CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them?

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by duxup on Sunday December 28, 2025 @09:48PM (#46416948)

I suspect Elon's value proposition now isn't really anything he does, it's the fear for stockholders that their companies will be evaluated like any other company and it will tank the stock if Elon isn't around.

Sort of a stock suicide pact ...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by aubanel on Monday December 29, 2025 @03:56AM (#46418747)

I'd advise you take a look at some of Musk's companies: - Tesla is the top seller of EVs in the US, beating century-old companies. - SpaceX has left public institutions like NASA and ESA in the dust despite their vastly bigger budgets - Although it joined late, xAI is now firmly in the top 4 of AI companies worldwide (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, xAI)

What's the common element between these successes?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by imtringued on Monday December 29, 2025 @08:23AM (#46420459)

That Elon Musk let the competent people do their job and didn't meddle too much? Did you know that Cybertruck, Starship and Twitter are the projects where Musk has let his competence "shine" the most?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by y0eswddl on Monday December 29, 2025 @02:02PM (#46424088)

It's been long-since established that the only reason early Musk companies survived was employees learning how to manage up and manipulate Musk into doing the right things early on...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by almostgotcaught on Monday December 29, 2025 @08:43AM (#46420674)

> xAI is now firmly in the top 4 of AI companies worldwide

Lolol literally no one thinks this

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by guywithahat on Monday December 29, 2025 @04:46PM (#46426128)

I'm not OP but that seems like a pretty reasonable assumption. LLM dominance is basically a US thing (Europe is handicapped by the EU and China is handicapped by hardware), and there are only a few companies that are actually competitive in LLM's (OpenAI, Gemini, xAI, Meta, Anthropic). I think top 5 is a safer bet but top four isn't an unreasonable thing to say confidently

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by almostgotcaught on Monday December 29, 2025 @04:54PM (#46426226)

> pretty reasonable assumption.

Sure if you have no clue about the frontier-lab landscape then it's a pretty reasonable assumption.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by guywithahat on Tuesday December 30, 2025 @11:16AM (#46434799)

xAI has the largest GPU cluster for AI training in the world, and they regularly produce top-ranking models. Companies like mistral produce clever models but they’re functionally just not on the level of things like Grok

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by rickydroll on Monday December 29, 2025 @01:12PM (#46423470)

> What's the common element between these successes?

Financial engineering.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:CEOs are hugely expensive. Why not automate them? by guywithahat on Monday December 29, 2025 @04:31PM (#46425961)

Yeah the anti-Elon sentiment on HN seems unique to this platform and maybe reddit. If you go onto any college campus, you'll see a variety of students wearing Tesla or SpaceX merch. Neuralink has a 7 or 8 stage, highly competitive interview process, and most of his companies are internationally recognized and careers with them are highly sought after.

I suspect a lot of people are just upset they got rejected

[ Parent | on HN ]