正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

Elon Musk says five-year deadlines gut every project before the work starts. Project schedules grow. Musk doesn't let them. He named the law nobody else does. "There is a law of gas expansion that applies to schedules." Then the consequence. "If you said we're going to do something in...

GeniusGTX's profile picture

GeniusThinking

277,491 subscribers

210,489 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

新闻政治教育科学技术
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Elon Musk on why his companies are able to move faster, accomplishing in 6 months what would take others 10 years "I'm constantly addressing the limiting factor. On the deadlines front, I generally actually, try to aim for a deadline that I at least think is at the 50th percentile So it's not like an impossible deadline, but it's the most aggressive deadline I can think, of that could be achieved with 50% probability. Which means that it'll be late half the time There is a law of gas expansion that applies to schedules. If you said we're going to do something in five years, which to me is like infinity time, it will expand to fill the available schedule and it'll take five years" Source: Dwarkesh Patel
0:54

Elon Musk on why his companies are able to move faster, accomplishing in 6 months what would take others 10 years "I'm constantly addressing the limiting factor. On the deadlines front, I generally actually, try to aim for a deadline that I at least think is at the 50th percentile So it's not like an impossible deadline, but it's the most aggressive deadline I can think, of that could be achieved with 50% probability. Which means that it'll be late half the time There is a law of gas expansion that applies to schedules. If you said we're going to do something in five years, which to me is like infinity time, it will expand to fill the available schedule and it'll take five years" Source: Dwarkesh Patel

SMX 🇺🇸

43,555 次观看 • 1 个月前

Elon Musk on how he moves so fast: "I'm constantly addressing the limiting factor." "I generally try to aim for a deadline that I at least think is at the 50th percentile. So, it's not like an impossible deadline, but it's the most aggressive deadline I can think of that could be achieved with 50% probability. Which means that it'll be late half the time." "A maniacal sense of urgency is a very big deal. You want to have an aggressive schedule. And then you want to figure out what the limiting factor is at any point in time and, and help the team address that limiting factor." Source: Elon Musk with Stripe’s John Collison and Dwarkesh Patel
1:53

Elon Musk on how he moves so fast: "I'm constantly addressing the limiting factor." "I generally try to aim for a deadline that I at least think is at the 50th percentile. So, it's not like an impossible deadline, but it's the most aggressive deadline I can think of that could be achieved with 50% probability. Which means that it'll be late half the time." "A maniacal sense of urgency is a very big deal. You want to have an aggressive schedule. And then you want to figure out what the limiting factor is at any point in time and, and help the team address that limiting factor." Source: Elon Musk with Stripe’s John Collison and Dwarkesh Patel

a16z

1,050,906 次观看 • 5 个月前

Incredible insight into how Elon Musk’s companies are able to move so quickly: “I’m constantly addressing the limiting factor. On the deadlines front, I generally actually try to aim for a deadline that I at least think is at the 50th percentile. So it’s not like an impossible deadline, but it’s the most aggressive deadline I can think of that could be achieved with 50% probability. Which means that it’ll be late half the time. There is a law of gas expansion that applies to schedules. If you said we’re going to do something in five years, which to me is like infinity time, it will expand to fill the available schedule and it’ll take five years. Physics will limit how fast you can do certain things. So scaling up manufacturing, there’s a rate at which you can move the atoms and scale manufacturing. That’s why you can’t instantly make a million units a year of something. You’ve got to design the manufacturing line. You’ve got to bring it up. You’ve got to ride the S-curve of production. What can I say that’s actually helpful to people? Generally, a maniacal sense of urgency is a very big deal. You want to have an aggressive schedule and you want to figure out what the limiting factor is at any point in time and help the team address that limiting factor.” (Via Cheeky Pint Podcast)
1:53

Incredible insight into how Elon Musk’s companies are able to move so quickly: “I’m constantly addressing the limiting factor. On the deadlines front, I generally actually try to aim for a deadline that I at least think is at the 50th percentile. So it’s not like an impossible deadline, but it’s the most aggressive deadline I can think of that could be achieved with 50% probability. Which means that it’ll be late half the time. There is a law of gas expansion that applies to schedules. If you said we’re going to do something in five years, which to me is like infinity time, it will expand to fill the available schedule and it’ll take five years. Physics will limit how fast you can do certain things. So scaling up manufacturing, there’s a rate at which you can move the atoms and scale manufacturing. That’s why you can’t instantly make a million units a year of something. You’ve got to design the manufacturing line. You’ve got to bring it up. You’ve got to ride the S-curve of production. What can I say that’s actually helpful to people? Generally, a maniacal sense of urgency is a very big deal. You want to have an aggressive schedule and you want to figure out what the limiting factor is at any point in time and help the team address that limiting factor.” (Via Cheeky Pint Podcast)

Nic Cruz Patane

53,959 次观看 • 5 个月前

Elon Musk runs the fastest companies in history. He finally explained why. Not genius. Not culture. Not a management philosophy. A law he refuses to ignore. Musk: “There is like a law of gaseous expansion that applies to schedules.” Give a project five years and it takes five years. Give it three and it takes three. Not because the work changed. Because organizations expand to fill every hour of runway they are handed. Every bloated timeline is a choice wearing the mask of a constraint. Musk: “The most aggressive deadline I can think of that could be achieved with 50% probability. Which means it’ll be late half the time.” He is not optimizing for certainty. He is targeting the edge of what is physically possible and accepting he will miss it half the time. Missing a hard target beats hitting a soft one. Every time. Then he named the one wall no mindset shift can move. Musk: “Physics will limit how fast you can do certain things. There’s a rate at which you can move the atoms.” Software scales overnight. Atoms do not. Chips. Power plants. Data centers. Factories. No algorithm compresses that timeline. No venture capital accelerates the physical world. This is not a software race. It is an electro-industrial one. You cannot build superintelligence without compute at scale. You cannot have compute without energy at scale. The real limiting factor is not the model. It is the power plant behind it. Musk: “A maniacal sense of urgency is a very big deal. You want to figure out what the limiting factor is at any point in time.” Now look at the board. China is not debating timelines. It is not running five-year comfort plans or waiting on regulatory permission slips. It is moving atoms. At scale. Right now. In 2025, China crossed 1,000 gigawatts of installed solar capacity. More than the rest of the world combined. No summits. No reports. No committees. They built the machine. Cheap, scalable energy feeding AI infrastructure at a fraction of the cost. Growing larger every single day. One country sends engineers. The other sends lawyers. The AI race does not run on models or benchmarks. It runs on the physical layer beneath them. The power. The chips. The supply chains that took decades to forge. Whoever owns that layer owns the leverage. America still leads on software. That lead is real. But software runs on hardware. Hardware runs on energy. Energy runs on the willingness to build faster than is comfortable. The nightmare is not that America moves too fast. The nightmare is that America moves too slow and wakes up inside infrastructure it did not build, running on rules it did not write, paying rent to the country that did. The country treating urgency as a preference is not in the same race as the country treating it as survival. Musk built three companies on that gap. America has not closed it. One country is still forming the question. The other is already living inside the answer.
0:55

Elon Musk runs the fastest companies in history. He finally explained why. Not genius. Not culture. Not a management philosophy. A law he refuses to ignore. Musk: “There is like a law of gaseous expansion that applies to schedules.” Give a project five years and it takes five years. Give it three and it takes three. Not because the work changed. Because organizations expand to fill every hour of runway they are handed. Every bloated timeline is a choice wearing the mask of a constraint. Musk: “The most aggressive deadline I can think of that could be achieved with 50% probability. Which means it’ll be late half the time.” He is not optimizing for certainty. He is targeting the edge of what is physically possible and accepting he will miss it half the time. Missing a hard target beats hitting a soft one. Every time. Then he named the one wall no mindset shift can move. Musk: “Physics will limit how fast you can do certain things. There’s a rate at which you can move the atoms.” Software scales overnight. Atoms do not. Chips. Power plants. Data centers. Factories. No algorithm compresses that timeline. No venture capital accelerates the physical world. This is not a software race. It is an electro-industrial one. You cannot build superintelligence without compute at scale. You cannot have compute without energy at scale. The real limiting factor is not the model. It is the power plant behind it. Musk: “A maniacal sense of urgency is a very big deal. You want to figure out what the limiting factor is at any point in time.” Now look at the board. China is not debating timelines. It is not running five-year comfort plans or waiting on regulatory permission slips. It is moving atoms. At scale. Right now. In 2025, China crossed 1,000 gigawatts of installed solar capacity. More than the rest of the world combined. No summits. No reports. No committees. They built the machine. Cheap, scalable energy feeding AI infrastructure at a fraction of the cost. Growing larger every single day. One country sends engineers. The other sends lawyers. The AI race does not run on models or benchmarks. It runs on the physical layer beneath them. The power. The chips. The supply chains that took decades to forge. Whoever owns that layer owns the leverage. America still leads on software. That lead is real. But software runs on hardware. Hardware runs on energy. Energy runs on the willingness to build faster than is comfortable. The nightmare is not that America moves too fast. The nightmare is that America moves too slow and wakes up inside infrastructure it did not build, running on rules it did not write, paying rent to the country that did. The country treating urgency as a preference is not in the same race as the country treating it as survival. Musk built three companies on that gap. America has not closed it. One country is still forming the question. The other is already living inside the answer.

Dustin

80,340 次观看 • 3 个月前

Elon Musk says Tesla swallows 1.5 GB of video into 2 KB of control. "We really are photons in, controls out. That is the vast majority of your life: vision, photons in, and then motor controls out." Musk reduced the human nervous system to a single equation. That theory runs in every Tesla on the road. "Your Tesla is taking in one and a half gigabytes a second of video and outputting two kilobytes a second of control outputs with the video at 36 hertz and the control frequency at 18." A 750,000-to-1 compression ratio. The car decides which photons matter. "You don't care about the details of the leaves on the tree on the side of the road, but you care a lot about the road signs and the traffic lights, the pedestrians, and even whether someone in another car is looking at you or not looking at you." Then Musk extended the equation past Tesla. The same architecture runs Optimus. **Photons in. Controls out.** Different number of degrees of freedom. A car has steering and acceleration. A robot arm has dozens of joints. Same compression. More fingers on the other side. Musk, who built one Tesla AI engine across two products: "AI is mostly compression and correlation of two bitstreams." The implication: a human, a Tesla, and an Optimus all run the same loop. Musk, looking back at the human equation: "This is what happens with humans." If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. P.S. I made a playbook breaking down 100+ mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. 5,000+ downloads. 113 five-star reviews. Comment "MODELS" + Follow GeniusThinking and I'll send it to you. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast
2:45

Elon Musk says Tesla swallows 1.5 GB of video into 2 KB of control. "We really are photons in, controls out. That is the vast majority of your life: vision, photons in, and then motor controls out." Musk reduced the human nervous system to a single equation. That theory runs in every Tesla on the road. "Your Tesla is taking in one and a half gigabytes a second of video and outputting two kilobytes a second of control outputs with the video at 36 hertz and the control frequency at 18." A 750,000-to-1 compression ratio. The car decides which photons matter. "You don't care about the details of the leaves on the tree on the side of the road, but you care a lot about the road signs and the traffic lights, the pedestrians, and even whether someone in another car is looking at you or not looking at you." Then Musk extended the equation past Tesla. The same architecture runs Optimus. **Photons in. Controls out.** Different number of degrees of freedom. A car has steering and acceleration. A robot arm has dozens of joints. Same compression. More fingers on the other side. Musk, who built one Tesla AI engine across two products: "AI is mostly compression and correlation of two bitstreams." The implication: a human, a Tesla, and an Optimus all run the same loop. Musk, looking back at the human equation: "This is what happens with humans." If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. P.S. I made a playbook breaking down 100+ mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. 5,000+ downloads. 113 five-star reviews. Comment "MODELS" + Follow GeniusThinking and I'll send it to you. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

160,972 次观看 • 2 个月前

Elon Musk was asked why his companies move faster than anyone else. His answer: "I'm constantly addressing the limiting factor. Whatever the limiting factor is on speed, I'm going to tackle that. If capital is the limiting factor, I'll solve for capital. If it's not the limiting factor, I'll solve for something else." He then said something most managers never figure out: "If something is going really well and making good progress, there's no point in me spending time on it." "The irony is if something's going really well, they don't see much of me. But if something is the limiting factor, they'll see a lot of me." He spends his time entirely on whatever is blocking the next step. Not on what's interesting. Not on what he's best at. But on whatever is the bottleneck right now. Most leaders do the opposite... They gravitate toward what they're comfortable with and away from the hard problem. From: Dwarkesh Patel and John Collison
1:53

Elon Musk was asked why his companies move faster than anyone else. His answer: "I'm constantly addressing the limiting factor. Whatever the limiting factor is on speed, I'm going to tackle that. If capital is the limiting factor, I'll solve for capital. If it's not the limiting factor, I'll solve for something else." He then said something most managers never figure out: "If something is going really well and making good progress, there's no point in me spending time on it." "The irony is if something's going really well, they don't see much of me. But if something is the limiting factor, they'll see a lot of me." He spends his time entirely on whatever is blocking the next step. Not on what's interesting. Not on what he's best at. But on whatever is the bottleneck right now. Most leaders do the opposite... They gravitate toward what they're comfortable with and away from the hard problem. From: Dwarkesh Patel and John Collison

Founder Mode

1,075,641 次观看 • 3 个月前

Elon Musk says one heat shield problem could kill Starship's reusability for years. Starship is the most complicated machine humans have ever built. The hardest part isn't the engines. It isn't the steel. It isn't even the explosion margin on liftoff. Musk named the one remaining bottleneck. "It's having the heat shield be reusable. No one's ever made a reusable orbital heat shield." The shield does two impossible jobs. "It's gotta make it through the ascent phase without shucking a bunch of tiles, and then it's gotta come back in and also not lose a bunch of tiles or overheat the main airframe." 40,000 tiles per ship. Musk reframed the consumable problem through brake pads: "Your brake pads in your car are also consumable, but they last a very long time." The shield must consume slowly. It must not require inspection between launches. Musk on the current state: "We have brought the ship back and had it do a soft landing in the ocean. But it lost a lot of tiles." A soft landing is not reusability. The bar is daily launches. One ship. Many flights. Musk, on the gap that's left: "You can't do this laborious inspection of 40,000 tiles type of thing." The first reusable heat shield in history is the last gate to Mars. If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast
1:37

Elon Musk says one heat shield problem could kill Starship's reusability for years. Starship is the most complicated machine humans have ever built. The hardest part isn't the engines. It isn't the steel. It isn't even the explosion margin on liftoff. Musk named the one remaining bottleneck. "It's having the heat shield be reusable. No one's ever made a reusable orbital heat shield." The shield does two impossible jobs. "It's gotta make it through the ascent phase without shucking a bunch of tiles, and then it's gotta come back in and also not lose a bunch of tiles or overheat the main airframe." 40,000 tiles per ship. Musk reframed the consumable problem through brake pads: "Your brake pads in your car are also consumable, but they last a very long time." The shield must consume slowly. It must not require inspection between launches. Musk on the current state: "We have brought the ship back and had it do a soft landing in the ocean. But it lost a lot of tiles." A soft landing is not reusability. The bar is daily launches. One ship. Many flights. Musk, on the gap that's left: "You can't do this laborious inspection of 40,000 tiles type of thing." The first reusable heat shield in history is the last gate to Mars. If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

635,472 次观看 • 2 个月前

Musk says the simulation hypothesis is almost certainly TRUE since 2016. And this is also why he renamed Twitter to X. This is hella interesting, watch this clip and lemme explain... Elon founded xAI on the mission of understanding the universe. The thesis traces back to a Darwinian thought experiment. "Like in this version of reality, in this layer of reality, if a simulation is going in a boring direction, we stop spending effort on it." Boring simulations got cancelled. Interesting ones got renewed. Then, he said, the corollary appeared. "They particularly seem to like interesting outcomes that are ironic." The simulation, in Musk's frame, didn't just keep stories alive — it actively preferred the ones that flipped on themselves, the ones where the noun and the truth ran in opposite directions. He pointed at the names of AI companies and read them off one by one. - OpenAI is closed. - Midjourney is not mid. - Stability AI is unstable. - Anthropic is misanthropic. Four labs. Four nouns. Four ironic reversals. Each picked a name with a clean flip available. The simulation took every one. Musk, who had named X for that exact reason, dodged the trick. "It's a name that you can't invert, really. It's hard to say, what is the ironic version?" He called it an irony shield. No opposite. No mirror. No clean flip. Musk, on the bet underneath the joke: "It's, I think, a largely irony-proof name. By design." Watch the video to hear Elon explains it: If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast
2:18

Musk says the simulation hypothesis is almost certainly TRUE since 2016. And this is also why he renamed Twitter to X. This is hella interesting, watch this clip and lemme explain... Elon founded xAI on the mission of understanding the universe. The thesis traces back to a Darwinian thought experiment. "Like in this version of reality, in this layer of reality, if a simulation is going in a boring direction, we stop spending effort on it." Boring simulations got cancelled. Interesting ones got renewed. Then, he said, the corollary appeared. "They particularly seem to like interesting outcomes that are ironic." The simulation, in Musk's frame, didn't just keep stories alive — it actively preferred the ones that flipped on themselves, the ones where the noun and the truth ran in opposite directions. He pointed at the names of AI companies and read them off one by one. - OpenAI is closed. - Midjourney is not mid. - Stability AI is unstable. - Anthropic is misanthropic. Four labs. Four nouns. Four ironic reversals. Each picked a name with a clean flip available. The simulation took every one. Musk, who had named X for that exact reason, dodged the trick. "It's a name that you can't invert, really. It's hard to say, what is the ironic version?" He called it an irony shield. No opposite. No mirror. No clean flip. Musk, on the bet underneath the joke: "It's, I think, a largely irony-proof name. By design." Watch the video to hear Elon explains it: If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

34,019 次观看 • 2 个月前

Elon Musk says one millionth of the Sun's energy is 100,000X Earth's economy. Yes you read that right. For a century, every advance had run on a tiny fraction of the Sun's output. Oil. Coal. Solar. Natural gas. Combined, they powered everything every human had ever built. The total: about half a billionth of what hit the planet each day. "Earth only receives about half a billionth of the Sun's energy." Then Musk pulled up the Kardashev scale: "The Sun is essentially all the energy." He named the framework: **the Kardashev scale**. A Soviet astronomer's idea from 1964, repurposed for AI scaling. Musk, who needed a terawatt a year, knew civilization ran on a rounding error. A Kardashev Type I civilization harnesses all the energy that reaches its home planet, a Type II harnesses the full output of its star, and Earth in 2026 sat at neither. Earth was nowhere close to Type I. Not 1%. Not 0.1%. Not 0.001%. "Let's say you wanted to harness a millionth of the sun's energy, which sounds pretty small." "That would be about, call it roughly, 100,000x more electricity than we currently generate on Earth for all of civilization." A million times Earth's economy. From one millionth of the Sun. Take a billionth and you still have a thousand-Earth economy. After Musk did the math, modular nuclear reactors looked like rounding errors. Musk, on what scale required: "Obviously, the only way to scale is to go to space with solar." P.S. Pull the thread on any story like this and you'll find the hidden incentive at the other end. As Munger said: "Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome." So I wrote a short book on how to spot them and design your own. Comment "INCENTIVES" and I'll send you the details. If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast
1:03

Elon Musk says one millionth of the Sun's energy is 100,000X Earth's economy. Yes you read that right. For a century, every advance had run on a tiny fraction of the Sun's output. Oil. Coal. Solar. Natural gas. Combined, they powered everything every human had ever built. The total: about half a billionth of what hit the planet each day. "Earth only receives about half a billionth of the Sun's energy." Then Musk pulled up the Kardashev scale: "The Sun is essentially all the energy." He named the framework: **the Kardashev scale**. A Soviet astronomer's idea from 1964, repurposed for AI scaling. Musk, who needed a terawatt a year, knew civilization ran on a rounding error. A Kardashev Type I civilization harnesses all the energy that reaches its home planet, a Type II harnesses the full output of its star, and Earth in 2026 sat at neither. Earth was nowhere close to Type I. Not 1%. Not 0.1%. Not 0.001%. "Let's say you wanted to harness a millionth of the sun's energy, which sounds pretty small." "That would be about, call it roughly, 100,000x more electricity than we currently generate on Earth for all of civilization." A million times Earth's economy. From one millionth of the Sun. Take a billionth and you still have a thousand-Earth economy. After Musk did the math, modular nuclear reactors looked like rounding errors. Musk, on what scale required: "Obviously, the only way to scale is to go to space with solar." P.S. Pull the thread on any story like this and you'll find the hidden incentive at the other end. As Munger said: "Show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome." So I wrote a short book on how to spot them and design your own. Comment "INCENTIVES" and I'll send you the details. If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

29,177 次观看 • 1 个月前

Musk says the simulation hypothesis is almost certainly true since 2016. And this is also why he renamed Twitter to X... Elon founded xAI on the mission of understanding the universe. He renamed Twitter to X in 2023, picking the only letter without an opposite. The thesis traces back to a Darwinian thought experiment. "Like in this version of reality, in this layer of reality, if a simulation is going in a boring direction, we stop spending effort on it." Boring simulations got cancelled. Interesting ones got renewed. Then, he said, the corollary appeared. "They particularly seem to like interesting outcomes that are ironic." The simulation, in Musk's frame, didn't just keep stories alive — it actively preferred the ones that flipped on themselves, the ones where the noun and the truth ran in opposite directions. He pointed at the names of AI companies and read them off one by one. - OpenAI is closed. - Midjourney is not mid. - Stability AI is unstable. - Anthropic is misanthropic. Four labs. Four nouns. Four ironic reversals. Each picked a name with a clean flip available. The simulation took every one. Musk, who had named X for that exact reason, dodged the trick. "It's a name that you can't invert, really. It's hard to say, what is the ironic version?" He called it an irony shield. No opposite. No mirror. No clean flip. Musk, on the bet underneath the joke: "It's, I think, a largely irony-proof name. By design." P.S. I made a playbook breaking down 100+ most powerful decision making mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. 5,000+ downloads. 113 five-star reviews. Grab a free copy here: If you're new here, follow GeniusThinking for content on the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast
2:18

Musk says the simulation hypothesis is almost certainly true since 2016. And this is also why he renamed Twitter to X... Elon founded xAI on the mission of understanding the universe. He renamed Twitter to X in 2023, picking the only letter without an opposite. The thesis traces back to a Darwinian thought experiment. "Like in this version of reality, in this layer of reality, if a simulation is going in a boring direction, we stop spending effort on it." Boring simulations got cancelled. Interesting ones got renewed. Then, he said, the corollary appeared. "They particularly seem to like interesting outcomes that are ironic." The simulation, in Musk's frame, didn't just keep stories alive — it actively preferred the ones that flipped on themselves, the ones where the noun and the truth ran in opposite directions. He pointed at the names of AI companies and read them off one by one. - OpenAI is closed. - Midjourney is not mid. - Stability AI is unstable. - Anthropic is misanthropic. Four labs. Four nouns. Four ironic reversals. Each picked a name with a clean flip available. The simulation took every one. Musk, who had named X for that exact reason, dodged the trick. "It's a name that you can't invert, really. It's hard to say, what is the ironic version?" He called it an irony shield. No opposite. No mirror. No clean flip. Musk, on the bet underneath the joke: "It's, I think, a largely irony-proof name. By design." P.S. I made a playbook breaking down 100+ most powerful decision making mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. 5,000+ downloads. 113 five-star reviews. Grab a free copy here: If you're new here, follow GeniusThinking for content on the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

20,844 次观看 • 1 个月前

Elon Musk’s system for keeping SpaceX/Tesla culture maniacally urgent at massive scale (deadlines, limiting factors, skip-level reviews, Starlink reboot) Urgency isn’t a vibe it’s a deliberate operating system. Aggressive 50 % deadlines + weekly microscopic engineering reviews + ruthless limiting-factor focus let giant companies move like startups. Drastic action only when data proves success is off the table. Most CEOs assume big companies must slow down. Elon Musk runs the opposite system. He sets deadlines at the 50th percentile the most aggressive schedule he believes has a coin-flip chance of being met. Half the time they slip. That’s by design. Schedules are gaseous. Give a team five years and it will consume five years. Physics sets the real limit: you can only move atoms so fast when scaling manufacturing. So he does two things relentlessly: > Identify the single limiting factor at any moment and clear it. > Run ultra-granular weekly engineering reviews skip-level, no slides, no prep. Every engineer reports raw status. He mentally plots the curve and asks: are we converging? Only when the data shows success is statistically impossible does he take drastic action. That’s exactly what happened with Starlink in 2018. Years of slow progress in Redmond. One decisive reset fixed it. Result: companies with tens of thousands of people still ship at startup velocity. Big organizations don’t die from bad ideas. They die from the slow erosion of urgency. Musk simply refuses to let that happen.
4:26

Elon Musk’s system for keeping SpaceX/Tesla culture maniacally urgent at massive scale (deadlines, limiting factors, skip-level reviews, Starlink reboot) Urgency isn’t a vibe it’s a deliberate operating system. Aggressive 50 % deadlines + weekly microscopic engineering reviews + ruthless limiting-factor focus let giant companies move like startups. Drastic action only when data proves success is off the table. Most CEOs assume big companies must slow down. Elon Musk runs the opposite system. He sets deadlines at the 50th percentile the most aggressive schedule he believes has a coin-flip chance of being met. Half the time they slip. That’s by design. Schedules are gaseous. Give a team five years and it will consume five years. Physics sets the real limit: you can only move atoms so fast when scaling manufacturing. So he does two things relentlessly: > Identify the single limiting factor at any moment and clear it. > Run ultra-granular weekly engineering reviews skip-level, no slides, no prep. Every engineer reports raw status. He mentally plots the curve and asks: are we converging? Only when the data shows success is statistically impossible does he take drastic action. That’s exactly what happened with Starlink in 2018. Years of slow progress in Redmond. One decisive reset fixed it. Result: companies with tens of thousands of people still ship at startup velocity. Big organizations don’t die from bad ideas. They die from the slow erosion of urgency. Musk simply refuses to let that happen.

Lacey

18,617 次观看 • 3 个月前

Elon Musk says AI will gut customer service — a $1 trillion industry — in months. Musk laid out the path AI takes to eat industry after industry. "If you have to integrate with the APIs of existing corporations — many of which don't even have an API, so you've got to make one, and you've got to wade through legacy software — that's extremely slow." Then he picked the industry that skips the slow part. "Take something as simple as customer service." Customer service is a human at a desktop, clicking through software the company already runs. "If AI can simply take whatever is given to the outsourced customer service company that they already use and do customer service using the apps that they already use, then you can make tremendous headway." No API. No integration. No engineering quarter to coordinate. Musk, on the size of the prize: "It's close to a trillion dollars all in, for customer service. And there's no barriers to entry." Customer service is 1% of the world economy. A trillion-dollar market sitting on top of software AI can already use. Then Musk drew the conclusion every CFO will eventually face: "You can immediately say, 'We'll outsource it for a fraction of the cost,' and there's no integration needed." The first wave will not be a smarter AI. It will be the same AI doing the same desktop work cheaper. Musk, looking at the digital human emulator about to ship: "You basically have access to trillions of dollars of revenue." Which $100M cost center in your business has zero integration moat? P.S. I made a playbook breaking down 100+ most powerful decision making mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. 5,000+ downloads. 113 five-star reviews. Grab a free copy here: If you're new here, follow GeniusThinking for content on the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast
0:58

Elon Musk says AI will gut customer service — a $1 trillion industry — in months. Musk laid out the path AI takes to eat industry after industry. "If you have to integrate with the APIs of existing corporations — many of which don't even have an API, so you've got to make one, and you've got to wade through legacy software — that's extremely slow." Then he picked the industry that skips the slow part. "Take something as simple as customer service." Customer service is a human at a desktop, clicking through software the company already runs. "If AI can simply take whatever is given to the outsourced customer service company that they already use and do customer service using the apps that they already use, then you can make tremendous headway." No API. No integration. No engineering quarter to coordinate. Musk, on the size of the prize: "It's close to a trillion dollars all in, for customer service. And there's no barriers to entry." Customer service is 1% of the world economy. A trillion-dollar market sitting on top of software AI can already use. Then Musk drew the conclusion every CFO will eventually face: "You can immediately say, 'We'll outsource it for a fraction of the cost,' and there's no integration needed." The first wave will not be a smarter AI. It will be the same AI doing the same desktop work cheaper. Musk, looking at the digital human emulator about to ship: "You basically have access to trillions of dollars of revenue." Which $100M cost center in your business has zero integration moat? P.S. I made a playbook breaking down 100+ most powerful decision making mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. 5,000+ downloads. 113 five-star reviews. Grab a free copy here: If you're new here, follow GeniusThinking for content on the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

33,183 次观看 • 1 个月前

Elon Musk: "If somebody is doing something that is useful to the rest of society I think that’s a good thing. It doesn’t have to change the world."
2:24

Elon Musk: "If somebody is doing something that is useful to the rest of society I think that’s a good thing. It doesn’t have to change the world."

Joe Rogan Podcast News

20,864 次观看 • 1 个月前

Who Won? Elon Musk Debates Don Lemon Over the Impact of DEI Programs Lemon repeatedly said, “There’s no evidence” that DEI programs are lowering medical standards, a comment Elon Musk believes is a “false statement.” Who is right? Musk calls on Community Notes to settle the score. LEMON: “There was a repost of Ben Shapiro that you claim that DEI is killing people. Specifically, you point to medicine. You claim that DEI programs are putting people at risk. Do you really believe this to be true? And what evidence do you have to support it?” MUSK: “What I was referring to there was that if we lower the standards for doctors, if the test for a doctor is lowered, then the probability of them making a mistake and killing someone is obviously going to be higher.” LEMON: “Wait, say that again. I’m not sure I understand what you said. I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying.” MUSK: “Yes. If the status for passing medical exams and becoming a doctor, especially something like a surgeon, if the standards are lowered, then the probability that the surgeon will make a mistake is higher. They’re making mistakes in their exam. They may make mistakes with people — and that may result in people dying.” LEMON: “What evidence do you have, though, that they’re lowering the standards? There is no evidence of that.” MUSK: “I believe there is.” LEMON: “There’s no evidence of that, Elon. What is the evidence?” MUSK: “I believe they have literally lowered the standards at Duke University, and that is what the article was referring to. You are saying they have not lowered the standards?” LEMON: “There’s no evidence about lowering standards. And I think that there is —” MUSK: “I believe that is a false statement you’re making.” LEMON: “Okay, well, we’ll figure it out.” MUSK: “The interesting thing is, when this is posted on the X platform, there will be a whole bunch of things that rebut what you said and what I said. And so people can then make their own decision, based on the replies and the rebuttals and the community notes.”
2:05

Who Won? Elon Musk Debates Don Lemon Over the Impact of DEI Programs Lemon repeatedly said, “There’s no evidence” that DEI programs are lowering medical standards, a comment Elon Musk believes is a “false statement.” Who is right? Musk calls on Community Notes to settle the score. LEMON: “There was a repost of Ben Shapiro that you claim that DEI is killing people. Specifically, you point to medicine. You claim that DEI programs are putting people at risk. Do you really believe this to be true? And what evidence do you have to support it?” MUSK: “What I was referring to there was that if we lower the standards for doctors, if the test for a doctor is lowered, then the probability of them making a mistake and killing someone is obviously going to be higher.” LEMON: “Wait, say that again. I’m not sure I understand what you said. I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying.” MUSK: “Yes. If the status for passing medical exams and becoming a doctor, especially something like a surgeon, if the standards are lowered, then the probability that the surgeon will make a mistake is higher. They’re making mistakes in their exam. They may make mistakes with people — and that may result in people dying.” LEMON: “What evidence do you have, though, that they’re lowering the standards? There is no evidence of that.” MUSK: “I believe there is.” LEMON: “There’s no evidence of that, Elon. What is the evidence?” MUSK: “I believe they have literally lowered the standards at Duke University, and that is what the article was referring to. You are saying they have not lowered the standards?” LEMON: “There’s no evidence about lowering standards. And I think that there is —” MUSK: “I believe that is a false statement you’re making.” LEMON: “Okay, well, we’ll figure it out.” MUSK: “The interesting thing is, when this is posted on the X platform, there will be a whole bunch of things that rebut what you said and what I said. And so people can then make their own decision, based on the replies and the rebuttals and the community notes.”

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

5,538,066 次观看 • 2 年前

Elon Musk says steel killed carbon fiber on Starship at one-fiftieth the cost. Carbon fiber was supposed to be the future of rocketry. Lighter than aluminum. Stronger than steel. Trusted by every Formula 1 team. SpaceX picked it for Starship. "Particularly if you go for a high-strength specialized carbon fiber that can handle cryogenic oxygen, it's roughly 50 times the cost of steel." Then progress stalled. The autoclaves needed to cure the resin had to outsize every autoclave on Earth, and the team couldn't even produce a clean barrel section without wrinkles. Musk, watching the Mars timeline slip: "At this rate, we're never going to get to Mars. So we've got to think of something else." So he asked the question nobody at SpaceX had asked: "What about steel?" It became known as the **cryogenic stainless flip**. Musk, who had already shipped Falcon 9 in aluminum-lithium, broke with the textbook. "When you look at the material properties of stainless steel, full-hard, strain hardened stainless steel, at cryogenic temperature the strength to weight is actually similar to carbon fiber." Starship ran on cryogenic methane and oxygen. The airframe lived at temperatures that flipped steel ahead of carbon fiber. "You could smoke a cigar while welding stainless steel." After Musk made the call, steel weighed less than the carbon fiber version. Fifty times cheaper in raw material. Twice the heat tolerance. Half the heat shield mass. Musk, looking back: "In retrospect, we should have started with steel in the beginning. It was dumb not to do steel." What "obvious" material in your work is silently costing you the project? If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. P.S. I've made a free playbook on how to use and create your own mental models. This includes the same thinking strategies Feynman, Munger, and Musk built their careers on. Ttrusted by 5,000+ founders and investors. Grab your copy: — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast
2:07

Elon Musk says steel killed carbon fiber on Starship at one-fiftieth the cost. Carbon fiber was supposed to be the future of rocketry. Lighter than aluminum. Stronger than steel. Trusted by every Formula 1 team. SpaceX picked it for Starship. "Particularly if you go for a high-strength specialized carbon fiber that can handle cryogenic oxygen, it's roughly 50 times the cost of steel." Then progress stalled. The autoclaves needed to cure the resin had to outsize every autoclave on Earth, and the team couldn't even produce a clean barrel section without wrinkles. Musk, watching the Mars timeline slip: "At this rate, we're never going to get to Mars. So we've got to think of something else." So he asked the question nobody at SpaceX had asked: "What about steel?" It became known as the **cryogenic stainless flip**. Musk, who had already shipped Falcon 9 in aluminum-lithium, broke with the textbook. "When you look at the material properties of stainless steel, full-hard, strain hardened stainless steel, at cryogenic temperature the strength to weight is actually similar to carbon fiber." Starship ran on cryogenic methane and oxygen. The airframe lived at temperatures that flipped steel ahead of carbon fiber. "You could smoke a cigar while welding stainless steel." After Musk made the call, steel weighed less than the carbon fiber version. Fifty times cheaper in raw material. Twice the heat tolerance. Half the heat shield mass. Musk, looking back: "In retrospect, we should have started with steel in the beginning. It was dumb not to do steel." What "obvious" material in your work is silently costing you the project? If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. P.S. I've made a free playbook on how to use and create your own mental models. This includes the same thinking strategies Feynman, Munger, and Musk built their careers on. Ttrusted by 5,000+ founders and investors. Grab your copy: — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

829,416 次观看 • 2 个月前

Maye Musk on her son Elon Musk: “I don’t like the words wealthy or billionaire, I think it is degrading. I think he is the genius of the world. And people are loving him for that. They love him because of what he does, and they respect him.” Yes, Elon is the genius of the world.
1:00

Maye Musk on her son Elon Musk: “I don’t like the words wealthy or billionaire, I think it is degrading. I think he is the genius of the world. And people are loving him for that. They love him because of what he does, and they respect him.” Yes, Elon is the genius of the world.

Taya Bass

93,666 次观看 • 19 天前

.Elon Musk explains how he comes up with deadlines: “I’m often optimistic on timing.” “But the press will report when I’m late, not when I’m early.” “I try to figure out— what is the 50th percentile likely, which means that half the time, I should be wrong.”
0:47

.Elon Musk explains how he comes up with deadlines: “I’m often optimistic on timing.” “But the press will report when I’m late, not when I’m early.” “I try to figure out— what is the 50th percentile likely, which means that half the time, I should be wrong.”

Jawwwn

19,287 次观看 • 2 个月前

Elon Musk says political tribalism makes reasoned debate physically impossible. For decades, civic culture had assumed that facts beat ideology. Debate it. Argue it. Persuade with data. Eventually the truth would prevail. Elon: "You often simply cannot reason with people." Same evidence. Different conclusions. No movement. Then Musk named the dynamic that surprised him most. "Politics generally is very tribal. People lose their objectivity usually with politics." He named the failure mode: **political tribalism**. Musk, who had spent a decade engineering vehicles that succeed or fail on physics, had assumed politics would yield to the same rules. The same engineer who debugged code by tracing root causes would defend their political party's worst decisions and condemn the opposing party's best ideas — because tribe was not a logical structure but an evolutionary one, predating language, science, and the concept of truth. "They generally have trouble seeing the good on the other side or the bad on their own side." Same facts. Two tribes. Two conclusions. Same engineer. Two completely different reasoning modes. After Musk's surprise sank in, he stopped trying to persuade the opposition and started trying to dilute their power. Musk, on what surprised him most about politics: "That, I guess, was one of the things that surprised me the most." What argument are you still having with someone whose mind cannot move? P.S. If you want to stop overthinking, control chaos, and navigate any decision with the clarity... I made a full playbook breaking down the timeless decision-making mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. Comment "models" and follow GeniusThinking so I can DM you a copy. If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast
0:21

Elon Musk says political tribalism makes reasoned debate physically impossible. For decades, civic culture had assumed that facts beat ideology. Debate it. Argue it. Persuade with data. Eventually the truth would prevail. Elon: "You often simply cannot reason with people." Same evidence. Different conclusions. No movement. Then Musk named the dynamic that surprised him most. "Politics generally is very tribal. People lose their objectivity usually with politics." He named the failure mode: **political tribalism**. Musk, who had spent a decade engineering vehicles that succeed or fail on physics, had assumed politics would yield to the same rules. The same engineer who debugged code by tracing root causes would defend their political party's worst decisions and condemn the opposing party's best ideas — because tribe was not a logical structure but an evolutionary one, predating language, science, and the concept of truth. "They generally have trouble seeing the good on the other side or the bad on their own side." Same facts. Two tribes. Two conclusions. Same engineer. Two completely different reasoning modes. After Musk's surprise sank in, he stopped trying to persuade the opposition and started trying to dilute their power. Musk, on what surprised him most about politics: "That, I guess, was one of the things that surprised me the most." What argument are you still having with someone whose mind cannot move? P.S. If you want to stop overthinking, control chaos, and navigate any decision with the clarity... I made a full playbook breaking down the timeless decision-making mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. Comment "models" and follow GeniusThinking so I can DM you a copy. If you're new here, GeniusThinking is a gallery for the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. Follow along for more similar content. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

14,799 次观看 • 2 个月前

Former SpaceX employee: I think Elon is smarter than Einstein. “SpaceX is special forces. We take on the missions that others deem impossible. This will be the hardest thing you will ever do in your life. It is the kind of personality that wants to be a Navy SEAL, the engineering equivalent of that. It will be bruising and punishing and uncomfortable every day. Growth is rarely comfortable. If you are comfortable, you are probably not growing. To work for Elon is to be comfortable in a constant state of discomfort. He has 10,000 times more what the average person has streaming through their brain any given time. Our ability to think about and analyze a problem is nothing compared to how his brain works. Elon aspires to be the greatest engineer in the history of the world. He does have the cognitive horsepower of the geniuses that we have seen come before us. I think he is smarter than Einstein.” Dolly Singh in BBC's documentary The Elon Musk Show, 2022
1:12

Former SpaceX employee: I think Elon is smarter than Einstein. “SpaceX is special forces. We take on the missions that others deem impossible. This will be the hardest thing you will ever do in your life. It is the kind of personality that wants to be a Navy SEAL, the engineering equivalent of that. It will be bruising and punishing and uncomfortable every day. Growth is rarely comfortable. If you are comfortable, you are probably not growing. To work for Elon is to be comfortable in a constant state of discomfort. He has 10,000 times more what the average person has streaming through their brain any given time. Our ability to think about and analyze a problem is nothing compared to how his brain works. Elon aspires to be the greatest engineer in the history of the world. He does have the cognitive horsepower of the geniuses that we have seen come before us. I think he is smarter than Einstein.” Dolly Singh in BBC's documentary The Elon Musk Show, 2022

ELON CLIPS

263,471 次观看 • 1 年前

Elon Musk says acquiring Twitter and electing Trump were the same bet... In two years, Musk had spent $44 billion buying Twitter and millions backing one candidate. Critics called it pure ego. Or politics. Or the end of his reputation. He spent another billion ignoring them. Musk had a different framing. "Those actions were good for civilization." Twitter. The election. America's runway. He named the framework: **the civilization hedge**. Musk, whose mission was extending consciousness off Earth, viewed Earth as the precondition. A SpaceX that built Mars colonies and a Tesla that scaled Optimus to billions of units required America to stay coherent for at least the next thirty years — a runway that depended on which laws got written, which agencies got built, and which speech got allowed. "America needs to be strong enough to last long enough to extend life to other planets." A platform with the speech he wanted. An administration with the policies he needed. A civilization with the runway to leave Earth. After Musk made the bets, his goal was unchanged — extending consciousness still required Earth functional. Musk, on the bet underneath both moves: "And to get AI and robotics to the point where we can ensure that the future is good." What's the bet you're making that nobody around you understands? P.S. I made a full playbook breaking down the timeless decision-making mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. So if you want to stop overthinking, control chaos, and navigate any decision with the clarity... Comment "models" and follow GeniusThinking so I can DM you a copy. If you're new here, follow GeniusThinking for content the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast
0:25

Elon Musk says acquiring Twitter and electing Trump were the same bet... In two years, Musk had spent $44 billion buying Twitter and millions backing one candidate. Critics called it pure ego. Or politics. Or the end of his reputation. He spent another billion ignoring them. Musk had a different framing. "Those actions were good for civilization." Twitter. The election. America's runway. He named the framework: **the civilization hedge**. Musk, whose mission was extending consciousness off Earth, viewed Earth as the precondition. A SpaceX that built Mars colonies and a Tesla that scaled Optimus to billions of units required America to stay coherent for at least the next thirty years — a runway that depended on which laws got written, which agencies got built, and which speech got allowed. "America needs to be strong enough to last long enough to extend life to other planets." A platform with the speech he wanted. An administration with the policies he needed. A civilization with the runway to leave Earth. After Musk made the bets, his goal was unchanged — extending consciousness still required Earth functional. Musk, on the bet underneath both moves: "And to get AI and robotics to the point where we can ensure that the future is good." What's the bet you're making that nobody around you understands? P.S. I made a full playbook breaking down the timeless decision-making mental models used by history's greatest thinkers. So if you want to stop overthinking, control chaos, and navigate any decision with the clarity... Comment "models" and follow GeniusThinking so I can DM you a copy. If you're new here, follow GeniusThinking for content the greatest minds in economics, psychology, and history. — Elon Musk ( Elon Musk ), CEO of Tesla and SpaceX, on Dwarkesh Patel's ( Dwarkesh Patel ) podcast

GeniusThinking

1,126,278 次观看 • 2 个月前