I agree with this. Still think that the ADHD, depression and narcissism are clearly detectable, in addition to substance abuse.

Giving more and more power to individuals who clearly struggle with mental health may not be in the best interest of society.

It's an Elon thread so HN users turn into doctors diagnosing depression, ADHD, etc.

Throw "narcissism" in there too for good measure, oh wait you did, bingo!

It couldn't be that he just thinks differently than you do, no he must have a mental illness!

- edit -

Someone flagged my reply to the person below concerning the pedo diver so I'll just drop this link here too:

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/idyllic-thai-provi...

If you are a public figure and call a rescuer a pedophile on twitter I question your mental stability. What other comments does he make in private I wonder?

On the topic of this rescue mission - please watch Jimmy Chin’s documentary The Rescue.

Elon’s contribution in this situation was beyond narcissistic and pure idiocy.

The documentary provides a lot of context - anaestesia was the last resort crazy idea - applied after a few other survivors almost drowned because of panic attacks - being moved at the fraction of the distance.

The rescue that these people pulled off is beyond anything I’ve seen. An incredible testimony of humanity’s kindness, commitment, and potential.

The pedo diver picked the fight first after Elon offered help and the pedo diver expat Brit lives in a known location for child exploitation:

https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/se-asia/idyllic-thai-provi...

In the end Elon did apologize to the guy for calling him a pedo, he probably just likes diving over there after all!

But I see... if you call people a name you must be unstable, makes sense with all the people spouting out racist this and that.

I wonder what comments you make in private that we can all use judge your mental soundness.

> The pedo diver picked the fight first after Elon offered help and the pedo diver expat Brit lives in a known location for child exploitation

After reading this paragraph I cannot take anything written by you seriously. You use “pedo driver” instead of a name of the person. A person who obviously has zero connection to child exploitation and a documented record of saving lives - at the risk of his own.

Here’s another take on the story:

A mentally unstable narcissistic billionaire attempted to latch on the publicity of a tragic event by publicly suggesting a solution showing his complete misunderstanding and incompetence.

After being exposed in an interview by Vernon Unsworth, one of the people risking their lives to come up with a real solution, the malignant narcissist launched a public attack toward the rescuer, hitting as low as to accuse the rescuer in pedophilia.

When sued by the rescuer for defamation, “ Mr Musk told the court this week the phrase "pedo guy" was common in South Africa, where he grew up.”

The billionaire himself can be seen in a photo with Ghislaine Maxwell who is now in jail for child exploitation and specifically arranging forced sex with minors for the ultra rich.

https://www.vox.com/2018/7/18/17576302/elon-musk-thai-cave-r...

One can be both exceptional and have deep seated emotional and mental health issues. The former does not excuse the latter, nor that observations made of the latter are any less relevant.

Also, it’s not one’s fault for having emotional and mental health issues but, crucially, it is their responsibility for addressing them.

I was commenting mostly on the mass confusion in our culture surrounding these issues. Our collective enthusiasm to further trust and empower such people is a symptom of our collective condition.

We have been hypnotized to measure only one or two things and blinded to the rest.

Money can be made much faster in the absence of empathy and care for others.

Musk is great at underpaying engineers, pushing his workers, manipulating stocks.

I couldn’t - not because of merit but because of internal discomfort and turmoil.

“Leaders” without such internal regulatory mechanisms can get further, faster, partially because as a collaborative species we don’t have strong built-in protective mechanisms against exploitation.

Your analysis seems to fit the old saying that the rich can only be eccentric. More accurately, I would say few other than the rich can be worthy of the wasted time on analysis (beyond the simple categories).

Since I believe that even the "eccentric" are unconscious rational actors, to a point, I would still like to know why people don't believe his goal is to diversify away from his holdings without ruining their value. If he sold a lot of stock his companies would be doomed, unless he can justify it with a complex expenditure with unexpected problems. Then he can ditch the unwanted investment and fail to put the money back in his one basket.

What is that link supposed to prove?

Then why did he try and back out of the deal?

Maybe it was a bluff to try to get a lower price?

It was always a bluff and a gamble. He clearly always wanted to own Twitter. Then the stock market came down.

The fact his risky gamble at getting the price reduced didn't work is not surprising. Whether or not he's the actual loser here is not clear, a lot of wealthy people own expensive sports teams that lose money but do it anyway because they like it.

> He simply doesn't have the skills to work his way up in those circles.

It looks like he’s more interested in the Trump route: making his own circle.

People forget that Trump has been very actively involved in politics since at least the 80s. He has been taking out newspaper ads for or against candidates for decades. He has been a regular speaker at political conventions. He ran a presidential campaign in 2000 and was #3 in polls behind Bush and Gore (on a third party ticket). There was a lot of speculation that he would run in 2012. His 2016 run didn't happen out of nowhere, as people seem to think.

> There was a lot of speculation that he would run in 2012.

I'm not sure why people keep on forgetting it: He ran in 2012 and lost very, very badly. To the point almost no one cared and remember that.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_career_of_Donald_Tru...

So, he "unofficially" campaigned and did not get much interest

No, I didn’t forget.

I was referring to the fact that Trump (and Musk) were not accepted into the “Carnegie, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Gates, Waltons, Kochs” circle OP mentioned.

So they blazed their own way, happy to ruffle feathers and make enemies along the way.