia as a more easily stored/transported/cracked "carrier"
for hydrogen, up to ammonia fuel cells, etc.) technically
very likely and "doable" with a somewhat limited *known*
downside. Though the fossil fuel and battery industries have
a long enough list... but clearly biased. We neo-luddites
have long lists as well, with similar caveats. I was raised
by Calvinists so I recognize in myself when I am generally
just being negative about anything that might be "fun", but
that doesn't stop me from being skeptical anyway. I am also
of the "if it feels good, do it" generation... extreme
Hedonism and Calvinism only polarize an otherwise complex and
rich space. TANSTAAFL in my (post-Libertarian) vocabulary is
"there aint no such thing as a free lunch, but that doesn't
mean you can't eat someone else's when they aren't looking".<br>
</p>
<p>And yes to Musk being a puzzling and mixed hero/villain. I
don't doubt his *intentions*, I think they are (by his values
and view of the stakes at hand) righteous. That doesn't
preclude him being an egomaniac with an exponentially growing
clout/sense ratio. I can't see any of his earth-focused tech
as anything but a (very well crafted) double-pronged
strategy... gathering the economic leverage of doing "useful"
things on the earth (electrifying and solarizing)... whilst
developing technology useful for colonizing/terraforming
mars. CO2 harvesting is an obvious one, as is tunneling and
broad electrification (are his residential heat-pumps on the
market yet?)... perfect for taking to Mars.<br>
</p>
<p>I believe that GeoEngineering is inevitable, given who we are
(Homo Faber) but I also believe our future exercises in this
realm will "rhyme" with all of our previous engineering
"miracles". Maybe we *can* rhyme our way out of the corner we
rhymed ourselves into... but I fear that most if not all of
our R&D is biased toward short-term and narrow goals
(Glen's rant about "values" and corruption), and defined by
confirmation biases...</p>
<p>I'm probably just barking at the church choir here...</p>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
...<br>
</body>
</html>