Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Elon Musk Knows How to Fight the Federal Government
Regulators despise him. Stakeholders love him. Fans of space exploration laud him. And innovators—well, it depends on whether you see electric cars as an inevitable part of the future, or an irresponsible and impractical development.
Very few people are indifferent to the workings of Elon Musk.
The main reason I want to celebrate Elon Musk is that he isn’t afraid of anyone, at least not in the federal government. He has repeatedly pushed back on, insulted, ignored, and refused to comply with federal regulators. Some people would say that he can afford to be incorrigible with his remarkable ventures, wealth, and success. On the other hand, there are many corporate CEOs who have caved into regulators who mainly seem to want to flex their muscles, exert stifling control, and make life difficult for risk-takers.
Musk has scuffled with the National Transportation Safety Board, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Security and Exchange Commission, the National Labor Relations Board, and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. We could debate whether these agencies have had legitimate concerns, but Musk is making a critical point: you’d better have good reasons for slowing him down or he will stonewall, criticize or ignore requests.
* * * * *
Elon Musk sets an outstanding example for corporate America to stand up to totalitarian forces and not to cave into the federal government. He is an iconoclast; his politics are all over the place. But he is very clear on his overall mission: to break boundaries and push ahead with every bit of his being—and to hell with the powers-that-be.
As we watch corporations supposedly stand up for the American people, we choke at their duplicity, ignorance, and disingenuousness. They don’t even care for their shareholders anymore; their priorities are virtue signaling, and as long as the Left dictates their agenda, they will foolishly comply. As businessmen, these CEOs aren’t obligated to defend America, but they are naïve enough to believe that if they walk in lockstep with the Left, they will be safe from criticism and retribution.
They have no clue that when the Left has used and abused them, those CEOs will be chewed up and spit out.
* * * * *
Elon Musk is also sending a message to everyday Americans, those of us who live ordinary lives and might think we have no power to make a difference.
We are lying to ourselves.
Each of us has an obligation—to our country, our communities, our families, and friends—to protest the lies and misrepresentations of the Left. We must support each other in taking a stand, for speaking out and refusing to bow to the arrogant and deceitful Left. More and more we are realizing that the consequences we might face if we speak out are inconsequential, compared to what we have to lose as a people.
May we have just an ounce of the boldness that Elon Musk demonstrates every day, and speak out against tyranny and oppression.
Published in Domestic Policy
It hasn’t yet found a way to limit privacy intrusions.
Yeah. If the market is driving privacy at the moment, they’re not going a very good job (at least if the “privacy” rather than the “driving” is the goal). That, coupled with the fact that much of the population seems unconcerned about privacy when “convenience” is involved (think Google, or Apple, Maps and the fact that both companies know exactly where you’re going and where you’ve been. Or any app using “locator services” on your iPhone. Or your insurance company, if you’re tied into a scheme which gives you rebates based on good driving and GPS analysis of where you’re going and how fast you’re going, or how quickly you’re applying the brakes, to get there.) Not to mention all the tracking that goes on under the hood every time we use the Internet, and which we most of us have no idea is taking place. We seem very willing to give up huge amounts of privacy on the grounds that it makes our lives easier or more convenient, and I don’t expect that driverless cars will be any different.
Roger.
The point I’m making isn’t really that humans can’t make smart decisions driving a car. I drive my truck in a way that is much safer than the way some 19 year old boy might drive it. I’m just making the point that once the car goes out of control, the human factor is gone. You, and everyone in the vehicle, are a passenger, subject to the unfaltering rules of physics. And in that case, you are far and away better off to be in a 2005 Honda than a 1972 Cordoba.
Not me! :)
Well, there’s a vast difference between “where have you been today” and “I’m now controlling where you are going and where you can go.”
What I’m saying is that why many folks may be find giving google their location so that they can map their bike ride, I’m confident that won’t translate in to “Sure I’ll buy the car that the government and / or Google can directly control.”
That’s the problem.
We’ve had the latter with us for a long time, and the former for a shorter time.
Correct me if I am wrong, but there are currently no means for the government to take over your automobile if you are going somewhere they don’t think you should go.
If I decide I want to drive elsewhere around here than on the public roads, they will likely take over my automobile.
I’m glad you said means instead of plans.
Are there plans?
I wouldn’t be surprised.
Ha ha. “Ok, Boomer.”
Sometimes Ricochet is so…curmudgeony… :-)
Aren’t we just, though?
Electric cars also produce toxic fumes in a collision with fire.
Well, presumably the autonomous cars should also be avoiding rifles and guacamole on the streets, so is it really a problem?
Not necessarily. If there was no traffic etc, the only things at risk were the tires and the brake pads.
You don’t have to get to self-driving for that to be an issue. There have already been examples shown were hackers could get into the electronic systems of much-less-advanced cars and cause them to shut down, or even go off the road in cases of vehicles with electric steering.
At least it won’t matter enough to enough people to stop it, and we all suffer as a result.
I probably produce toxic fumes in a collision with fire.
You might produce methane. The heavy metals etc in electric car batteries are far more dangerous, and they can burn and produce those fumes for quite a while.
The high voltages in the batteries and in other parts of the cars present additional hazards to rescue workers.
I’ll be installing my first StarLink system tomorrow afternoon, for a beta tester out in rural Central New Mexico.
I’ll give some feedback about it, after I understand it better.
Fortunately, those were the good guys. And that particular issue was fixed. An example of innovations and smart people figuring things out.
All problems to sort out. Fortunately, we have been and continue to work on these issues. Both WEC and F1 cars have these issues, and those sports have sorted it out to one degree or another.
Is “autonomous” the same thing as “autocorrect”? Some people really hate autocorrect.
Not the same, but the same principle.
Like with the internet and cell phones?
Well, I was trying to make the point that many people actually generate typos and use wrong words by not being able to turn off their autocorrect, and many seem to not know how to do it, even if they can. I can envisage people driving fifty miles out of their way because a car decides this other way is safer, or will not be caught in, or will not promote traffic congestion.
But more to the point, will a car automatically swerve into a j-walker to avoid a dog? All done before the driver can sense what the car is doing?
I really don’t want cars to autocorrect my driving.
I understood, and I agree.