Interesting, but I'm not convinced. There is a big different between Musk being overly optimistic, and the ideas themselves being unsound. Musk does have his share of unsound idea, but he also has many ideas that are probably good but ahead of their time. Attacking an ahead of their time idea as unsound is wrong analysis. (I happened to watch the one on hyperloop - which clearly is a lot of vaporware - but don't confuse that with being a bad idea. Also don't confuse it being a good idea with it being something that anyone working on now will make work)

Hyperloop is definitely lower-hanging fruit than Tesla. Of SpaceX, Hyperloop, Boring and Tesla, Tesla is easily the least scammy. But this particular energy density argument does come up pretty much any time he talks about Tesla.

Why do you say that Tesla is less scammy than SpaceX?

Because of how scammy SpaceX is. Phil's points that we're just re-trodding the reusable vehicle idea from the Space Shuttle days, but somehow paying more for it, are pretty damning in my eyes [1]. It feels a lot like government-funded rocket shows.

I mean, space stuff happening is fun and I like it. But if it was cheaper to do it through NASA, on even the famously expensive Space Shuttle, what's the point of all of this?

Tesla's stuff is all minor in comparison.

[1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TxkE_oYrjU

(Disclosure: I'm from Orlando and almost certainly somehow biased towards the shuttle program, not that I don't think it wasn't an inherently flawed idea. It was an awesome inherently flawed idea. So I actually do understand the fanboyism at play. I just liked NASA's "cool" better than Musk's "sexy." The stuff they've been pulling off remotely on other planets is more impressive than anything Musk is doing. I feel like we're picking corporate propaganda over American propaganda and I don't like it.)

Comparing a reusable launch vehicle (spacex falcon) with a reusable payload (the space shuttle) is absurd.

It might be if the nature of the comparison weren't overwhelmingly favorable to SpaceX.

Yeah, ThunderfOOt isn't exactly a reliable source - especially when it comes to Musk. I'm no Tesla sycophant - I'm plenty of skeptical with much of what Tesla is and how they operate - but ThuderfOOt comes across as someone with an axe to grind. Which is fine - just don't get all huffy when people call you out on it.

Call me out on what? Watching Phil Mason? I enjoy The Flaming Lips too. Should I get upset when people don't like them?

Thanks for the warning but I'm trying to save the huffiness for when people attack my own work. I've already got a backlog there, with just that alone.

Common Sense Skeptic has better arguments against Elon Musk though.

Thanks, just subbed

This guy is a joke, that people on HN use him as a source for anything is sad.

Phil's great! He's funny, scientific and very opinionated. I don't agree with all of his arguments and viewpoints either. I think that's part of the fun.