Acting that dumb when you literally employ a huge team of top-notch rocket scientists to advise you is absolutely evil.

> I think there needs to be some rule in discussion that as soon as you start arguing over if someone is dumb or evil, you have to stop.

I really like this, and I propose it be called "Kulak's Law".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor is basically the same thing

Also the word "kulak" is loaded - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kulak

> And denying covid kept workers in his factory, against the law

not sure if there even can be a complete list with Musk but, let's also add:

1) privileged background thanks to emerald mining fortune made in apartheid South Africa,

2) union-busting and abusive employer,

3) hoarding $175.6 billion in stolen wages during a pandemic,

4) encouraged a coup

> 3) hoarding $175.6 billion in stolen wages during a pandemic,

I hadn't seen this before. Do you have an article diving into this number?

Wait, did you not just do that above, calling Musk not that bright?

As far as I know, when I made my first comment we weren’t yet debating dumb vs evil.

It was practically an invitation to though.

Clearly they don't pay attention to what they say.

If you've done what Elon Musk has done, you're definitely not dumb.

That's what I hate about people telling Trump is dumb. If you've done what he has done, he's definitely not dumb.

Funny thing is that although I never liked Paris Hilton, I was pretty sure she was not that dumb (turned out she wasn't).

The same story when I look at my Facebook feed. Plenty of smart people have all kinds of different views on Covid and vaccination. And all of them call the 'other group' dumb.

Seems like political viewpoints have nothing to do with being smarter than someone else.

If it's true to say that there are different types of intelligence, then it's true to say that there are different types of dumb

Interesting comment. Never quite thought about it that way.

If you started your adult life with the same help from Daddy that Trump had - and did nothing, literally besides putting all of that money into an index fund - you’d be richer than Trump is today. They did the math.

So what exactly are Trump’s accomplishments? It’s not like the dude started off selling hot dogs. He made a lot of shitty investments, lost a lot of money, and is one of the few people on this planet capable of bankrupting a casino. In Vegas.

Yes he’s famous, of course, but his “look at me I’m a successful billionaire” image is all smoke and mirrors.

Tesla would have been dead if he had not brought the Fremont factory back online. I give him credit for this, as I think ignoring the “rules” was one of the smartest business moves ever made in 2020.

Would you think the same way if it was your life on the line? Not livelihood. Live.

I think when evaluating situations compassion for people's lives is a more important matter than economical wellbeing. (Even if it's their wellbeing)

Most of his workers were in an age group at negligible risk from covid; they'd be more likely to die in a road accident driving home.

How many of those workers have friends and/or relatives who are part of a vulnerable demographic?

Nobody's forcing them to associate with vulnerable friends or relatives. And it's not like they don't have a choice; tech workers aren't exactly poor.

What do tech workers have to do with a car factory?

Workers at a Tesla factory are high-skilled and highly paid, it's not some third-world sweatshop.

OR driving to the funerals of their parents, grandparents, friends, neighbors, and other loved ones and acquaintances who they infected with COVID-19.

Wow, people here really hate statistics. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-020-00698-1... ; if you're aged under 34 (as are the majority of tech workers), in the USA you're almost ten times more likely to die from "other acccidental fatalities" (0.0032) than covid if you catch it (0.004). Note that to assess risk the covid IFR there should be multiplied by the chance of catching it, to make it more comparable with the other columns, so if the chance of catching covid is less than 50%, then overall you're also more likely to die in a traffic accident.

You are making a strong point for further lockdowns.

Traffic accidents decrease, other accidental fatalities decreases, the number of people who catch covid decrease in a lockdown.

>Traffic accidents decrease, other accidental fatalities decreases, the number of people who catch covid decrease in a lockdown.

What's the point of being alive if you can't live life? Fine if you choose that for yourself, but you're a monster if you'd dare to assume you have the right to confine everybody else to such a miserable existence.

Marx has a great quote along those lines:

"The human body is mortal by nature. Hence illnesses are inevitable. Why does a man only go to the doctor when he is ill, and not when he is well? Because not only the illness, but even the doctor is an evil. Under constant medical tutelage, life would be regarded as an evil and the human body as an object for treatment by medical institutions. Is not death more desirable than life that is a mere preventive measure against death? Does not life involve also free movement? What is any illness except life that is hampered in its freedom? A perpetual physician would be an illness in which one would not even have the prospect of dying, but only of living. Let life die; death must not live. Has not the spirit more right than the body?"

It's a good thing not everyone has such disregard and lack of empathy for their fellow humans. I'm guessing you're Libertarian, not Communist, right?

It's good that not everybody has such flagrant disregard for human rights; I'm guessing you're a Democrat?

The risk of Covid has never been the individualized risk. It's the collective risk of what happens when hospitals and ICUs reach capacity when too many people catch Covid at once. For example, what is happening in India.

This was widely known in the US on the first week of March in 2020.

When hospitals reach capacity, people in their 40s and 50s become much more likely to die from Covid. Lots of preventable loss of life is going to occur, from Covid and from everything else that can't be attended to because the hospitals are full.

The point of lockdowns is not to reduce the individual risk. It's to reduce the collective risk of getting hit by a runaway train that completely overwhelms our health systems.

>For example, what is happening in India.

What is happening in India? The death rate per capita there is still way less than in the US or UK. How come the death rate in Florida is less than that in California and New York, in spite of no lockdowns and an older population in Florida?

There's no statistical evidence that countries with stricter lockdowns had a lower death rate than those without.

I think it's well understood that deaths in India are massively underreported.

California and New York both came close to having their health care systems overwhelmed in certain counties, Florida did not. That's exactly my point.

> There's no statistical evidence that countries with stricter lockdowns had a lower death rate than those without.

Honestly, you would expect it to be the other way around. Lockdowns are a last-resort tool to prevent healthcare systems from being overwhelmed. You would expect areas that implement lockdowns to be either denser (thus, hypothetically having less warning time between rising case counts and hospital saturation) or, more likely, to have an existing large scale Covid problem that they need to get under control.

Lockdowns are correlated with bad Covid outcomes because lockdowns are implemented in places that are liable to, or are already having, bad Covid problems.

The signals I'm seeing from India strongly suggest that their death rate is massively under-reported.

http://www.healthdata.org/special-analysis/estimation-excess...

Death rate per capita I think is a misleading way to look at it. If covid wipes half of my say 10 ppl family and half of someone else’s say 4 ppl family, I lose 5 ppl and they lose 2 ppl. Per capita rate is fine for statisticians after the fact. But during the pandemic you can’t tell me we lost same ppl per capita. Obviously I lost much more (hypothetically)

I've got some bad news for you: Tesla died in 1943.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla#Death

If Tesla died, the major automakers would probably abandon EVs.

Does the industrial effort to decarbonize our economy really matter? Is it urgent? Is it essential?

I'm fairly certain it was not in violation of "the law", but rather in violation of edicts from unelected officials.

"The law" gives public health officials authority to issue those "edicts". Try taking them to court and see how far that gets you. Hint: not very.

Some people seem to have done pretty well in court bringing a case against unconstitutional edicts: https://www.npr.org/2021/04/10/986010977/supreme-court-rules...

Restricting religion and regulating a factory are pretty different. The first runs directly afoul of the constitution, while the second is clearly within the purview of regulators and public health officials.

I was thinking of Jacobson v Massachusetts in my original comment, which upheld state and local governments' broad authority in public health.

Here's a balanced view of the powers affirmed in Jacobson and how that has changed over time to better protect individual liberty: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1449224/

Note however that applies to individuals, not factories or places of business which are subject to much more regulation.

Ironically, I believe this was overturning a law made by elected officials (on constitutional grounds)

Well, given how nobody was prosecuted, taking it to court seems unnecessary, which was my point.

If that was your point, you did a poor job of making it.

Not being prosecuted is not the same as not guilty.

The California Executive Order creating a shutdown was issued by the Governor, who is elected.

It makes me so sad that it's impossible to have a polite conversation these days without clinical paranoids popping in at every juncture to say, "COVID is a hoax! Public health officials are frauds! Medicine is meaningless!"

Huh?