Comment by concordDance
2 years ago
That's definitely not what he argues there. It's quite possible for 95% of hate to be mostly unfounded while that person is still worthy of hate. It's just that the existence of haters does not necessarily mean that person is hate-worthy.
The different rates and ways that various types of information travels through media (both social and not) and gets distorted by it are fascinating and there's probably been some good books written on them...
If my memory serves, Graham would sometimes link to his essay when people criticized Musk. It’s hard for me to check at the moment, as Graham’s Twitter account has been suspended.
Now that Graham’s account is unsuspended, here’s a tweet from a month ago surrounding Musk.
https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1591100636854374400
As I said, 95% of criticism might by illegitimate while the 5% isn't. Paul could have been linking for the X% of Musk hate that's ill founded based on his personal knowledge of the guy.
In the article, he makes no breakdown like you describe. He appears to have created a straw man which he alludes to whenever once of his associates receive criticism.
In light of Musk fulfilling the predictions of his worst “haters,” maybe this merits clarifying the essay.
2 replies →