> Put that on your resumé and you'll easily land a cushy job in Washington.
I think you have it backwards. The entire tech bro scene reeks of fraud schemes, and the most successful ones seem to be pulled into all kinds of government schemes as well.
I guess when people stop believing them. Until then, they're words from a visionary that's building the future, who can get some things wrong / be over zealous etc. When people stop believing him, they become lies.
Imagine me standing next to the fence of the White House, calling the Meta Office. "I am calling from the White House", while technically true would be a lie, as my intent would be to make the other person believe something that isn't true, that I would be calling in some kind of official role.
So the statement does not necessarily be false to be a lie - if the intent is to deceive.
That’s a fair point, but a combination of “fake it ‘til you make it” together with extracting massive “compensation” before you actually make it amounts to pretty much the same thing.
He has been selling a lot of Tesla stocks through the life of the company (not that it matters to him as other shareholders are giving him load of free shares all the time).
It's not the usual type of 'dump', but he will probably again request massive bonus or threaten to leave. And his statements are the key for pumping part.
To be "mere puff", the claim needs to be so obviously untrue that no reasonable bystander would suppose it to be meant literally.
But Musk often acts as if he does actually intend to be taken seriously. In the case of the current story, consider the marketing resources Tesla have poured into their previous "Battery Day" events and look at the press reaction; it's clear that at least some people believed that the claims stacked up.
A quick search of the hn archives for "4680" shows a similar picture. Yes, there were always some sceptical voices, but they were often shouted down as being from people motivated by an anti-Elon grudge. Nevertheless, the sentiment tended to be overwhelmingly positive with many posters actively reinforcing the hype.
Now, whether or not a self-selecting sample of hn posters can be seen as "reasonable bystanders" is certainly debatable - but it does seem that we're getting close to the point where Musk is going to have to start branding those who believe him as being exceptionally gullible in order to escape a charge of misleading advertising.
"Forward-looking statements" aka legal stock pumping.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forward-looking_statement)
Those are borderline lies that deceived both customers and investors.
After the first few some responsibility begins shifting to those still believing him.
Investors know what's up. They want number to go up, therefore they "believe" him and the number goes up.
The map precedes the territory
Put that on your resumé and you'll easily land a cushy job in Washington.
> Put that on your resumé and you'll easily land a cushy job in Washington.
I think you have it backwards. The entire tech bro scene reeks of fraud schemes, and the most successful ones seem to be pulled into all kinds of government schemes as well.
s/Predictions/Ketamine-and-adderall-fueled ramblings
There's a slash missing at the end.
I think they mean grift or even fraud, since they were definitely meant to attract investment.
Now excuse me while I go check on where my 2016 full-self-driving Tesla car. It was supposed to pick me up 9 years ago, something must have happened.
I still don’t understand how they haven’t been sued for the hundreds of millions they took as a deposit for a new Roadster…8 years ago!
7 replies →
I guess when people stop believing them. Until then, they're words from a visionary that's building the future, who can get some things wrong / be over zealous etc. When people stop believing him, they become lies.
A statement is a lie if the person saying it knows it to be false. Not if the person hearing it disbelieves it.
Imagine me standing next to the fence of the White House, calling the Meta Office. "I am calling from the White House", while technically true would be a lie, as my intent would be to make the other person believe something that isn't true, that I would be calling in some kind of official role.
So the statement does not necessarily be false to be a lie - if the intent is to deceive.
1 reply →
Pump and dump scheme?
What evidence is there for the 'dump' part?
Mr Musk is a strange fellow indeed, but he's not guilty of all the vices and sins. Just plenty enough of them.
That’s a fair point, but a combination of “fake it ‘til you make it” together with extracting massive “compensation” before you actually make it amounts to pretty much the same thing.
2 replies →
He has been selling a lot of Tesla stocks through the life of the company (not that it matters to him as other shareholders are giving him load of free shares all the time).
He might be pumping until his potential trillion USD bonus :P
IIRC, back in 2022 or so he'd made about as much selling TSLA shares as Tesla Inc. has made lifetime profits selling cars.
Tesla's profits have been positive since then, so this may no longer be the case, but still, that's a very iffy state of affairs.
1 reply →
It's not the usual type of 'dump', but he will probably again request massive bonus or threaten to leave. And his statements are the key for pumping part.
I'd say more in Doge and Bitcoin but you could argue with his stocks even though they're announced/scheduled.
2 replies →
https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2024/05/31/tes...
> Musk sold 19.5 million Tesla shares worth about $3.95 billion in November 2022
I mean sure it is his to sell, but how is that different?
7 replies →
According to the article, a court would call this "corporate puffery", but to me it's nothing but lies and grifting.
To be "mere puff", the claim needs to be so obviously untrue that no reasonable bystander would suppose it to be meant literally.
But Musk often acts as if he does actually intend to be taken seriously. In the case of the current story, consider the marketing resources Tesla have poured into their previous "Battery Day" events and look at the press reaction; it's clear that at least some people believed that the claims stacked up.
A quick search of the hn archives for "4680" shows a similar picture. Yes, there were always some sceptical voices, but they were often shouted down as being from people motivated by an anti-Elon grudge. Nevertheless, the sentiment tended to be overwhelmingly positive with many posters actively reinforcing the hype.
Now, whether or not a self-selecting sample of hn posters can be seen as "reasonable bystanders" is certainly debatable - but it does seem that we're getting close to the point where Musk is going to have to start branding those who believe him as being exceptionally gullible in order to escape a charge of misleading advertising.
Predicting is easy. Predicting correctly less so.
When you are making predictions about what you are going to do, "correctly" is spelled "honestly".
"Tech Optimism"