> Why are you taking hits for him? Does he somehow pay your bills?

I responded to your pointless, inaccurate and rude conjecture with an equally pointless, rude, and what I assumed was an equally inaccurate conjecture to suggest that perhaps we keep our conversation substantive.

If the sense in that still isn’t clear, you might check out the guidelines on this site for keeping discussion constructive.

> What "success"? The stuff that other people have made happen that he takes credit for?

I don’t know how “success” could be any more evident.

But if you believe you see shortcuts that were taken, then perhaps take your insight and do something comparable? Good luck!

We've seen an explosion in time spent looking at second-hand information online in recent decades - social media & news. I think a healthier way is to get information direct from the source, and from going and doing things.

I think some people responded to the deluge of slop by clutching out their connection to reality and relying solely on a couple of third parties for their worldview.

There's no point in arguing with someone who looks at Elon Musk and cannot see success because they can only look at him through a thick lens of ideology and tribalism. Five, ten years ago, some these same people probably thought he was in their tribe and idolized him then. Ten years ago, they probably liked Trump and his shows too.

I think it's the other way around. My interlocutor above has a "thick lens of ideology and tribalism".

This is why they're being very unspecific and arguing like a child from a position of conviction, "this is the most evident thing there ever was".

I've never had a keen eye to people that ride on the labour of other people and take credit for their work. Gossip magazines just don't work on me, and I don't trust the rich when they say they're "progressive" or whatever, like Musk did before. If they meant what they say, they'd get rid of their riches and return to society.

> My interlocutor above has a "thick lens of ideology and tribalism". This is why they're being very unspecific and arguing like a child from a position of conviction, "this is the most evident thing there ever was".

There you go again, making up my back story despite having no idea who I am.

It is rude, but worse than that, a waste of words.

I would insert another whimsical parody, referring back to you, but that somehow threw you last time.

So I will just repeat:

> Is that really the kind of conversation we want to have?

> you might check out the guidelines on this site for keeping discussion constructive.

--

It isn't controversial, nor should it require a complex justification to say with some confidence, that the richest person on the planet has been "successful". Widely documented synonym: "prosperous", i.e. achieving great wealth.

>> "this is the most evident thing there ever was".

I will be more precise and less rhetorical: based on the meanings of the words "successful", "prosperous" and "richest person on the planet" it is as close to a tautology as informal human language allows.

--

> I don't trust the rich when they say they're "progressive" or whatever, like Musk did before. If they meant what they say, they'd get rid of their riches and return to society.

"Progressive" doesn't mean charitable.

As has been pointed out to you already, reading and using words consistent with their widely documented meanings will help you communicate better, and communicate something coherent, beyond simply projecting strong dislike and distrust of Musk.

But, I am sympathetic to that viewpoint as was evident from my first comment.

Musk has not lived up to values he previously espoused. And he routinely demonstrates deep hypocrisy relative to principles he claims to value today.