Elon Musk is TIME's Person of the Year

[Gabi001 2,470]

52 minutes ago, SEANGT said:

Elon is horrible but like...are you against the concept of electric cars? What else are we gonna do. The supply chain & energy grid issues are solvable. In fact...there's no chance of solving the energy source problems unless we get cars on the grid in the first place. What should we use? Hydrogen? Nobody's proven that that's feasible at scale. 

I think that the main issue is in city and country planning. We should build environment where people won't have to use cars, because there would be eitner more convenient public transport or everyhing would be at walkable distance form you. No more big monofunctional suburbs etc... So for me the issue is not the source of energy for car, but the amount of cars in the world.

[Ployd 862]

1 hour ago, AUARAOFSHEISSE said:

I honestly don't understand why people hate him, he is actually using his money to help humanity, one day his efforts will pay off, and maybe get your grandchildren off this dying planet.

This planet isn't dying, it's the human race that is dying. No matter how much we over pollute the earth will always be able to bounce back, even if it takes thousands of years 

[Ployd 862]

7 minutes ago, Gabi001 said:

I think that the main issue is in city and country planning. We should build environment where people won't have to use cars, because there would be eitner more convenient public transport or everyhing would be at walkable distance form you. No more big monofunctional suburbs etc... So for me the issue is not the source of energy for car, but the amount of cars in the world.

Exactly!!!!!! And this idiot they named person of the year wants to create tunnels for cars so they can do the same thing as a train but can't even hold half the amount of people a train can. 

[Sepsami 19,418]

I would love it if everyone stopped inflating his already massive ego  When are we going to start rewarding kindness & generosity instead of sucking up to billionaires 

[Economy 50,933]

3 hours ago, Supersonic said:

He's in illustrious company:

We dont need to start using stuff like this as an exibit to drag the company.

 

First of all in 1939 it wasnt common knowledge what Hitler was prepping (heck even most of the German population themselves didnt know everything till after the war)

 

Second i dont think anyone who wrote this up is even alive still

[Economy 50,933]

1 hour ago, Sepsami said:

I would love it if everyone stopped inflating his already massive ego  When are we going to start rewarding kindness & generosity instead of sucking up to billionaires 

Its cuz hes not just a billionaire. Hes a celebrity also. Celebs always get this kind of worship whether they like it or not

 

Not many rich ppl ever win this list if they are relatively under the radar. Theres thoudands of billionaires in the US alone most are completely unknown. So its not just the wealth itself but also the public image

 

Personally i also hate how much disproportioante praise celebs or rich or high profile ppl get for positive contributions that anyone else can make within their own abilities. They are just ppl not Gods .

 

im not gonna criticize a company for who they chose 70 years ago but i dont like that these lists exist in the first place tbh making some arbitrary human list inflating egos

 

 

[weed 75,288]

His fans deserved for giving him the attention to begin with 

[Chic 20,830]

2 hours ago, Economy said:

We dont need to start using stuff like this as an exibit to drag the company.

 

First of all in 1939 it wasnt common knowledge what Hitler was prepping (heck even most of the German population themselves didnt know everything till after the war)

 

Second i dont think anyone who wrote this up is even alive still

If I recall correctly, it’s not that they didn’t know what Hitler was like. It’s just that Person Of The Year isn’t based on morality. Good or evil, the person given the title is one who was most influential and powerful. Bad people are given the title because sometimes the most powerful person is a also a morally decrepit person.

[StarstruckIllusion 53,169]

6 hours ago, pedrohemg said:

King.

of marketing and being just a mascot while his employees do everything… I mean why not just praise the company at this point. Its not new but I don’t really get it. 

[StarstruckIllusion 53,169]

5 hours ago, Supersonic said:

...maybe billionaires should be putting their money into the betterment of society as a whole and keeing the planet sustainable, instead of pumping it into escape schemes for other billionaires when this planet become inhabitable. Space travel is a sham, a grift. Colonizing other planets is a sham. 

I agree with everything you said but I cant believe you actually wanna call space colonization a sham, as if there hasn’t been 6 mass extinction events in the past  Plus it’d be our most ethical colonization to date so 

[Supersonic 49,376]

2 hours ago, Economy said:

First of all in 1939 it wasnt common knowledge what Hitler was prepping (heck even most of the German population themselves didnt know everything till after the war)

Straight up untrue.  People knew exactly wtf was going on, this was literally AFTER the pogroms of November 9th (also known as "Kristallnacht" in English), where almost 100 Jewish people were publically lynched and 30,000 Jewish people were incarcerated. At this point of time, the American government already offered refuge to over 40,000 Jewish people from Germany who fled persecution by the Hitler regime. Old Germans who say "they didn't know what was going on" are f*cking liars or were literal 4-year old children during those times. No shade, but I'm German and I had 8+ years of extensive historial education about the Holocaust and Nazi Germany to get a high school diploma.  

I agree that this serves nothing but the ego of the people the TIMES writes about. But I think that's exactly why older instances like these should be continuously brought up, to make people question the actual authority and intentions the TIMES has. 

[Supersonic 49,376]

5 minutes ago, StarstruckIllusion said:

I agree with everything you said but I cant believe you actually wanna call space colonization a sham, as if there hasn’t been 6 mass extinction events in the past  Plus it’d be our most ethical colonization to date so 

Climate change is a far easier problem to solve than mars colonisation, and look how humanity has done with that. Not for the lack of solutions, just humans f*cking sh*t up for the sake of short-term money. You think they wouldn't act the same with colonizing Mars? 

[pedrohemg 7,802]

17 minutes ago, StarstruckIllusion said:

of marketing and being just a mascot while his employees do everything… I mean why not just praise the company at this point. Its not new but I don’t really get it. 

The man has the resources to promote real changes in our society, and he's doing that. I just think he's doing it in the wrong way.

[Economy 50,933]

29 minutes ago, Supersonic said:

Climate change is a far easier problem to solve than mars colonisation, and look how humanity has done with that. Not for the lack of solutions, just humans f*cking sh*t up for the sake of short-term money. You think they wouldn't act the same with colonizing Mars? 

@StarstruckIllusion

 

Tbh. The kinds of environemtal problems mass extinction events have caused were still a better environemnt for humans than Mars would be

 

Its easier to solve issues we have than to try to survive in a planet with different atmospheric pressure, gravity, day cycles etc. Those are default settings that more or less stay the same regardless of what happens. On Earth those factors remain favourable to pur biology, in a colonized place it never would be

[StarstruckIllusion 53,169]

52 minutes ago, Supersonic said:

Climate change is a far easier problem to solve than mars colonisation, and look how humanity has done with that. Not for the lack of solutions, just humans f*cking sh*t up for the sake of short-term money. You think they wouldn't act the same with colonizing Mars? 

 

22 minutes ago, Economy said:

@StarstruckIllusion

 

Tbh. The kinds of environemtal problems mass extinction events have caused were still a better environemnt for humans than Mars would be

 

Its easier to solve issues we have than to try to survive in a planet with different atmospheric pressure, gravity, day cycles etc. Those are default settings that more or less stay the same regardless of what happens. On Earth those factors remain favourable to pur biology, in a colonized place it never would be

I think youre missing the point… Nothing we do literally matters if some asteroid or super volcano cancels 100% of humanity. Living in space might suck but it’d probably be better than an inhabitable earth. Projects like these are life insurance for humanity. The faster we get off the earth permanently, the better