Connect with us

News

Opinion: Fmr President Trump was wrong to call Elon Musk “another bullshit artist”

Credit: MINISTÉRIO DAS COMUNICAÇÕES, CC BY 2.0 , VIA WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

Published

on

Former President Trump was wrong to call Elon Musk, “another bullshit artist.” The former president held a rally in Anchorage, Alaska, where he claimed that Elon Musk had said that he voted for Trump. The former president is well known for weaponizing mistruths to mislead his base.

The former president said that he wanted to “stop left-wing censorship and to restore free speech in America.” Following that, he promoted Truth Social and then made the following comments about Elon Musk.

“I tell you what. Elon is not gonna buy Twitter. Where did you hear that before? From me.”

“He’s got himself a mess. You know, he said to me the other day, ‘oh I’ve never voted for a Republican.’ I said, “I didn’t know that. You told me you voted for me.’ So he’s another bullshit artist but he’s not going to be buying it. Well, he might later.”

Advertisement
-

The former president then instructed his base again to sign up for his social network, Truth Social.

 

Trump Is Wrong.

Many far-left talking heads are either mocking Elon Musk or celebrating this. However, Trump is completely wrong about Elon Musk, in my opinion. And his reasoning for not buying Twitter is, I think, due to the bot issues that plague the social network.

Twitter has a real problem with bots and fake accounts and doesn’t really seem to care about solving that problem. On the other hand, real accounts often get suspended for no reason. This happened to me in 2020 after Elon Musk responded to me about ventilators for Louisiana. This was before my account was verified. And I am not the only one who has had this happen.

Is Twitter worth $44 billion? I highly doubt it. Elon Musk was right to call out Twitter on its bot problem. He has been impersonated by both verified and non-verified accounts promoting crypto scams.

 

Advertisement
-

The Bot Attack On Elon Musk Before He Decided Against Buying Twitter.

What I haven’t seen the media address is the bot attack on Elon Musk right before he called off the Twitter deal.

Recently, Insider published an article breaking the story of Elon Musk’s new set of twins born last November. And strangely, that account’s tweet was supported by a lot of bots and fake accounts. We know this thanks to Andrea Stroppa, a contributor to the World Economic Forum, who shared research into the Insider account and its bots in a Twitter thread.

“Yesterday, an online media outlet published an article about Elon Musk’s personal life and a person close to him. These articles generated thousands of harassment, insults by some users, and malicious bots. Watch the video. Here’s what happened. A thread.”

 

Andrea Stroppa’s Thread

Andrea continued.

“ThisIsInsider, part of Business Insider, published the article. Business Insider tweeted It multiple times article and then created a Twitter thread. A user contacted me through DMs, sending me a screen of suspicious comments below the tweets.

“The tip was correct. Around 9.000 tweets posted by bots in a couple of hours produced insults toward Elon and a person close to him. It’s interesting because, as you can note, tweets have an additional random character. It’s a trick to bypass potential spam detection.”

“Many real users also tweeted insults, but the n° of tweets produced by bots are not comparable, even If some of these real users might have a more significant impact. In fact, with quick network analysis, we found that these accs belong to a specific political group.”

“As Elon said attacks against him and his companies have increased over the past months. But recently, these attacks have involved even his family and people close to him. And about that, I want to share a personal thought.”

Advertisement
-

“Elon Musk is a strong person. Yeah, of course, he’s not a robot. He has feelings, so sometimes, these attacks push him down. But it’s ok. It’s the pressure that a person like Elon is ok to face but let’s keep his family and children away from these things.”

“As the last tweet of this thread, I’d love to mention this wonderful verse “For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind…” Hosea (8,7).”

“To the people who insult the personal profile of a mother of two kids, we pity you.”

 

A Thought On Elon’s Evolving Political Stance.

This may seem random but I want to include a thought here. Elon Musk has gotten a lot of hate-fueled criticism from the far-left over his evolving political stance. I think that a huge part of the problem is also bots.

I’d share something on Twitter and the tweet would go viral. I’d get so much hate from accounts that were either new, had very few followers, or were old but very inactive with the exception of commenting on tweets about Elon Musk. Clearly bots or at least troll farms.

Advertisement
-

 

And these farms and bots, I suspect, are being used to make certain tweets more visible. And they amplify the sensation of a trend on Twitter. This includes Elon Musk. Combine this with the narrative of him being a far-right Republican being put forth and we have a hot mess.

Advertisement
-

Some of the accounts are also used to try to silence any truth cutting through the misinformation. For example, the tweet above is Elon Musk explaining why he chose to vote for a Republican for the first time. The hate that followed drowned out the truth itself.

For example, I find it odd that no mainstream media outlet commented or reported Senator Warren’s taking out Facebook ads against Elon Musk and literally spreading lies about him.

Yes, Elon has tweeted that he voted Republican for the first time. But many forget that he actually voted for President Biden. He also voted for Hillary Clinton.

And President Biden completely snubbed Elon Musk, Tesla, and even SpaceX. The current president even went on to claim that General Motors’ Mary Barra was the true leader of the EV industry when it is actually Tesla. And Tesla is still leading–unless you count hybrid electric vehicles as battery-electric vehicles.

The fact of the matter is that he actually called out both the far right and the far left. Elon Musk has been a bit harder on the left, I think it’s because he might feel as if the political platform betrayed him. He supported the left for the longest and now they are vilifying and jeering at him.

Many on this platform are making him the current thing to hate. Imagine having a platform you’ve believed in and rooted for suddenly make you their sworn enemy.

Advertisement
-

 

Conclusion: Trump Was Wrong Here.

Former President Trump is wrong to call Elon Musk a “bullshit artist” especially since the former president isn’t known for being truthful. I think Trump is doing the exact same thing the media, left-wing and right-wing politicians, and crypto scammers are doing. He is, in my opinion, using Elon Musk’s name to simply generate more views and media attention.

I also highly doubt that Elon Musk told the former president that he voted for him. Or that he spoke with Elon Musk “the other day.”

Johnna Crider is a Baton Rouge writer covering Tesla, Elon Musk, EVs, and clean energy & supports Tesla's mission. Johnna also interviewed Elon Musk and you can listen here

Advertisement
Comments

News

SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit

SpaceX filed with the FCC for Starship Flight 14, its first true orbital launch attempt.

Published

on

By

SpaceX has asked the Federal Communications Commission for permission to fly Starlink terminals during Starship’s fourteenth flight test, and the filing lays out a genuine trip to orbit, something the program has never attempted.

Every Starship flight so far, including Flight 13’s successful splashdown in the Indian Ocean on July 24, has flown a suborbital arc that ends with the ship reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launches. The FCC paperwork describes a mission profile built around an actual orbital insertion instead.

The payload is the other half of the story. Flight 13 carried 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, but because that mission never reached orbit, the satellites reentered along with the ship rather than joining the constellation, something Teslarati covered in detail after SpaceX released footage shot from one of those satellites as it drifted away from Starship in space. Flight 14 is designed to close that gap. If the orbital insertion holds, the roughly 20 V3 satellites onboard would separate into an operational orbit and could eventually go into service, each one rated for about 1 terabit per second of downlink capacity by SpaceX’s own account.

SpaceX announces new Starbase for ‘thousands of Starship launches annually’

Elon Musk first flagged the orbital attempt during SpaceX’s August 4 earnings call, the company’s first as a public entity following its June IPO under the ticker SPCX. He also floated catching the ship with the Starbase tower on the same flight, an idea he walked back on August 20, saying the catch attempt would more likely come “in a few months,” as Teslarati reported at the time. Flight 14 will instead target a splashdown for the ship in the Indian Ocean, the same recovery method used since Flight 12.

Hardware has been catching up to the ambition. Booster 21 completed a full 33-engine static fire on August 28, and Ship 41 finished its own six-engine test the week before. An airspace briefing circulated to pilots on August 20 listed September 15 as the target date, later than the end of August window Musk mentioned on the earnings call, though SpaceX has not confirmed a launch date publicly and Starship schedules routinely slip while hardware and FAA paperwork line up.

Advertisement
-

The FCC filing itself does not guarantee a launch date. It covers communications authority, and not flight readiness, considering SpaceX still needs Ship 41 fully stacked and cleared by the FAA before Flight 14 can fly. But the filing is a real marker of intent and it puts a specific regulatory process behind what had so far only been Musk’s word on the earnings call.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab Event: what to expect from Austin

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is set to launch Cybercab on Thursday at an event in Austin, Texas, which will officially bring the company’s first steering wheel-less and pedal-less vehicle to a limited number of consumers for the first time.

The event, which is invite-only, is still thin on details: we’ll be there, and it seems the event will be held at Gigafactory Texas, but the launch of this vehicle truly relies on it being operational outside of the factory and on public roads.

Nevertheless, there are some big things to expect, and other things to temper expectations on. For what it’s worth, we believe this event could be perhaps the biggest indication that Tesla is ready to truly enter a new phase and chapter in its historic story.

Tesla Cybercab’s First Foray into the Public with Real-World Riders

Cybercab will likely hit the streets of Austin and the surrounding areas, likely in the established geofence that Tesla has expanded on for the past 14 months. Just yesterday, Tesla expanded it once again by 9 percent.

Advertisement
-

Tesla will put, for the first time, a vehicle without any manual controls on public roads, likely without any help from teleoperators. This is a truly groundbreaking development if it comes through in this fashion: it would be groundbreaking for Tesla to roll out a truly driverless ride-hailing vehicle.

Cybercab Has Already Been Unveiled

This is not an unveiling event. Cybercab has been released for nearly two years, as Tesla first showed it to the public on October 10, 2024.

FIRST LOOK: Tesla ‘Cybercab’ Robotaxi makes its global debut

While there is some small speculation that Tesla could release the Roadster at the event as a surprise, it seems more likely the focus will be on the Cybercab and the huge accomplishment that will come with releasing a vehicle with no manual controls.

There Will Be a Lot of Hype

What’s important to remember about the Cybercab event is that Tesla will continue to prioritize safety and the rollout will likely be slow, just as it has been with Robotaxi.

One of the biggest complaints about Robotaxi is vehicle population, and the fact that the wait for a ride, at least in some instances, has been longer than most want to admit.

Advertisement
-

Tesla Cybercab fleet grows in Austin ahead of launch event

It will take time for this project to truly scale. It will take time for Tesla to roll this out in a large fashion. The important thing to note is that they are doing it, and they’re doing it with a vehicle that is completely engineered and built internally. That’s something no other ride-hailing service can say.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX would not exist if this crucial early launch failed, Musk says

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.

On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”

Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”

In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.

Advertisement
-

The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.

Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.

That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.

Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”

SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success

That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.

Advertisement
-

Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.

One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.

Continue Reading