I would have hoped this thread would be a reprieve for you. I'm seeing tons of respect for SpaceX as a whole here. Ditto for the video, where they thank their partners at NASA, The FAA, etc. - and customer, Orbcomm - for making all this possible. I don't recall Elon being mentioned once in the video. Elon's mentioned a few times in thread for the purposes of citation about the plans of SpaceX, and some silly twitter drama - that's about it. No Elon worship I can spot.
> Sorry if this is an unpopular opinion.
I think pretty much everyone is on board with appreciating the hard work of everyone at SpaceX, NASA, The FAA, Orbcomm, and all the engineers and taxpayers who made it possible. Elon's one of those people though. This... jealousy of him? That's probably not the right phrasing. But if it's poorly received, I suspect it's because it comes across as appreciating the hard work of everyone but him. Or put differently: It's not appreciating the hard work of everyone.
That is true of engineers as well, I've met engineers who, under a great manager, have achieved results that they themselves didn't think they could achieve. And I've known engineers who were superstars and unable to perform well at all under poor management.
The point is you need both, the talent to do the work and the leadership to inspire the talent to do their best work. Without both you don't make the playoffs and you don't advance the state of the art in rockets.
And it's hard to argue that a guy fired from his job deserves respect. Shkreli deserves no respect (for example) and was recently fired. The coach who doesn't having a winning season gets no respect.
In my experience I found a huge difference in organizations with good leadership and those with poor leadership (and I've been in both!) And I've been both the engineer and the leader in my career.
You can imagine other organizational forms, but as you experience them you may find, as I did, that the people make the difference, not the form. And that every position has its advantages and challenges. The more senior you are, the more leverage you have in screwing things up. If a line manager makes a bad call, the schedule slips, if the CEO makes a bad call, the company can cease to exist and lose all those jobs. Sort of like in a Viking longboat the oarsmen do the work but if the guy on the tiller falls asleep they are all dead.
It took me a while to understand the roles everyone has to play in getting something done, and the stakes involved for everyone involved. Of course I've really only known organizations which have operated in the environment of US laws and customs, (of which SpaceX is one) but in those organizations I've found that people don't arbitrarily "get to the top", and understanding the difference between what it takes to operate at that level, versus at the level of getting the stuff done that you're told to do. There is a big gulf.
One of the more interesting things a CEO I respect and admire told me about being a senior leader was this, "Chuck the good thing about being in this role is you get to make some of the important decisions, the bad thing about being in this role is that you have to make the important decisions."
So we disagree on what is disproportionate and what is unjust. Perhaps one day we'll be more in agreement.
I disagree that people make make the difference over the form. The role of CEO or product manager, or whatever, is a human invention. We as people created these roles.
Roles are designed to limit or enhance your skills. A senior role is an artificial multiplier and therefore a person's praise, or pay, or whatever, is artificially enhanced.
Imagine Musk, same as he is, in a different role, like a mailman. The FORM limits how we can contribute. LIMITS what he gets paid. and LIMITS who listens to him.
The workers of SpaceX don't listen to musk because they like the guy, they listen to him because he will fire them otherwise.
There are organizations that have different roles, and the idea of someone having so much power is a really stupid one. We decided this to be true in politics, why not other places?
To put it another way, if Elon Musk hadn't founded SpaceX in 2002, how many of the engineers currently working there would right now be celebrating working at a company having successfully recovered a first stage from an orbital rocket?
Let's try looking at it from a third angle. Lets suppose a random employee other then Elon Musk had been unable to join the company during it's history and had to be replaced with another job candidate. What are the chances such a substitution would have prevented SpaceX from achieving a stage recovery?
Finally, I'll address your proposed scenario directly. How likely is it that having the wrong mail man in that position would lead to the failure of the company? In contrast, what are the chances that having the wrong CEO might lead to the failure of the company? I can imagine Elon Musk might make a pretty decent mailman. But if we took the best mailman in the country and put him or her in charge of SpaceX, do you think that would be likely to have a positive or negative effect on the prospects of the company?
But Why? It has nothing to do with Musk but everything to do with organizational form. He has an invention at his disposal called "Role of CEO". It is a magical invention that gives you the power to control what thousands of people do everyday. A mailman doesn't have this invention and obviously won't be able to decide what thousands of people do everyday.
There is nothing magical about Musk here. Since so few people get a chance at being CEO, it is hard to say if most people would be good or bad at it. And it is also hard to say how hard the work really is.
IMO, the statement is not as absolute as it first seems. At one point, Rome held that title, about 100 years ago it was Britain, in another 100, it probably will be China.
"Greatest" in what sense? Isn't that a value judgement (but without any qualifying arguments)?
If we just talk about numbers, then it's not best in many categories, not even financial ones. Heck, not even in infant mortality (57 other countries fare better).
As for quality of life and actual democracy (as opposed to two parties alternating in power forever and a crazy vote transfer system - gerrymandering), there are several candidates far better in one or the other, and some even in both terms. Switzerland, for one.
Maybe we should just call it "the country with the biggest idea for itself".
You know he said recently that he was going to give less interviews. I'm sure he likes and uses his public persona to help his endeavors...but that's just being smart.
Steve Jobs did the same thing with Apple.
And as for thanking the American people. Hogwash. Did you personally make a choice in this matter? Sure you voted in the officials that did...that's where the money went...and they made the choice to spend it this way.
You know why? Because it's a smart move. A move towards a future where space travel can expand and grow because it will be more economical and feasible to accomplish.
So...yes, of course the engineers should be applauded! And THEY know this! And I'm positive they are celebrating this monumental event.
You should too! :)
So before we all thank Elon for taking our money, let's pat our selves on the back.
Really we should thank the amazing spacex engineers, who worked tirelessly. Not just Elon. Sure he worked hard too, but not much more than anyone else at spacex
I'm just tired of the Elon worship. Nobody acknowledges the amazing people who actually made this happen. As an engineer it pisses me off. Sorry if this is an unpopular opinion.