Can we compromise on 50% hinged?
…deal! 
Musk bought his way into Tesla. He didn’t have anything to do with the development of the technology. And SpaceX is pretty much all using existing technology.
You’re also underplaying how bad what is going on with Twitter is. It’s not merely that he’s screwing up. It’s that he’s doing things that anyone with any level of expertise would know would fail. He doesn’t know what he’s doing, and he’s unwilling to listen to others who do.
There just isn’t much reason to be optimistic that this one of his pie-in-the-sky ideas is going to be the one that actually works. There’s no reason to hold on to the type of thinking in the OP where people actually thought the guy was smart or capable. We’ve seen the man behind the curtain, and he’s far less capable than he was able to trick people into believing he was.
I know I will never trust anything else that man does.
At this point, any time he says he’s going to do something, I read as him saying “wouldn’t it be cool if”.
To borrow a tweet I saw today;
You are deeply confused about the timeline. At the time that Musk joined Tesla, Eberhard and Tarpenning didn’t have any technology. They had purchased a prototype car–the tzero–from AC Propulsion. And they came up with the name Tesla, and had a vague idea of using the Lotus Elise as a platform. That was basically all they had when they went shopping around for VCs. Of course, with such a weak business case they were blown off repeatedly. Until they met Musk, who contributed the first $6.5Mish.
The sorta unsung hero here is JB Straubel. He actually was building electric cars in his spare time, and was probably a better engineer than the rest of them combined. He came in a few months after Musk, as the fifth employee. Fortunately, he is also recognized as a co-founder, along with Ian Wright (five total). He stuck with Tesla for another 15 years.
Of course, it’s utter nonsense to suggest that any aspect of what they developed then applies to their later vehicles. All of the difficulty is in increasing production.
Utter tripe.
He’s since unreinstated the Ye formerly known as Kanye. Due to a tweet that put a swastika next to a Star of David.
It’s not possible for Twitter to not follow the first amendment.
Sure it is. They could, as a company, say a bunch of stuff which is not covered by the 1st Amendment and break the law.
But that’s beside the point. It should have been clear from the context that I was referring to their moderation standards, not whether they as a company were following it.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act says this:
No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider
So in terms of the tweets that go through their servers (i.e., tweets), the 1st Amendment is irrelevant, as they are not considered a publisher or speaker. But they can still adopt moderation standards that roughly match the 1st Amendment (along with all the caveats that the Supreme Court has decided on over the years).
It’s a fuzzy boundary, to be sure, since questions like “what is an incitement to violence?” can only really be decided by a court, and so outside the scope of a service provider. But they can adopt a similar stance and perhaps set the boundary a bit further out so as to make the decisions easier.
For instance, was Kanye’s swastika+Star of David symbol really a call to violence? Not directly, but the subtext was certainly there. It’s doubtful it would really fall outside the realm of protected speech in true 1st Amendment terms. But it’s a bit of a gray area, and it makes sense for Twitter to ban anyone that is edging close to the line.
That’s not how the first amendment works. The FA is a check on government power. It’s a law about what sort of laws the state can pass. Twitter cannot possibly violate the first amendment unless it gets elected to Congress first.
If Musk tweets out a bunch of stuff not covered by the FA, he’s not in violation of the FA, he’s in violation of whatever laws or statutes were passed that criminalized that particular speech. Those laws will have been tested against the FA, and presumably found not to be violating it, or to have a compelling reason why it doesn’t apply.
Reuters reports that Neuralink is under federal investigation for violations of the Animal Welfare Act, and that their death count is over 1500 due to Elon’s demands to rush the research.