Elon Musk email to Tesla employee about missing an event to witness the birth(businessinsider.com)
businessinsider.com
Elon Musk email to Tesla employee about missing an event to witness the birth
http://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-email-tesla-employee-2015-5
167 comments
> A dad isn't in the delivery room just to "witness" the birth, or at least he shouldn't be.
But I mean, surely the "witnessing" is important on its own, no?
But I mean, surely the "witnessing" is important on its own, no?
We went through the Lamaze classes where they tell you all the things you'll be doing to help your wife birth your first child. Then we went to the delivery room where the nurses pointed next to my wife's head and said, "you stand here" while they did all the things I thought I was supposed to do.
And, honestly, I didn't mind. It was nice letting the professionals do their jobs and I could sort of be a cheerleader (bad term but its the best I can come up with at the moment) and witness the birth of my child.
And, honestly, I didn't mind. It was nice letting the professionals do their jobs and I could sort of be a cheerleader (bad term but its the best I can come up with at the moment) and witness the birth of my child.
Hospitals and experiences differ, neither of my kids' births were like that.
Dad in the room is very modern development. It seems weird and pointless to me.
All the negative press and comments about this miss the point. The guy has very specific, very ambitious goals that he has a track record of achieving. He prioritizes those literally above everything and expects the same from key employees.
Working at Tesla, which has already done a ton to change the entire car industry is a huge privilege, and no one's making you do it. If you can get a job there, you can get a job elsewhere, but if you do want to have your job there and help reshape the world behind someone with a track record like Elon Musk's, yeah, you're going to have to play by his rules. If other stuff is more important to you, go work at like 95% of other companies.
Working at Tesla, which has already done a ton to change the entire car industry is a huge privilege, and no one's making you do it. If you can get a job there, you can get a job elsewhere, but if you do want to have your job there and help reshape the world behind someone with a track record like Elon Musk's, yeah, you're going to have to play by his rules. If other stuff is more important to you, go work at like 95% of other companies.
Working at Tesla is not a huge privilege. It's a job, maybe even a great one, but it doesn't make you a better person, it doesn't even guarantee that you'll be employable after working there. Having worked for a couple of very popular places, I realized pretty quickly its a job. You know what these places have in common? You're an employee, which means they can and will cut you loose when it suits them. "Reshaping the World" seems to be a popular refrain that gets overused by tech companies, and while Tesla may be more accurate then most, it's still hubris. Spend time with your real family.
So, don't work there. We're talking about really smart people that can get jobs wherever else if they don't like the culture at Tesla. All the replies on my comment share the same issue that for them seeing the birth of their child is more important than being a part of Tesla. That's fine. Don't work at Tesla. That's why I wouldn't work there either. I wouldn't work in the army either, which has the same setbacks when you're on a deployment. Elon Musk consistently delivers on actually changing the world, so yeah, he's allowed to have rules to work with him.
Also, to the people that downvoted: it's really disheartening to see you'd rather downvote out of existence than have a dialogue with a contrasting opinion. Enjoy your echo chamber.
Also, to the people that downvoted: it's really disheartening to see you'd rather downvote out of existence than have a dialogue with a contrasting opinion. Enjoy your echo chamber.
Except that nobody's arguing that you have to work at Tesla, they're pointing out that Elon Musk is a dick.
Just as people can choose who to work for, people can also choose to share information on which employer is a dick.
Just as people can choose who to work for, people can also choose to share information on which employer is a dick.
> Just as people can choose who to work for, people can also choose to share information on which employer is a dick.
In fact, being able to the latter is an important part of making the former an informed choice.
In fact, being able to the latter is an important part of making the former an informed choice.
If you consider the birth of a child "other stuff" less important that your job your priorities as a parent are already seriously fucked.
I am reminded of this famous Stallman incident, where he basically scorns at another developer for having a baby:
http://edward.oconnor.cx/2005/04/rms
http://edward.oconnor.cx/2005/04/rms
Wow. It's no surprise that rms lacks empathy or social grace, but I'm kind of shocked one man's availability could single-handedly delay a release of a project like emacs. What if the poor chap had got hit by a bus?
I suspect that in this case it was easier to wait for the person to be available rather than transitioning to someone else.
BTW, since then Emacs development has been handed over to other folk and development has really picked up pace, including being (finally!) hosted in Git.
BTW, since then Emacs development has been handed over to other folk and development has really picked up pace, including being (finally!) hosted in Git.
That email chain contains one of my favorite quotes:
"It doesn’t take special talents to reproduce—even plants can do it. On the other hand, contributing to a program like Emacs takes real skill. That is really something to be proud of." --RMS
(As a parent without any special talents, I am evidence supporting his claim.)
"It doesn’t take special talents to reproduce—even plants can do it. On the other hand, contributing to a program like Emacs takes real skill. That is really something to be proud of." --RMS
(As a parent without any special talents, I am evidence supporting his claim.)
Which reminds me of this RMS classic:
http://www.art.net/Studios/Hackers/Hopkins/Don/text/rms-vs-d...
I can't say I disagree with RMS. Having a child is really nothing special. Every other person on the planet does that. And while I respect that for many parents, having their own kid is the best moment of their lives, I think RMS is right to point out that except said parents, no one else cares. It's a huge problem on social media now; one of the most annoying things is people continuously spamming everyone with photos of their newborns.
http://www.art.net/Studios/Hackers/Hopkins/Don/text/rms-vs-d...
I can't say I disagree with RMS. Having a child is really nothing special. Every other person on the planet does that. And while I respect that for many parents, having their own kid is the best moment of their lives, I think RMS is right to point out that except said parents, no one else cares. It's a huge problem on social media now; one of the most annoying things is people continuously spamming everyone with photos of their newborns.
You might not care, RMS might not care, but please don't assume that "no one else cares". I don't know you, and I don't know RMS, but he doesn't seem like the most emotionally intelligent person, perhaps you aren't either. Nothing wrong with that, you are who you are.
Some people are capable of responding very strongly to the emotions of others. I'm not saying they're better than you, just that they're different to you, and that they exist :)
Some people are capable of responding very strongly to the emotions of others. I'm not saying they're better than you, just that they're different to you, and that they exist :)
Ok, I might overstated it for dramatics, but what I'm complaining about is that being considerate should go both ways. I'll be happy for you that you have a kid and congratulate you, but please don't assume that it's in any way as important for me as it is for you.
It reminds me a thing my friend told me once, that she sometimes wonder whether if she'll have a kid, will she be as obnoxious about it on Facebook as many of her friends.
It reminds me a thing my friend told me once, that she sometimes wonder whether if she'll have a kid, will she be as obnoxious about it on Facebook as many of her friends.
That's ridiculous. No one's commitment to any organization or cause should be questioned if they choose to see their child born vs. coming into work.
Completely agree! Nobody should be shamed because he/she prioritizes things differently. As long as people accomplish the job agreed upon, it should not matter that some people are not OK with never seeing their family.
I think it's reasonable to expect an astronaut to report to work on the day of a launch regardless of personal circumstances. Also a soldier can't go AWOL in the middle of a mission to see his family. Same with a surgeon in the middle of a surgery. Those are pretty much the only cases I can think of.
I get the sense that, amusingly, Elon Musk sees himself and his company as that important.
I get the sense that, amusingly, Elon Musk sees himself and his company as that important.
"All the negative press and comments about this miss the point."
What, that working at Tesla is more important than being at the birth of your child, to both see them come into the world and support the mother during a physically and emotionally trying event?
Because that is the alleged point. And the criticism is spot-on.
What, that working at Tesla is more important than being at the birth of your child, to both see them come into the world and support the mother during a physically and emotionally trying event?
Because that is the alleged point. And the criticism is spot-on.
No, it's not. It's not that working at Tesla is more important for everyone. It's that if you do work at Tesla in that employee's role (which was key because he's getting direct emails from Elon Musk), then that's a sacrifice you need to make. For me, I'd much rather witness my child's birth, which is why I wouldn't take a job where I might have to miss that. The solution is not to take the job, not to criticize a guy literally changing the world for his process.
Playing by a specific, abnormal ruleset or not playing at all sounds more like a cult and a recipe for fatal groupthink than a healthy company culture. But hey, I'm not saying cults can't achieve great things. It's just that they are not usually that healthy for most participants.
True, but this "cult" says up-front that it cares about the end-goal and not profits, and is inviting people who are willing to think alike. I've noticed however that as both SpaceX and Tesla gain media exposure, there's an influx of people who want to join only to get a good line on their resume. These companies are definitely not healthy for such participants.
Unless the employee has the same reward ($$$) you can't expect the same level of commitment.
Witnessing the beginning of a life altering project is not even comparable to help somebody else build a car.
What would you think of a founder that misses the launch of his product?
That's over the line if it's true in my opinion. But again, all we have here is some anecdotal quotes that might be really out of context. It could just be just on a status update meeting on Monday 10am and the guy who's responsible for a critical component did not show up and no one knows why.
Musk even scolded a Tesla employee who missed an event to witness the birth of his child
If true, that diminishes my respect for Elon just a touch. I mean, OK, I get it... when you're trying to change the world, you want passion, you want commitment, etc. Fine. But here's the thing: in the end, you're just as dead either way. Change the world, you're still dead. Don't change the world: You're dead. The only thing that really counts in many ways (if such a thing can be said to even exist) is what happens "between the goalposts" so to speak.
If I were working for Elon and he said something like that to me, I'm pretty sure my answer would be "bugger off". You only get to witness the birth of a child once, ya know?
It's also important to remember that, as a founder, you'll never find people who are exactly as committed to your project and your ideals as you are. You just can't. It will always be your baby, and it will always hold significance to you that it will never hold for anyone else in the world. You may find people who are committed and passionate, but they still won't be you. To expect otherwise is folly.
If true, that diminishes my respect for Elon just a touch. I mean, OK, I get it... when you're trying to change the world, you want passion, you want commitment, etc. Fine. But here's the thing: in the end, you're just as dead either way. Change the world, you're still dead. Don't change the world: You're dead. The only thing that really counts in many ways (if such a thing can be said to even exist) is what happens "between the goalposts" so to speak.
If I were working for Elon and he said something like that to me, I'm pretty sure my answer would be "bugger off". You only get to witness the birth of a child once, ya know?
It's also important to remember that, as a founder, you'll never find people who are exactly as committed to your project and your ideals as you are. You just can't. It will always be your baby, and it will always hold significance to you that it will never hold for anyone else in the world. You may find people who are committed and passionate, but they still won't be you. To expect otherwise is folly.
If this statement is true and in the proper context (who knows), this all but kills my respect for Musk. It basically puts him at the same level as Jobs, Ellison and others who are just egotistical, sociopathic assholes.
Look, Musk /is/ out to change the world. His employees might not be, at least to the degree and level as he is. And, if they are, they'll likely not be remembered along with Musk. There is often only one, maybe two names attached to great achievements. If I'm an employee at a company like that (and I have been, and I have killed myself with long hours making someone else rich when I was young and dumb, before I realized what it was all about), I would do my job very, very well and make sure I have the balance in life /I/ want.
You don't want me to see the birth of my child? Sorry, fuck off. It's my time, my life, my family, my kid. And we aren't talking about a tee-ball game. This is the BIRTH. We aren't talking about kindergarten parent-teacher conferences. This is the birth, where you support your wife and see your child for the first time.
And, sadly, Musk probably doesn't realize because he is so wrapped up in his own world, but having a child IS changing the world for a few folks. But, ya know, sociopaths don't care about other people, just themselves.
I'm continually saddened that we put people on pedestals who so clearly aren't deserving of it. Musk is just another example of someone who /really/ is out for theirs and want to get it any way possible. I think we all thought, or maybe hoped, he was different. I don't know that he is.
Look, Musk /is/ out to change the world. His employees might not be, at least to the degree and level as he is. And, if they are, they'll likely not be remembered along with Musk. There is often only one, maybe two names attached to great achievements. If I'm an employee at a company like that (and I have been, and I have killed myself with long hours making someone else rich when I was young and dumb, before I realized what it was all about), I would do my job very, very well and make sure I have the balance in life /I/ want.
You don't want me to see the birth of my child? Sorry, fuck off. It's my time, my life, my family, my kid. And we aren't talking about a tee-ball game. This is the BIRTH. We aren't talking about kindergarten parent-teacher conferences. This is the birth, where you support your wife and see your child for the first time.
And, sadly, Musk probably doesn't realize because he is so wrapped up in his own world, but having a child IS changing the world for a few folks. But, ya know, sociopaths don't care about other people, just themselves.
I'm continually saddened that we put people on pedestals who so clearly aren't deserving of it. Musk is just another example of someone who /really/ is out for theirs and want to get it any way possible. I think we all thought, or maybe hoped, he was different. I don't know that he is.
I'm mostly just happy that we've largely figured out how to channel driven sociopaths into relatively productive pursuits like building rockets (and, yes, less productive things like finance) instead of conquering, pillaging, and salting the earth.
This is easily the best 'glass half full' statement on corporate sociopaths I've ever seen.
Thank you!
Thank you!
Heh, you're welcome!
I truly do think that one of the keys of modern civilization is that we've figured out a system where the best way to get ahead is to give people something they want, rather than by killing and stealing.
These people might be the ones tossing books into the Tigris until it runs black with ink, but instead they're "just" abusing people because of their family obligations, bending labor laws, etc.
Not to defend that sort of behavior in any way, but it's better!
I truly do think that one of the keys of modern civilization is that we've figured out a system where the best way to get ahead is to give people something they want, rather than by killing and stealing.
These people might be the ones tossing books into the Tigris until it runs black with ink, but instead they're "just" abusing people because of their family obligations, bending labor laws, etc.
Not to defend that sort of behavior in any way, but it's better!
> And, sadly, Musk probably doesn't realize because he is so wrapped up in his own world, but having a child IS changing the world for a few folks. But, ya know, sociopaths don't care about other people, just themselves.
I'm partial about this. The reply (assuming it's true, context, etc.) seemed very harsh and inconsiderate, and struck me as not his style (but I never worked for him so I don't know how he is day-to-day).
But the celebration of family I see in these comments is weird for me as well. Ok, so having a child is changing the world for a few folks. But the work done at Tesla and SpaceX will quite likely change the world for better for hundreds of millions or even billions of people. It's not the typical SV "change the world" = "build a mobile social spyware app", it's actually fixing some of the biggest problems humanity faces. Call me sociopath, but were I working for SpaceX or Tesla on some critical components, I probably wouldn't consider my own family more important than this work. Same if I was working for cutting-edge cure-cancer stuff. There are more important things than myself and my personal life.
I'm partial about this. The reply (assuming it's true, context, etc.) seemed very harsh and inconsiderate, and struck me as not his style (but I never worked for him so I don't know how he is day-to-day).
But the celebration of family I see in these comments is weird for me as well. Ok, so having a child is changing the world for a few folks. But the work done at Tesla and SpaceX will quite likely change the world for better for hundreds of millions or even billions of people. It's not the typical SV "change the world" = "build a mobile social spyware app", it's actually fixing some of the biggest problems humanity faces. Call me sociopath, but were I working for SpaceX or Tesla on some critical components, I probably wouldn't consider my own family more important than this work. Same if I was working for cutting-edge cure-cancer stuff. There are more important things than myself and my personal life.
I think the main issue here, as has been pointed out by other commenters, is that choice between a personal life and between work even at companies like SpaceX and Tesla is a false dichotomy. There should be no person who is so singularly important to a task that s/he cannot afford to be away without notice for even a day.[0]
Dressing it up by saying you're changing the world is just another form of emotional manipulation.
[0] Anecdotal, but I work in the space industry. People taking off without prior notice for emergencies happens and doesn't elicit this type of response.
Dressing it up by saying you're changing the world is just another form of emotional manipulation.
[0] Anecdotal, but I work in the space industry. People taking off without prior notice for emergencies happens and doesn't elicit this type of response.
I'm continually saddened that we put people on pedestals who so clearly aren't deserving of it. Musk is just another example of someone who /really/ is out for theirs and want to get it any way possible. I think we all thought, or maybe hoped, he was different. I don't know that he is.
The thing is, there's nothing wrong with being obsessive, or even sociopathic to a point. Elon wants what he wants and he has a right to go after it with all his might. And to be honest, I expect he really is interested in making the world a better place in the general sense. Nothing about him gives off a "Bondian Supervillian" vibe or anything. I just think it's a mistake for him to assume that anyone else will necessarily share his level of dedication and passion, now matter how important his initiative is to him personally.
And when you start bossing people around, who would otherwise be your supporters, and saying stuff like this, I expect the principle consequence isn't "more commitment" form those people (not over the long-term anyway) but an increased desire on their part to tell you to fuck off, while they go find another outlet to try and change the world.
The thing is, there's nothing wrong with being obsessive, or even sociopathic to a point. Elon wants what he wants and he has a right to go after it with all his might. And to be honest, I expect he really is interested in making the world a better place in the general sense. Nothing about him gives off a "Bondian Supervillian" vibe or anything. I just think it's a mistake for him to assume that anyone else will necessarily share his level of dedication and passion, now matter how important his initiative is to him personally.
And when you start bossing people around, who would otherwise be your supporters, and saying stuff like this, I expect the principle consequence isn't "more commitment" form those people (not over the long-term anyway) but an increased desire on their part to tell you to fuck off, while they go find another outlet to try and change the world.
>You only get to witness the birth of a child once
You know what else? Though it's rare, the spouse is needed to make important decisions in the event of some unplanned problem and the incapacitation of the mother.
You know what else? Though it's rare, the spouse is needed to make important decisions in the event of some unplanned problem and the incapacitation of the mother.
But it's a good idea if the would be parents talk about what they want to happen and write it down. Just in case.
My parents' birth plan went out the window when my mother had an emergency C-section 4 weeks early because I was breech and there were unexpected complications. Plus, mom had an adverse reaction to the anesthesia that was used. It's not easy to plan for things that could go wrong - which is why I'm going to do everything in my power to make sure that my partner or my mother is there to advocate for me if I can't for whatever reason.
Birth plans have moved on. They should consider the rare but catestrophic events -- the doctors can only save either the mother or the child. Which one do they save?
Most people don't like thinking about it, and most parents won't need it. But it is a good idea.
Most people don't like thinking about it, and most parents won't need it. But it is a good idea.
that diminishes my respect for Elon just a touch
You are way more generous than I am.
You are way more generous than I am.
I mean, it's one incident, at one point in time, with very little context. I'm hardly in a position to judge somebody based on that. Who here hasn't said something insensitive or less than compassionate to somebody else, at some point in time? Does that mean we're all bad people? Nah...
Even though I'm totally not religious, I try to adhere somewhat to that old saw about "let ye who be free from sin throw the first stone" or whatever.
Even though I'm totally not religious, I try to adhere somewhat to that old saw about "let ye who be free from sin throw the first stone" or whatever.
You changed my mind in more than one way. Thank you.
[deleted](1)
If this is true it's a little bit sad. If a person isn't present in the most important moments of a family is "changing the world" of the family for worse and not for better.
> is "changing the world" of the family for worse and not for better
Hypothetical counterexample: What if he were busy curing cancer and thus making sure that the future world of that very family would be a nicer place, one where the children would never have to experience that disease?
Hypothetical counterexample: What if he were busy curing cancer and thus making sure that the future world of that very family would be a nicer place, one where the children would never have to experience that disease?
That is a classic false dichotomy. You never, ever need to choose between those two things. You can have some semblance of both in nearly ALL cases.
I was thinking of a generalization. Choosing between working on something important in the future for many people vs. spending time in the now with a few people you value.
I.e. if you don't single out the event "birth of a child" but look at the more generalized category "spending time with family and friends" then the response may be more understandable.
If Elon truly convinced himself that he's basically trying to do his own contribution to saving the world (climate change and such) then in his mind he may be working to save countless future lives at the expense of some personal time of his own and his employees. And thus "birth of a child" and "going bowling with friends" don't seem all that different.
It's basically a side-effect of convincing himself absolutely of his own mission.
Also note that scolding is not necessarily the same thing as punishment. It's just a harsh way of stating a preference. I.e. that he would prefer if they'd spend more time on saving the world.
I.e. if you don't single out the event "birth of a child" but look at the more generalized category "spending time with family and friends" then the response may be more understandable.
If Elon truly convinced himself that he's basically trying to do his own contribution to saving the world (climate change and such) then in his mind he may be working to save countless future lives at the expense of some personal time of his own and his employees. And thus "birth of a child" and "going bowling with friends" don't seem all that different.
It's basically a side-effect of convincing himself absolutely of his own mission.
Also note that scolding is not necessarily the same thing as punishment. It's just a harsh way of stating a preference. I.e. that he would prefer if they'd spend more time on saving the world.
That's just a rationalization. I really doubt Elon cares about anything but his own driving ambition. People who can't prioritize their own loved ones over their jobs, surely don't care for "humanity". They are the very definition of selfish. They simply do what they want first and then rationalize it afterwards.
On top of that, these selfish people expect/demand that their employees work infinitely harder than they do on a ROI basis. Example: A start up founder may worked twice as many hours as the founding engineer but the founder stands to make a lot more than twice as much when the company has it's liquidation event.
On top of that, these selfish people expect/demand that their employees work infinitely harder than they do on a ROI basis. Example: A start up founder may worked twice as many hours as the founding engineer but the founder stands to make a lot more than twice as much when the company has it's liquidation event.
> I really doubt Elon cares about anything but his own driving ambition. People who can't prioritize their own loved ones over their jobs, surely don't care for "humanity". They are the very definition of selfish. They simply do what they want first and then rationalize it afterwards.
No, I think what you wrote is selfish and is a typical rationalization of having a botched moral compass. I should prioritize my own over the rest of the world, so it's ok to fuck everyone over as long as I and my family are happy. This is how a lot of world seems to operate. You wouldn't have companies polluting rivers, or shoppers cheating you on every occasion possible, if those people were not prioritizing themselves and their families over other humans. It's easy to rationalize the harm by saying to yourself, "I have kids to feed, so fuck those other people, I need that money".
> On top of that, these selfish people expect/demand that their employees work infinitely harder than they do on a ROI basis. Example: A start up founder may worked twice as many hours as the founding engineer but the founder stands to make a lot more than twice as much when the company has it's liquidation event.
While this may apply to many startups, it doesn't apply to SpaceX and Tesla, and it's disingenuous to discuss them in such terms. The ROI on electrification of transport, switching everyone away from fossil fuels and enabling life on another planet is fuckton lot for every single human being. It dwarfs most of the personal sacrifices you could make. And still, no one is telling you to do it; people who join those companies know up-front what's the goal, and how much dedication is required.
No, I think what you wrote is selfish and is a typical rationalization of having a botched moral compass. I should prioritize my own over the rest of the world, so it's ok to fuck everyone over as long as I and my family are happy. This is how a lot of world seems to operate. You wouldn't have companies polluting rivers, or shoppers cheating you on every occasion possible, if those people were not prioritizing themselves and their families over other humans. It's easy to rationalize the harm by saying to yourself, "I have kids to feed, so fuck those other people, I need that money".
> On top of that, these selfish people expect/demand that their employees work infinitely harder than they do on a ROI basis. Example: A start up founder may worked twice as many hours as the founding engineer but the founder stands to make a lot more than twice as much when the company has it's liquidation event.
While this may apply to many startups, it doesn't apply to SpaceX and Tesla, and it's disingenuous to discuss them in such terms. The ROI on electrification of transport, switching everyone away from fossil fuels and enabling life on another planet is fuckton lot for every single human being. It dwarfs most of the personal sacrifices you could make. And still, no one is telling you to do it; people who join those companies know up-front what's the goal, and how much dedication is required.
" I should prioritize my own over the rest of the world"
It feels like you're suggesting that a job such as SpaceX is automatically beneficial to the rest of the world.
I suggest that you are assuming too much. Could SpaceX usher in a golden age of transport and colonisation? Sure. It might also fail.
I suggest that you are also assuming too much by suggesting that parenting your children is selfish and (implicitly) doesn't benefit the world. It's possibly that SpaceX takes us all to Mars and none of the kids/descendants of its employees were ever going to achieve world changing things without their mum/dad being around more. It's also possible that some of those kids would have achieved greatness if only they had a more present mum/dad in their life.
You can't bail the future down, it's made of unrealised possibilities that we make real with our choices. Those choices are either implicit or explicit and we have no way of knowing what will actually happen.
It feels like you're suggesting that a job such as SpaceX is automatically beneficial to the rest of the world.
I suggest that you are assuming too much. Could SpaceX usher in a golden age of transport and colonisation? Sure. It might also fail.
I suggest that you are also assuming too much by suggesting that parenting your children is selfish and (implicitly) doesn't benefit the world. It's possibly that SpaceX takes us all to Mars and none of the kids/descendants of its employees were ever going to achieve world changing things without their mum/dad being around more. It's also possible that some of those kids would have achieved greatness if only they had a more present mum/dad in their life.
You can't bail the future down, it's made of unrealised possibilities that we make real with our choices. Those choices are either implicit or explicit and we have no way of knowing what will actually happen.
Then someone else could take over his position for a few hours while he attended the birth of his child.
With a market cap of 26 billion dollars, Tesla can afford to hire enough employees.
With a market cap of 26 billion dollars, Tesla can afford to hire enough employees.
He's probably better motivated and does better work if you give him time away from work to be with his spouse and child.
Possibly so, but I was merely trying to dismantle the fairly blunt assertion that it's unconditionally making the world of the family worse.
> it's unconditionally making the world of the family worse
It obviously is.
The 48 hours or whatever curing cancer can and will continue another time. Child birth won't.
And if you can't even afford to prioritize your family at such little cost to your work, then I think it's also pretty easy to assert that the world of the family will continually be worse off. Unless you actually cure cancer next year, collect your $1billion and quit your job to focus on your family from then on.
It's much more likely you're going to continually prioritize trivial work events (or in this scenario, non-events) over important family ones.
It obviously is.
The 48 hours or whatever curing cancer can and will continue another time. Child birth won't.
And if you can't even afford to prioritize your family at such little cost to your work, then I think it's also pretty easy to assert that the world of the family will continually be worse off. Unless you actually cure cancer next year, collect your $1billion and quit your job to focus on your family from then on.
It's much more likely you're going to continually prioritize trivial work events (or in this scenario, non-events) over important family ones.
> Unless you actually cure cancer next year, collect your $1billion and quit your job to focus on your family from then on.
Why is a hard cut-off date required?
If you take into account that your family extends into the future indefinitely (not just your children) and that there are gradual benefits (not just black-white) then spending time now to gradually improve the world for future generations (including those of your family) then you can come to the conclusion that a little hardship now could have tremendous payoffs in the future.
Maybe a slightly better example than the cancer case:
- spend a lot time with family now - miss climate change goals by the end of the century, making life significantly worse for everyone.
- spend less time with family now - meet goals, life continues to be good for hundreds of years to come
I know that this example is fairly reductionist, ignores diminishing returns and has various other problems, but it's merely there to illustrate that it gets a lot more difficult to appreciate the value of a little personal time in the present if you have an unusual utility-function in your moral code that applies a lot more weight to the future than most people do.
Why is a hard cut-off date required?
If you take into account that your family extends into the future indefinitely (not just your children) and that there are gradual benefits (not just black-white) then spending time now to gradually improve the world for future generations (including those of your family) then you can come to the conclusion that a little hardship now could have tremendous payoffs in the future.
Maybe a slightly better example than the cancer case:
- spend a lot time with family now - miss climate change goals by the end of the century, making life significantly worse for everyone.
- spend less time with family now - meet goals, life continues to be good for hundreds of years to come
I know that this example is fairly reductionist, ignores diminishing returns and has various other problems, but it's merely there to illustrate that it gets a lot more difficult to appreciate the value of a little personal time in the present if you have an unusual utility-function in your moral code that applies a lot more weight to the future than most people do.
> it's merely there to illustrate that it gets a lot more difficult to appreciate the value of a little personal time in the present if you have an unusual utility-function in your moral code that applies a lot more weight to the future than most people do.
That actually comes off very egotistical.
The damage you do to your family today by putting a simple job before them is likely to do damage far into the future.
Because you aren't that important. The cure will almost happen (or not) with or without you. The best you can likely hope for is to accelerate it. Everyone is replaceable in a job. Everyone. Parents aren't.
A decade ago I'd have been much more willing to agree with you. But today it feels like a superficial rationalization of ego. One man does not get to Mars.
Seems like this should be one of those named Internet Laws. i.e.: Any mention of "...more than most people" is self-flattery and an indication that the user lacks the empathy to understand that most people have actually considered the same thing at one point or another in their lives. As a corollary, the position professed generally only holds any truth in as much as most people have already considered and rejected it's premise and matured beyond it.
That actually comes off very egotistical.
The damage you do to your family today by putting a simple job before them is likely to do damage far into the future.
Because you aren't that important. The cure will almost happen (or not) with or without you. The best you can likely hope for is to accelerate it. Everyone is replaceable in a job. Everyone. Parents aren't.
A decade ago I'd have been much more willing to agree with you. But today it feels like a superficial rationalization of ego. One man does not get to Mars.
Seems like this should be one of those named Internet Laws. i.e.: Any mention of "...more than most people" is self-flattery and an indication that the user lacks the empathy to understand that most people have actually considered the same thing at one point or another in their lives. As a corollary, the position professed generally only holds any truth in as much as most people have already considered and rejected it's premise and matured beyond it.
> Because you aren't that important. The cure will almost happen (or not) with or without you. The best you can likely hope for is to accelerate it. Everyone is replaceable in a job. Everyone. Parents aren't.
By this standard I'd say that children are also replaceable, and therefore so are the parents. From the society's point of view, children are a commodity.
> That actually comes off very egotistical.
I strongly disagree. I find the opposite belief, that you should prioritize yourself and a small circle around you above all other people, to be much more self-centered. And it's part of the reason the world needs fixing in the first place - because most of the people tend to focus on themselves and their families at the expense of everyone else.
By this standard I'd say that children are also replaceable, and therefore so are the parents. From the society's point of view, children are a commodity.
> That actually comes off very egotistical.
I strongly disagree. I find the opposite belief, that you should prioritize yourself and a small circle around you above all other people, to be much more self-centered. And it's part of the reason the world needs fixing in the first place - because most of the people tend to focus on themselves and their families at the expense of everyone else.
1) If true, NONE of us here know under what circumstances this happened. Maybe Elon hadn't slept for days at the time and later apologized, or maybe the employee was really at fault. NONE OF US KNOW.
2) Some of the quotes from the book make me think the author merely went through other people's interviews/articles and compiled them into a sensationalist book.
2) Some of the quotes from the book make me think the author merely went through other people's interviews/articles and compiled them into a sensationalist book.
While this is true, it's also worth nothing that HN places Elon Musk on a pedestal and becomes incredibly defensive when someone criticizes him.
The reality is probably somewhere in the middle: Elon Musk is no doubt an amazing man, but he is not without flaws. I think we do need people pointing out those flaws to balance out all the hype and hero-worship.
The reality is probably somewhere in the middle: Elon Musk is no doubt an amazing man, but he is not without flaws. I think we do need people pointing out those flaws to balance out all the hype and hero-worship.
Agreed. I just get angry when people think it's a good idea to chime in on "gossip". This isn't Gawker.
If true -- that is, Musk was criticizing an employee specifically for being at their child's birth instead of work -- then he's an ass, and he's wrong. I would expect somebody with 5 children would know better.
Every man or woman put on a pedestal will inevitably disappoint their admirers in some regard. Steve Jobs, despite his skill at pushing Apple into a highly profitable and desirable direction, appears from most accounts to be a horrid, miserable human being. Same with every politician and celebrity.
I doubt this will change much; Musk's goals and reputation hinge on technical delivery, not interpersonal skills.
Every man or woman put on a pedestal will inevitably disappoint their admirers in some regard. Steve Jobs, despite his skill at pushing Apple into a highly profitable and desirable direction, appears from most accounts to be a horrid, miserable human being. Same with every politician and celebrity.
I doubt this will change much; Musk's goals and reputation hinge on technical delivery, not interpersonal skills.
Before anybody jumps to conclusions about Musk, we need to first know the source is accurate and the email is real, and also we need to know the context of the email.
It could be very well that the employee failed to communicate the fact his wife may go into labor prior to the event, and with no heads up of any kind, he gave the excuse after missing the event. In which case, I completely agree with Musk, if any employee is expecting to be out soon, they need to make it known. And let's face it...you have quite a few months notice on when the baby is due.
It could be very well that the employee failed to communicate the fact his wife may go into labor prior to the event, and with no heads up of any kind, he gave the excuse after missing the event. In which case, I completely agree with Musk, if any employee is expecting to be out soon, they need to make it known. And let's face it...you have quite a few months notice on when the baby is due.
Yes, you have a rough idea when babies are due. My middle child was born 5 weeks early, however. My last was born 3 weeks early. I've had employees send me a note a day after saying 'sorry, baby came early. more later'.
If you have any reaction other than "oh, ok, hope everyone is healthy", you are probably a terrible human being.
If you have any reaction other than "oh, ok, hope everyone is healthy", you are probably a terrible human being.
Regardless of the actual timing, if you have informed your employer that you are having a baby and it could be anywhere in the time frame, I think that should be accepted. However, if one day you are just gone and then came back and say 'we just had a baby', and that's the first time your employer has heard about it, then yeah, I can see that as a real problem.
In this kind of situation, it is much better to keep people you are obligated to as informed as possible, not keep it a secret. No matter if the baby comes a month early, at least they know you may be out and not wondering why you would miss without any indication you were expecting a child.
In this kind of situation, it is much better to keep people you are obligated to as informed as possible, not keep it a secret. No matter if the baby comes a month early, at least they know you may be out and not wondering why you would miss without any indication you were expecting a child.
Huh, my coworkers who have had pregnant spouses generally gave us a heads-up around week 24... unlikely to be that premature, but it helps everyone plan for that possibility.
Even if you give people at work a heads up at week 24, that's still a lot of weeks left to go in the ideal case. I caused my mother to get an emergency C-section 4 weeks early and it still wreaked havoc with everything - most importantly, my father missed my birth because he had to go pick up my grandmother flying in from halfway across the world, who thought 4 weeks was plenty early.
Besides, this kerfuffle says volumes about how some people would still react to an unexpected emergency. Death or severe illness in the family? Immediate medical emergencies? Taking care of myself and my immediate family comes before any corporate bullshit, personally. I wouldn't have it any other way.
Besides, this kerfuffle says volumes about how some people would still react to an unexpected emergency. Death or severe illness in the family? Immediate medical emergencies? Taking care of myself and my immediate family comes before any corporate bullshit, personally. I wouldn't have it any other way.
"And let's face it...you have quite a few months notice on when the baby is due."
This simply is not true! You should understand that the "due date" is a distribution in normal childbirth. Even for cesarian sections, which are scheduled, things can go awry.
In fact the second case is precisely what happened to my wife. She still had about 15 days to her scheduled cesarian when she visited the hospital for a routine checkup, during which they found that her blood pressure was too high and presented a mortal danger to the baby. They took her to delivery room immediately. She just had enough time to call me at work, I rushed like a madmen, but due to my long commute I still wan't there when our son was delivered.
This simply is not true! You should understand that the "due date" is a distribution in normal childbirth. Even for cesarian sections, which are scheduled, things can go awry.
In fact the second case is precisely what happened to my wife. She still had about 15 days to her scheduled cesarian when she visited the hospital for a routine checkup, during which they found that her blood pressure was too high and presented a mortal danger to the baby. They took her to delivery room immediately. She just had enough time to call me at work, I rushed like a madmen, but due to my long commute I still wan't there when our son was delivered.
And you hadn't given work a heads-up that she was getting close?
Edit: Just pointing out that there is an extremely easy way to notify your work, given the uncertain schedule of all childbirth.
Edit: Just pointing out that there is an extremely easy way to notify your work, given the uncertain schedule of all childbirth.
"It could be very well that the employee failed to communicate the fact his wife may go into labor prior to the event, and with no heads up of any kind, he gave the excuse after missing the event."
That's an excellent point that I had not considered. When my wife & I had a due date for both our children, I put everybody at work on notice about my possible lack of availability. That's just how I work. But it's entirely possible that the individual in question either flaked out completely or just spaced out about the logistics of the matter.
There are definitely some puzzle pieces missing from the story.
That's an excellent point that I had not considered. When my wife & I had a due date for both our children, I put everybody at work on notice about my possible lack of availability. That's just how I work. But it's entirely possible that the individual in question either flaked out completely or just spaced out about the logistics of the matter.
There are definitely some puzzle pieces missing from the story.
My first day at SpaceX I ran into a friend. I asked him how he was doing and he said he just had a kid. "How old is she now?" "Oh no, like, my wife just gave birth an hour ago."
The guy was working through the birth of his first born. The story continued for months afterwards and it's not a good one.
That and many other stories are what led me to quit. I took the summer off and didn't work. I hung out with my dog and got my pilot's license. A few months later my dog unexpectedly passed away one night. I was so, so happy I spent the last months of his life with him instead of at SpaceX.
I get working on big goals, I get working hard. I don't get throwing away everything else. It's not just your life it's the people who need a father and a friend.
The guy was working through the birth of his first born. The story continued for months afterwards and it's not a good one.
That and many other stories are what led me to quit. I took the summer off and didn't work. I hung out with my dog and got my pilot's license. A few months later my dog unexpectedly passed away one night. I was so, so happy I spent the last months of his life with him instead of at SpaceX.
I get working on big goals, I get working hard. I don't get throwing away everything else. It's not just your life it's the people who need a father and a friend.
I interviewed at a big company (unrelated to Mr. Musk) about a decade ago. The team was in a little satellite office away from headquarters, and we headed back to headquarters for lunch. As we walked into the cafe, the guy from the team who took me pointed to an office building next door and said something to the effect of, "Our office used to be right in there. It was so convenient! I could be at work, come down and grab dinner, then go right back up to work."
And that was the moment I knew I would decline their offer.
Some people really seem to go for that stuff, though.
And that was the moment I knew I would decline their offer.
Some people really seem to go for that stuff, though.
>> I get working on big goals, I get working hard. I don't get throwing away everything else. It's not just your life it's the people who need a father and a friend.
Agreed.
The quote which finally got me to realize my family was more important than my job:
"When you’re gone would you rather have your gravestone say, ‘He never missed a meeting.’ Or one that said, ‘He was a great father'."
Agreed.
The quote which finally got me to realize my family was more important than my job:
"When you’re gone would you rather have your gravestone say, ‘He never missed a meeting.’ Or one that said, ‘He was a great father'."
I agree that family is important and it's especially important to be there for other people, but regarding your quote, to the two gravestone inscriptions above I'd much prefer: "He helped mankind make its first steps on Mars.", or "He helped ensure the world is a good place to live for generations to come.".
Mars will be there in 20 years. Your kids' childhood won't.
OTOH the future my kid would live in would be better.
But honestly though, if I knew I'm doing work I consider that important, I wouldn't decide to have a kid in the first place.
But honestly though, if I knew I'm doing work I consider that important, I wouldn't decide to have a kid in the first place.
My uncle did that. Spent his life on eliminating malaria. Good work. Now he's dead and there are no kids in his line that might carry his intellectual legacy or create their own.
Human life is short term. Good genes and culture are long term. If everyone capable burned through their 50 or so years attempting to create a better world in such a hurry there'd be few with the capacity to perpetuate that vision or create their own.
It is not an either/or proposition. It is worth in in the long term to find balance, not for yourself, but for the future of humanity.
Human life is short term. Good genes and culture are long term. If everyone capable burned through their 50 or so years attempting to create a better world in such a hurry there'd be few with the capacity to perpetuate that vision or create their own.
It is not an either/or proposition. It is worth in in the long term to find balance, not for yourself, but for the future of humanity.
I'm sorry that your uncle passed away. I wish I could thank him while he was alive for the work he did.
You have an interesting point about passing on legacy, but then again there are so many people born every day, that there will be more than enough people to perpetuate the vision if they can learn about it. Having a child furthers memory only temporary. I myself don't know much about my grand-grandparents and have no clue about who their parents were. I doubt many people do. In the end, we all get forgotten, but our work may improve the lives of next generations.
> It is not an either/or proposition. It is worth in in the long term to find balance, not for yourself, but for the future of humanity.
I strongly agree, and that's how I try to look at it. I don't want to burn out, but I personally don't consider starting a family to be an important goal for me. I respect that it is for many others, and I believe they should be supported. Some people sacrifice themselves for others to have better lives. Some people are the others. And many are in the middle. I don't think any of them are making a bad choice.
You have an interesting point about passing on legacy, but then again there are so many people born every day, that there will be more than enough people to perpetuate the vision if they can learn about it. Having a child furthers memory only temporary. I myself don't know much about my grand-grandparents and have no clue about who their parents were. I doubt many people do. In the end, we all get forgotten, but our work may improve the lives of next generations.
> It is not an either/or proposition. It is worth in in the long term to find balance, not for yourself, but for the future of humanity.
I strongly agree, and that's how I try to look at it. I don't want to burn out, but I personally don't consider starting a family to be an important goal for me. I respect that it is for many others, and I believe they should be supported. Some people sacrifice themselves for others to have better lives. Some people are the others. And many are in the middle. I don't think any of them are making a bad choice.
You might not remember your great-grandparents but your DNA does. Your family culture does. Much of what makes you, you is built from their legacy. If you are out there learning and applying skills that are making the world better, you can bet that a significant measure of that disposition comes from decisions made by them 100 years ago.
And a hundred years from now our decisions will influence the make up of people trying to advance humanity (or not) in their time as well.
We are lucky as humans that we have effective ways to pass on information to each other and to the future generations and to have plenty of people for that information to find purchase. But I think it is a deep mistake to discount the ancient (and more reliable IMHO) vectors of genetics and family tradition.
I respect people's very personal choices but if I could wave a wand and change one pervasive thing about our world it would be to have people take a much longer view and incorporate that in their decision making. Much longer than the span of their own lives. That shift would lead to very different choices than are made on average today.
And a hundred years from now our decisions will influence the make up of people trying to advance humanity (or not) in their time as well.
We are lucky as humans that we have effective ways to pass on information to each other and to the future generations and to have plenty of people for that information to find purchase. But I think it is a deep mistake to discount the ancient (and more reliable IMHO) vectors of genetics and family tradition.
I respect people's very personal choices but if I could wave a wand and change one pervasive thing about our world it would be to have people take a much longer view and incorporate that in their decision making. Much longer than the span of their own lives. That shift would lead to very different choices than are made on average today.
> You might not remember your great-grandparents but your DNA does. Your family culture does. Much of what makes you, you is built from their legacy.
This sounds like a person arguing on behalf a cast system. Without the right family culture and DNA you can't possible be successful/worthwhile, lets just put those people in a cast to save time, easy labeling for all! Maybe if you breed with a better cast and become part of their family your future would be brighter, so we will arrange a marriage to make this so. This isn't some far off idea - this is the norm in some places, and it is disgusting.
Do you support eugenics? Do you think less of intelligent people who choose to adopt rather than breed? Do you think overpopulation is a non-issue? Do you believe cast systems are useful?
Human knowledge and functional advancement is vastly more important than genetics or children. Jonas Salk had three children, but anyone who claimed "his children are his greatest accomplishment" would be laughed at. His impact on mankind was direct. Direct impact is always better, because no matter how many generations your DNA is passed on, it is all meaningless until they at some point take action and do something. Mindless breeding is something rabbits can do.
There is this desperately sad tendency to want to "pass the buck" to children... sure, MY life was a huge waste, but maybe my children will be something special, maybe it was all worth it because of them.... or my grandchildren. People who do something in the here and now are to be admired because they are a rarity.
This sounds like a person arguing on behalf a cast system. Without the right family culture and DNA you can't possible be successful/worthwhile, lets just put those people in a cast to save time, easy labeling for all! Maybe if you breed with a better cast and become part of their family your future would be brighter, so we will arrange a marriage to make this so. This isn't some far off idea - this is the norm in some places, and it is disgusting.
Do you support eugenics? Do you think less of intelligent people who choose to adopt rather than breed? Do you think overpopulation is a non-issue? Do you believe cast systems are useful?
Human knowledge and functional advancement is vastly more important than genetics or children. Jonas Salk had three children, but anyone who claimed "his children are his greatest accomplishment" would be laughed at. His impact on mankind was direct. Direct impact is always better, because no matter how many generations your DNA is passed on, it is all meaningless until they at some point take action and do something. Mindless breeding is something rabbits can do.
There is this desperately sad tendency to want to "pass the buck" to children... sure, MY life was a huge waste, but maybe my children will be something special, maybe it was all worth it because of them.... or my grandchildren. People who do something in the here and now are to be admired because they are a rarity.
None of the things you are talking about were suggested or even mentioned by the parent comment. No one said anything about cast systems or eugenics. You are beating up a straw man.
It's pretty well supported that intelligence is heritable and greatly determined by genetics. But so are a huge number of other traits, like executive functioning and attention span, which also correlate with success.
And we don't need to be constrained by genetics either, even if a trait is environmental, parents still have a huge amount of influence over it. From education to work ethic, your upbringing has a huge amount of influence over you, and it's something you basically pass down to your children just like genetics.
>Jonas Salk had three children, but anyone who claimed "his children are his greatest accomplishment" would be laughed at.
This is a counterexample to the claims you are defending, that you can't be successful/change the world, and have a family.
Regardless, that's great if you are Jonas Salk. Sacrifice your personal life to save the world. It's certainly a noble thing to attempt.
But most likely you aren't Jonas Salk. The average person is not going to impact the world anywhere near the level of Jonas Salk, no matter what career they are in or how hard they try. Even Salk, if he hadn't been at the right place at the right time, working on the right problem, would not have been remembered today.
So yes it's not surprising that his children aren't known for anything. Even if they had been exact clones of him, they were born at the wrong time to cure polio. But if they are like him, they have the same probability of doing great things as he did when he started. So if your goal is to maximize the probability of doing great things, having children isn't a horrible option.
It's pretty well supported that intelligence is heritable and greatly determined by genetics. But so are a huge number of other traits, like executive functioning and attention span, which also correlate with success.
And we don't need to be constrained by genetics either, even if a trait is environmental, parents still have a huge amount of influence over it. From education to work ethic, your upbringing has a huge amount of influence over you, and it's something you basically pass down to your children just like genetics.
>Jonas Salk had three children, but anyone who claimed "his children are his greatest accomplishment" would be laughed at.
This is a counterexample to the claims you are defending, that you can't be successful/change the world, and have a family.
Regardless, that's great if you are Jonas Salk. Sacrifice your personal life to save the world. It's certainly a noble thing to attempt.
But most likely you aren't Jonas Salk. The average person is not going to impact the world anywhere near the level of Jonas Salk, no matter what career they are in or how hard they try. Even Salk, if he hadn't been at the right place at the right time, working on the right problem, would not have been remembered today.
So yes it's not surprising that his children aren't known for anything. Even if they had been exact clones of him, they were born at the wrong time to cure polio. But if they are like him, they have the same probability of doing great things as he did when he started. So if your goal is to maximize the probability of doing great things, having children isn't a horrible option.
I've argued for none of the nasty things you think.
I am not arguing for a caste system or eugenics. I believe in meritocracy. I believe, though, that people are shaped by their genes to some extent. It is not the whole of the person but there is an effect. Why does this matter? Well, over time I think family functioning evolves to maximize member success based on predispositions. What does that mean? Well, I think of my brother in laws family. They are a quiet reserved people who are very religious. My brother in law is not religious but he fills that deep psychological need in other ways. They know how to deal with each other and give each other advice and guidance that works for them. My family, on the other hand, is loud and gregarious and we need to be busy all of the time. We have our own mechanisms for support and success that work very well for us. They are not very mutually compatible. If we swapped children there would be considerable friction and they would not be as successful as they would be in their native habitat. Is some of this behavior learned? Of course. Is some of it genetic? Definitely. Is either family 'better' or 'superior'? No. Just different. As things stand now our respective families build on our strengths. This type of diversity is important for our species.
I certainly applaud people who choose to adopt as I think this is a great way to pass on 'family intelligence'.
I think overpopulation is a solvable problem and not nearly the size of issue it is made out to be. I certainly don't want people with a demonstrated successful approach to life to eschew bringing their brand of life into the world and nurturing it. People as a whole are not going to stop breeding and the only way to solve the problems that overpopulation brings along with our other problems are capable human minds.
The caste system is overly rigid to be useful. It is disgusting, I agree, because it wastes human potential. But that doesn't mean that what a person learns from their family and heritage is not important, just not all important. There is a big distinction there.
And I do thing that knowledge and technology are important. But not all important. Again, there is a big distinction.
And I never said children are everyone's 'greatest accomplishment'. That's silly. I am saying that focusing on the now and chasing ephemeral success and ignoring what will last beyond one's own short life might be a short term winner but a long term loser. Jonas Salk's children might not cure any global diseases but what about their children? What about their children's children? What about 500 years from now? Can you say that some predisposition that is passed on from Salk's genes or familial values will not influence his progeny to make the world an even better place? Direct impact is deeply important but it can't exist without existence. Where do you think the Jonas Salks of this world come from?
You seem to think that having children keeps people from making an impact. It absolutely does not. It is a false dichotomy. That is what I am trying to get across. It is like working 18 hours a day to get something done -- in the short term you might accomplish your goal, but how many times is getting something done in a month that you could've done in three really going to make a huge difference when considering the long term price you pay? Do you know what is even more rare than doers? People who do for the long term because that means thinking about the long term. All too rare. And the lack of that perspective means that people who do think for the long term are discounted. Having kids? Oh jeez, now that person is useless. Its a poisonous idea that affects far more than the person spending their life like it was a stolen credit card.
I am not arguing for a caste system or eugenics. I believe in meritocracy. I believe, though, that people are shaped by their genes to some extent. It is not the whole of the person but there is an effect. Why does this matter? Well, over time I think family functioning evolves to maximize member success based on predispositions. What does that mean? Well, I think of my brother in laws family. They are a quiet reserved people who are very religious. My brother in law is not religious but he fills that deep psychological need in other ways. They know how to deal with each other and give each other advice and guidance that works for them. My family, on the other hand, is loud and gregarious and we need to be busy all of the time. We have our own mechanisms for support and success that work very well for us. They are not very mutually compatible. If we swapped children there would be considerable friction and they would not be as successful as they would be in their native habitat. Is some of this behavior learned? Of course. Is some of it genetic? Definitely. Is either family 'better' or 'superior'? No. Just different. As things stand now our respective families build on our strengths. This type of diversity is important for our species.
I certainly applaud people who choose to adopt as I think this is a great way to pass on 'family intelligence'.
I think overpopulation is a solvable problem and not nearly the size of issue it is made out to be. I certainly don't want people with a demonstrated successful approach to life to eschew bringing their brand of life into the world and nurturing it. People as a whole are not going to stop breeding and the only way to solve the problems that overpopulation brings along with our other problems are capable human minds.
The caste system is overly rigid to be useful. It is disgusting, I agree, because it wastes human potential. But that doesn't mean that what a person learns from their family and heritage is not important, just not all important. There is a big distinction there.
And I do thing that knowledge and technology are important. But not all important. Again, there is a big distinction.
And I never said children are everyone's 'greatest accomplishment'. That's silly. I am saying that focusing on the now and chasing ephemeral success and ignoring what will last beyond one's own short life might be a short term winner but a long term loser. Jonas Salk's children might not cure any global diseases but what about their children? What about their children's children? What about 500 years from now? Can you say that some predisposition that is passed on from Salk's genes or familial values will not influence his progeny to make the world an even better place? Direct impact is deeply important but it can't exist without existence. Where do you think the Jonas Salks of this world come from?
You seem to think that having children keeps people from making an impact. It absolutely does not. It is a false dichotomy. That is what I am trying to get across. It is like working 18 hours a day to get something done -- in the short term you might accomplish your goal, but how many times is getting something done in a month that you could've done in three really going to make a huge difference when considering the long term price you pay? Do you know what is even more rare than doers? People who do for the long term because that means thinking about the long term. All too rare. And the lack of that perspective means that people who do think for the long term are discounted. Having kids? Oh jeez, now that person is useless. Its a poisonous idea that affects far more than the person spending their life like it was a stolen credit card.
Some people sacrifice themselves for a probability that many people will have better lives.
Some people sacrifice themselves for a probability that specific people around them will have better lives.
It's disingenuous to say that only those who work for some greater good are making sacrifices.
Which sacrifice is more "noble"? Unless you know the parameters (magnitude of sacrifice, probabilities of change, incremental impact from your involvement, number of people affected, degree to which lives are bettered), you have no way to evaluate this.
(Not that there's anything wrong with making personal value judgments in the matter; they just don't make particularly good arguments.)
Some people sacrifice themselves for a probability that specific people around them will have better lives.
It's disingenuous to say that only those who work for some greater good are making sacrifices.
Which sacrifice is more "noble"? Unless you know the parameters (magnitude of sacrifice, probabilities of change, incremental impact from your involvement, number of people affected, degree to which lives are bettered), you have no way to evaluate this.
(Not that there's anything wrong with making personal value judgments in the matter; they just don't make particularly good arguments.)
The question is about whether you'd have it say that or that you were a great father. It's rare to be able to do both, particularly if the company's CEO says having a child is "no excuse" to miss an event. Not a deadline or a board presentation or an earnings report. An event.
We don't really have all the context of the message. For instance what was the event? (The launch of their first rocket might be classified as an even to Musk for all I know)
What was the message that was sent to prompt this reply? I mean he starts with 'That is no excuse' so he is clearly referring to an email sent to him and I am trusting about the general content of the email chain. But for all I know this guy just got up and left work when heard his child was being born as opposed to actually taking time off. While this is a completely invented narrative by me, it could be that it was that kind of action that can leave a lot of other people in the lurch is what there was no excuse for.
My point is simply that many people are reading things into the quote which do not seem to be explicitly stated, but are being treated as though they are.
What was the message that was sent to prompt this reply? I mean he starts with 'That is no excuse' so he is clearly referring to an email sent to him and I am trusting about the general content of the email chain. But for all I know this guy just got up and left work when heard his child was being born as opposed to actually taking time off. While this is a completely invented narrative by me, it could be that it was that kind of action that can leave a lot of other people in the lurch is what there was no excuse for.
My point is simply that many people are reading things into the quote which do not seem to be explicitly stated, but are being treated as though they are.
Pretty sure the ppl of Nasa/JPL who actually put a man on the moon, worked reasonable hours and almost never missed dinner with family.
So, I don't think they're mutually exclusive
EDIT: So, everybody was screwed then? I must have mixed anecdotes :)
EDIT: So, everybody was screwed then? I must have mixed anecdotes :)
"The room, the hours that we worked were incredible. I don't think anyone ever worked anything less than 10 to 12 hours each day. Saturday was a normal day of work; in fact, that's the way we felt it should be. We were given this impossible dream by President Kennedy, and we were living it. We were doing the kinds of things that engineers would kill for. And as part of this process, we'd go and open up our pay—we were surprised we were getting paid by this thing here. As long as we had enough money to make things meet, that's all we needed. The job was our life, and we lived this literally every day."
- NASA Flight Controller Gene Kranz
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tothemoon/kranz.html
- NASA Flight Controller Gene Kranz
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tothemoon/kranz.html
10 - 12 hours a day is pretty typical in the entertainment business. Most tv shows do 12s for an entire year, movies about the same for less, and VFX workers during crunch time (which is near permanent for some) 12 is usually the minimum. Plus your weekends are gone.
At least the guys in the Space Program were doing for a far more valuable reason.
At least the guys in the Space Program were doing for a far more valuable reason.
Gene Kranz is an interesting case here. He had a loving and very supporting wife who would make him new vests for every mission, which became symbolic for the team he worked with.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gene-kranzs-apollo-ves...
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gene-kranzs-apollo-ves...
RE your edit - that's probably part of the reason it took only 12 years after Sputnik to get a man on the moon - because for people working on it this wasn't a job, this was their life. They did it for the goal itself, and not for money.
Your statement couldn't be farther from the truth (or you forgot the /sarcasm tag?). Watch "Moon Machines" mini-series (6 episodes), with many interviews of the engineers behind the Apollo program. They were all working crazy hours, many divorced during the project because of work/family imbalance.
[deleted]
I am pretty sure that is completely false, from what I have read of the early space program, it sounds like it had a way of devouring lives.
"The Apollo 11 crew calculated they spent 2000 hours in simulators between their selection in January and their flight in July 1969." http://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-8-3.html
And the book makes numerous references to others at NASA working long hours too.
"Apollo had become intimately interwoven in the fabric of the waking hours of my life and often caused the remaining hours to be fewer than they should have been." http://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-7-1.html
"I'd be checking on alertness, especially among men who had been working long hours. Were they fatigued? Were they concentrating on the dials? Was there any unnecessary chit-chat going on?" http://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-6-3.html
"The Apollo 11 crew calculated they spent 2000 hours in simulators between their selection in January and their flight in July 1969." http://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-8-3.html
And the book makes numerous references to others at NASA working long hours too.
"Apollo had become intimately interwoven in the fabric of the waking hours of my life and often caused the remaining hours to be fewer than they should have been." http://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-7-1.html
"I'd be checking on alertness, especially among men who had been working long hours. Were they fatigued? Were they concentrating on the dials? Was there any unnecessary chit-chat going on?" http://history.nasa.gov/SP-350/ch-6-3.html
That is approximately 10 hours of simulator work a day, plus other regular work.
Agreed that you need work very hard for success. But at what cost? There is a balance. If a person can't be there for their newly born child, one might as well not have a kid at the first place.
All of us have been in situations where we had to put our head down and work marathon hours straight for days to get things done. We've also had days when we had nothing to do. We are not bots to clock $x amount of time of time everyday.
There is always time to accomodate family and other commitments.
Agreed that you need work very hard for success. But at what cost? There is a balance. If a person can't be there for their newly born child, one might as well not have a kid at the first place.
All of us have been in situations where we had to put our head down and work marathon hours straight for days to get things done. We've also had days when we had nothing to do. We are not bots to clock $x amount of time of time everyday.
There is always time to accomodate family and other commitments.
I'd prefer to have it say both, but if I were to chose only one, I'd want Mars/future for everyone.
> Not a deadline or a board presentation or an earnings report. An event.
As others said, it's not clear what the "event" was and what was the context of the message. I'd be surprised if Musk really turned out to be so inconsiderate as some people assume here.
> Not a deadline or a board presentation or an earnings report. An event.
As others said, it's not clear what the "event" was and what was the context of the message. I'd be surprised if Musk really turned out to be so inconsiderate as some people assume here.
Neither of those things will matter to people who love you but I suppose it would help a selfish person rationalize loving their jobs more than their family.
That's kind of the point I'm making. Given a choice, why should I promote few people in my inner circle over hundreds, thousands or more other people?
This really bothers me. There's a common mentality that says it's OK to harm countless of strangers in order to support yourself and your family. I think that is selfish.
This really bothers me. There's a common mentality that says it's OK to harm countless of strangers in order to support yourself and your family. I think that is selfish.
Somehow we've gone from "Elon cares more about his business than he does about his employees - to the extreme."
To: "Would it be OK to be a dick if you're curing cancer?"
And when that didn't play, the argument was reframed again as: "You're harming countless strangers unless you're a dick."
Twist it anyway you want, if someone wants to be a selfish dick, they should own it, not rationalize it. I'm pretty sure the conquistadors didn't do what they did because they wanted to bring Christianity to the New World...
If you can't prioritize (what should be) the most important of your personal relationships above what you want to do, it's unlikely that the real reason you working is because you have a surplus of love for the world.
To: "Would it be OK to be a dick if you're curing cancer?"
And when that didn't play, the argument was reframed again as: "You're harming countless strangers unless you're a dick."
Twist it anyway you want, if someone wants to be a selfish dick, they should own it, not rationalize it. I'm pretty sure the conquistadors didn't do what they did because they wanted to bring Christianity to the New World...
If you can't prioritize (what should be) the most important of your personal relationships above what you want to do, it's unlikely that the real reason you working is because you have a surplus of love for the world.
> If you can't prioritize (what should be) the most important of your personal relationships above what you want to do, it's unlikely that the real reason you working is because you have a surplus of love for the world.
Is having a surplus of love for the world a bad thing? I believe a lot of problems would solve themselves if we have more. Also, relationships are also something you want to do, you aren't forced into them at gunpoint.
Also the answer as it seems (without the context we don't know for sure) was dickish, but I wouldn't call it selfish. Just incredibly rude.
Is having a surplus of love for the world a bad thing? I believe a lot of problems would solve themselves if we have more. Also, relationships are also something you want to do, you aren't forced into them at gunpoint.
Also the answer as it seems (without the context we don't know for sure) was dickish, but I wouldn't call it selfish. Just incredibly rude.
You misread his statement. He is NOT saying that having a surplus of love for the world is bad. He IS saying that, in the scenario he describes, one likely does NOT have a surplus of love for the world. (tl;dr - it means that person is probably just being selfish and/or self-deceiving)
> Also, relationships are also something you want to do, you aren't forced into them at gunpoint.
That's true. For example, people can choose to have a relationship with their kids, they can also abandon them. Happens all the time. :-(
That's true. For example, people can choose to have a relationship with their kids, they can also abandon them. Happens all the time. :-(
“I love mankind ... it's people I can't stand!!” ― Charles M. Schulz
I disagree. The best thing we, as individuals, can do for future society is to guide and nurture our kids. If you don't have that responsibility (you don't have kids), by all means go all out. If you do have kids, take care of them first. I actually feel very bad for Elon's kids. Money and accomplishment isn't everything. Hopefully, they at least have a good mom. BTW, you can still accomplish other great things while doing this, but you certainly can't work 23 hour days.
That only works if you really have an opportunity to affect hundreds or thousands of people, to the same extent you would affect your family. That seems incredibly unlikely, unless you are a scientist on the verge of curing cancer or something.
A single employee at a space company missing a few hours of work isn't that, and it's certainly not "harming countless strangers", or "selfish".
A single employee at a space company missing a few hours of work isn't that, and it's certainly not "harming countless strangers", or "selfish".
I like your phrasing. It prevents being busy for its own sake. I wonder how much work at Space X is "help mankind make its first steps on Mars" and how much work is TPS reports.
And, were I employed at SpaceX, my commitment would probably vary depending on that distinctions. Reports can wait, so don't you dare tell me to skip a very important family moment. But if I were deep in the critical parts of the path to making humans multiplanetary species, or in Tesla the electrification of transport process, I'd probably consider this more important than any but most special personal events.
I think the point is, that with this job, Musk want's people whose dream and life goal is the success of what the company is trying to do, and not to have a family or any such commonly accepted life goal.
I believe improving space travel is one of a handful of dreams/goals that there are potentially enough talented people out there, that one could find the people who want this to be their life as opposed to that of a more traditional role.
I know this may illicit the typical 'burn out is real' responses, and I know it is but I honestly don't think it occurs if you are a person with a singular passion and you are lucky enough to be pursuing it for your 'work'.
I believe improving space travel is one of a handful of dreams/goals that there are potentially enough talented people out there, that one could find the people who want this to be their life as opposed to that of a more traditional role.
I know this may illicit the typical 'burn out is real' responses, and I know it is but I honestly don't think it occurs if you are a person with a singular passion and you are lucky enough to be pursuing it for your 'work'.
I too believe it's Musk's idea. He stated many times that Tesla/SpaceX is not a regular company, but sort of "special forces" where you're supposed to give all you've got because you believe in the mission. But then again, with rising popularity of those companies, it seems that many people join them in order to build up their resumes, and then get surprised by the amount of dedication required.
An acquaintance who works for one of Boeing's manufacturing plants told me of an encounter he witnessed between a manager and another employee regarding how hard they were being worked. The manager told the employee, in all sincerity, that "if Boeing wanted them to have a family they would have been issued one."
Yea, I really enjoy programming but I have yet to be able to come to terms with this idea that if I'd like to be a professional software engineer I have to want to be the world's saving grace rockstar ninja programmer.
Isn't it enough to want to wake up refreshed every day, put in a good solid 6-7 hours of professional quality engineering work, and then have the time and energy to want to perform all of the other duties and joys to be found in life?
Isn't it enough to want to wake up refreshed every day, put in a good solid 6-7 hours of professional quality engineering work, and then have the time and energy to want to perform all of the other duties and joys to be found in life?
That is enough. Anyone that tries to convince you otherwise wants to leverage your Life for their benefit.
That's enough for lots of jobs. It's just not enough for all jobs, and the ones it's not enough for tend to get more publicity (and, with good reason, higher salaries).
Yeah if you can find a job that is okay with you only working 30 hours a week while paying you for 40, hang on to it and never let go.
You missed the "quality engineering work" disclaimer. Any reasonably good project manager knows that, between meetings, email, and water cooler conversation, you get about 30-32 hours of actual project work from someone each week.
30 hours sounds pretty high to me :-)
Please tell my boss that :)
He knows. :) He just doesn't let you know he knows.
Or your boss doesn't know, and isn't a reasonably good project manager.
Oh haha, I wasn't even thinking in that regard, I'd gladly take the pay drop for the time since it'd still be a pretty decent salary generally.
Work hard, but work 20% less hours, get paid 20% less and get a life in exchange. For me, this is a really good deal.
I don't care about Musk either way, so I doubt this is too biased in his favor, but I don't think many people would knowingly say something like the phrase in the article to someone who went to his child's birth. I consider it more likely that Musk didn't know that the person was missing because of the birth, or something similar, than that someone would say "yeah this company event is more important than your child being born".
I've heard him talking before, and this doesn't surprise me at all. He has a definite mean streak, and he's almost gleeful about being nasty.
I tend to agree. Without much information on the other side, it's hard to figure out exactly what the context was. I doubt the employee was expected to miss the actual birth but was expected to return to the event/office, perhaps sooner than other employers might expect.
If true that would be hard to not shape my perspective of the man. I can't respect the Daniel Plainviews of the world.
There's not enough information for a fair opinion on the matter, so I flagged the article. It's not the first time that ambiguous sources try to smear Elon Musk. The ex-wife rant was enough.
There are so many variables we are not aware of. Dismissing Elon as a "the bad guy" is giving too much credit to an unknown source.
There are so many variables we are not aware of. Dismissing Elon as a "the bad guy" is giving too much credit to an unknown source.
I'm a fan of Musk and his companies. I own one of his cars (as far as they can be called "his," obviously there are tons of people involved) and it's even better than all the "best car in the world!" people say. I follow every SpaceX launch and am eager to see them pull off their stage recovery attempts soon.
That said, this doesn't surprise me at all. He doesn't seem like the kind of guy I'd want to work for. My admiration is about vision and execution, not personal relationships. He may well be a dick, and it would be no shock if he is.
Maybe this is what it takes to do big things. Maybe it's entirely unnecessary. Either way it reminds me a bit of Steve Jobs, who was undeniably a massive jerk, but who got things done.
I forget exactly what my point was here. I guess it's just that this is a bit of a "water is wet" story mixed in with celebrity gossip. It's highly important for the people involved but not terribly relevant for the rest of us.
That said, this doesn't surprise me at all. He doesn't seem like the kind of guy I'd want to work for. My admiration is about vision and execution, not personal relationships. He may well be a dick, and it would be no shock if he is.
Maybe this is what it takes to do big things. Maybe it's entirely unnecessary. Either way it reminds me a bit of Steve Jobs, who was undeniably a massive jerk, but who got things done.
I forget exactly what my point was here. I guess it's just that this is a bit of a "water is wet" story mixed in with celebrity gossip. It's highly important for the people involved but not terribly relevant for the rest of us.
Jobs made fancy white electronic devices - he just sold a lot of them - to justify rude behavior with something that trivial simply doesn't seem right to me.
I'm not saying that anything justifies rude behavior. I'm just commenting on a case where rude behavior and success occurred together.
...just when you start think there might be someone in Silicon Valley who is worth working for and learning from... it turns out he is also a flawed human being who can and will wreak havoc on this employees' personal lives.
If this is true, and not taken out of context, Musk has some serious soul searching to do.
If this is true, and not taken out of context, Musk has some serious soul searching to do.
To everybody who is talking about this being out of context: in what context is the alleged behavior okay?
The article makes it sound like "That is no excuse" is referring to taking time off work to see your child born - in other words, there is nothing that could excuse someone taking off time for that. It's possible that he's merely saying that taking time off for something so important is no excuse for failing to request the time off with HR, failing to ensure that a different team member could be present in a meeting, or something along those lines - in other words, not that taking time off for important family reasons isn't OK, but rather that things still need to be handled properly even for things as important as taking time off to be with your partner while she was giving birth. Something like that might not be the kindest thing to do, but I can at least understand the logic behind it.
The alleged e-mail seems to mitigate against that reading:
> That is no excuse. I am extremely disappointed. You need to figure out where your priorities are. We're changing the world and changing history, and you either commit or you don’t.
"Figure out where your priorities are," not follow procedure. "Commit or you don't." There is not a terrible lot of ambiguity here.
> That is no excuse. I am extremely disappointed. You need to figure out where your priorities are. We're changing the world and changing history, and you either commit or you don’t.
"Figure out where your priorities are," not follow procedure. "Commit or you don't." There is not a terrible lot of ambiguity here.
It's unlikely the employee was expected to miss the actual birth, despite what the book apparently tries to imply (i.e., context is missing).
Assuming the Business Insider summary is correct (which is an assumption, yes), the book isn't trying to imply it, the book is outright claiming it. It is possible that either the book or the Business Insider article is mistaken -- gets facts wrong, is misleading, whatever. That's not "out of context" so much as it is "being wrong," though.
True. I guess the problem I had was that it quoted Elon but not the employee. So it was lacking context in that manner.
A good number of "world changers" prioritize their work over everything else in their lives, including themselves and the people around them. They expect their team to do nothing less, so if he did say that, I'm not exactly surprised.
This wouldn't work for me, and I'd imagine it wouldn't work for a lot of people who prioritize their families over whatever project they may be working on. I still like Musk and the things he does, but I have no desire to work for him if that means working 24/7 like he does.
This wouldn't work for me, and I'd imagine it wouldn't work for a lot of people who prioritize their families over whatever project they may be working on. I still like Musk and the things he does, but I have no desire to work for him if that means working 24/7 like he does.
History repeats itself and people who are trying to "change the world" don't care about any casualties on their way.
Ironically, world could change so much by everyone being kind and grateful to others. No invention or conquest can bring this kind of change.
Ironically, world could change so much by everyone being kind and grateful to others. No invention or conquest can bring this kind of change.
You're saying it as if Elon was Genghis Khan. He's not conquering anything, he's just trying to solve two of the big problems of humanity, and he invites volunteers to help him. You don't believe in his mission? Don't join, and don't take places because you want to "build a resume" (it seems to be a recent trend now). It's not like he doesn't keep saying that Tesla and SpaceX are not ordinary jobs.
No, I didn't say this. I'm saying that he's making the same mistake as thousands of leaders before him: placing achievements first and people second.
How is that a mistake? His companies both had periods where they barely survived, and now they are driving forces in solar power, electric cars, and private space operations. Had the people there not been as dedicated as they were, some or all of them might not still be here.
It would not be a tragedy for me. Well-being of these people is more important than an imaginable entity named "company".
"Changing the world." The world is bigger than the technology in it. The world consists of relationships too. I didn't learn this early enough. While you're out building rocketships don't forget to build relationships.
What a lonely world it would be if we had everything but nobody to care about us.
What a lonely world it would be if we had everything but nobody to care about us.
Not everyone has to build rocketships. Let the few who want to take one for the team, and the rest can enjoy the fruits of their sacrifice.
[deleted]
[deleted]
-it true-
I don't know how people here are deffending this kind of attitude. If you decide to bring another person to this planet, you have a huge responsibility. You can balance things out and work a lot and have a family. But if you really want to work 23 hours a day without paying proper attention to your family, for the sake of your children and spouse, just don't form a family. The damage you'll do, is irreversible.
You can't have it all in life... And one has to make hard choices.
I don't know how people here are deffending this kind of attitude. If you decide to bring another person to this planet, you have a huge responsibility. You can balance things out and work a lot and have a family. But if you really want to work 23 hours a day without paying proper attention to your family, for the sake of your children and spouse, just don't form a family. The damage you'll do, is irreversible.
You can't have it all in life... And one has to make hard choices.
That "23 hours a day" part is what strikes me as suspect. Unless they're being hyperbolic--and it doesn't seem like that's what they're trying to do--then its not sustainable for anyone.
John Chambers seems nice, and Cisco did okay.
From Justine Musk, Elon Musk's wife during those times:
"Extreme success results from an extreme personality and comes at the cost of many other things. Extreme success is different from what I suppose you could just consider 'success', so know that you don't have to be Richard or Elon to be affluent and accomplished and maintain a great lifestyle. Your odds of happiness are better that way. But if you're extreme, you must be what you are, which means that happiness is more or less beside the point."
...continued at: http://www.quora.com/How-can-I-be-as-great-as-Bill-Gates-Ste... (answered by Justine herself)
"Extreme success results from an extreme personality and comes at the cost of many other things. Extreme success is different from what I suppose you could just consider 'success', so know that you don't have to be Richard or Elon to be affluent and accomplished and maintain a great lifestyle. Your odds of happiness are better that way. But if you're extreme, you must be what you are, which means that happiness is more or less beside the point."
...continued at: http://www.quora.com/How-can-I-be-as-great-as-Bill-Gates-Ste... (answered by Justine herself)
This is a thought I've been having myself a lot lately. None of the successes I have actually leave me happier at the end of the day, they just kind of exist. Trying to balance success with happiness is a curious dilemma since to so many people the two are intertwined.
Very interesting read though- I appreciate you linking it here.
Very interesting read though- I appreciate you linking it here.
Following Justine's thesis: Do you mean that you feel you're an extreme person, like Musk, you must be what you are, which means that happiness is more or less beside the point? Or the opposite: that you're a non-extreme person, and feel that you're focusing too much on success and not enough on happiness?
Whatever the truth of the matter I think this highlights a specific thing people should pay attention to when they choose their employer: different companies have different values and when considering joining, it's good to make sure those values are aligned with ones personal values. Having a strongly disaligned value base can lead to burnout and depression.
Tesla values seem to be in the extreme end of the spectrum. I am not saying that this is good or bad, just that they are not necessarily aligned with the values of all.
But all in all, having a car is pretty pointless if there is no-one to drive them. Hiring clever people and then hindering their pro-creation is not really helping the society as talented parents usually get talented children, and for children the most important time of their development is their first years. Screw those, and the person is considerably worse off. A healthy child might get well of and by a fancy Tesla in 30 years. I'm not saying slave laboring the father would make the infant a mental patient and a destitute, but discouraging healthy parenthood is hedging the bets towards worse outcomes.
The same argumentation can be said of space travel. What's the point of traveling to Mars unless the needs of future of the species are taken care of as well. This includes resources for nurture and care.
Tesla values seem to be in the extreme end of the spectrum. I am not saying that this is good or bad, just that they are not necessarily aligned with the values of all.
But all in all, having a car is pretty pointless if there is no-one to drive them. Hiring clever people and then hindering their pro-creation is not really helping the society as talented parents usually get talented children, and for children the most important time of their development is their first years. Screw those, and the person is considerably worse off. A healthy child might get well of and by a fancy Tesla in 30 years. I'm not saying slave laboring the father would make the infant a mental patient and a destitute, but discouraging healthy parenthood is hedging the bets towards worse outcomes.
The same argumentation can be said of space travel. What's the point of traveling to Mars unless the needs of future of the species are taken care of as well. This includes resources for nurture and care.
Changing the world through government grants, subsidies, and prison labor...
[deleted]
For possible context, Elon Musk's first wife wrote about their relationship during the midst of her divorce[1].
[1] http://www.marieclaire.com/sex-love/advice/a5380/millionaire...
[1] http://www.marieclaire.com/sex-love/advice/a5380/millionaire...
People will justify this sort of abuse because they see it as a necessary cost for a bright future.
Do you really think we'll create a bright future by continually setting the precedent it's ok to abuse people to get there? Won't tomorrow's leaders simply use their own visions of the future to justify their own abuse?
Do you really think we'll create a bright future by continually setting the precedent it's ok to abuse people to get there? Won't tomorrow's leaders simply use their own visions of the future to justify their own abuse?
Father of two kids I will not trade the moment of my kids birth for anything in the world. As for Mr Elon Musk, go home... you are another psycho CEO from america crime corporate
I'm changing the world. I'm changing history. I'm fully committed. His name is Theodore and he turns three in July.
Well, isn't Elon Musk one of those guys who thinks he's going to live forever? He probably figures he can spend time with family 1000 years from now after things settle down a bit.
He said he plans to die on Mars ("just not on landing"). I guess he plans to do it being happy that the civilization is no longer facing imminent collapse because of energy and climate problems, and that humans are multiplanetary species.
While it's not unbiased, his ex-wife's article on their marriage and this comment makes me think Musk has NPD. I was going to say he's a psychopath, but he has exhibited no signs of antisocial disorder. Rather, he's exhibited a lack of empathy and illusions of grandeur.
Seriously, it's more than possible to achieve great things while having an enriching family life. It's about involving your family in your dreams while working on having healthy relationships. It's possible, it takes a lot of work, but most worthy things are.
Seriously, it's more than possible to achieve great things while having an enriching family life. It's about involving your family in your dreams while working on having healthy relationships. It's possible, it takes a lot of work, but most worthy things are.
> That is no excuse. I am extremely disappointed. You need to figure out where your priorities are. We're changing the world and changing history, and you either commit or you don’t.
What an idiot - he became rich - so what ...
What an idiot - he became rich - so what ...
There's a constructive dismissal lawsuit if I've ever seen one.
Not excusing the comment, it's pretty harsh.
It seems that everyone praises the prioritization of family over work. The quote that's brought up goes like:
"When you’re gone would you rather have your gravestone say, ‘He never missed a meeting.’ Or one that said, ‘He was a great father'."
This supposes that the acceptable thing to do for any human being is to desire having a family and caring for your own kind. It also supposes that work can only be a succession a meaningless events.
I see another take on this. I see that some projects can be life projects. Some of those life projects can happen to be 'work'. Desiring the completion of a life project, as your mean to live your humanity, is as valid in my opinion, as the desire to fulfill your humanity through the experience of family.
When you look at someone like Elon Musk and criticize him for not caring about family, you criticize him for having a different set of priorities than yours. The argument is an appeal to emotion and some assumed higher truth. It's not valid. There's more than one way to focus your life. You don't have to focus on having and raising children. You might want to do that. Or not.
It seems that everyone praises the prioritization of family over work. The quote that's brought up goes like:
"When you’re gone would you rather have your gravestone say, ‘He never missed a meeting.’ Or one that said, ‘He was a great father'."
This supposes that the acceptable thing to do for any human being is to desire having a family and caring for your own kind. It also supposes that work can only be a succession a meaningless events.
I see another take on this. I see that some projects can be life projects. Some of those life projects can happen to be 'work'. Desiring the completion of a life project, as your mean to live your humanity, is as valid in my opinion, as the desire to fulfill your humanity through the experience of family.
When you look at someone like Elon Musk and criticize him for not caring about family, you criticize him for having a different set of priorities than yours. The argument is an appeal to emotion and some assumed higher truth. It's not valid. There's more than one way to focus your life. You don't have to focus on having and raising children. You might want to do that. Or not.
---
Imagine a world where that level of insensitivity was inextricably coupled with the sort of accomplishments he produces for humanity.
I'm not saying they are, but if asshole-ness and makes-awesomethings-ness were linked, would it be preferable for him to be "a nice guy" and not "a guy who drove plausible solutions to global online payments, solar power, electric cars, and space travel"?
Or would we rather have another nice guy that didn't do those things?
It's hard to imagine that anyone who continues to work for Elon Musk's companies right now doesn't have alternatives. So they're CHOOSING that, for whatever reason. Maybe they tolerate his behavior to be a part of what he does. But nobody is really trapped there without options.
Maybe (probably) it's possible to be nice and be awesome. But it's not important to me that Elon Musk is nice. If I have to pick between his creation and his compassion, I pick creation.
I'm not saying they are, but if asshole-ness and makes-awesomethings-ness were linked, would it be preferable for him to be "a nice guy" and not "a guy who drove plausible solutions to global online payments, solar power, electric cars, and space travel"?
Or would we rather have another nice guy that didn't do those things?
It's hard to imagine that anyone who continues to work for Elon Musk's companies right now doesn't have alternatives. So they're CHOOSING that, for whatever reason. Maybe they tolerate his behavior to be a part of what he does. But nobody is really trapped there without options.
Maybe (probably) it's possible to be nice and be awesome. But it's not important to me that Elon Musk is nice. If I have to pick between his creation and his compassion, I pick creation.
Most of my children were born without a lot of complications, and I didn't have to do much decision-making or advocacy, just support my wife, talk to her, hold her hand, rub her back, cut the cord, take pictures, hold the baby, and all that. My baby girl responded immediately to my voice in a way that she didn't respond to other voices, because she had heard my voice a lot while she was in the womb.
My most recent turned into a difficult birth, with both mother and baby very sick with a rare infection, and an emergency C-section, and then with my newborn son in the hospital for ten days of IV antibiotics. Because my wife was in recovery I had to immediately provide "kangaroo care" -- that is, skin to skin contact with my newborn son, to help him adapt. Also, to hold him as much as possible in the neonatal ICU, while he had IVs stuck in and medication pumped in. My wife was not very mobile at that point.
Once she was a little more mobile the friends we had tapped to watch our other kids were all tapped out and so I had to be a stay-at-home dad for them.
Parenting responsibilities and spouse responsibilities are not like work responsibilities. They just aren't. Anyone who says or behaves otherwise is a sociopath.