It is clearly going well at Twitter.
I get that too. I don’t know who Dan Bongino is, but his sole contribution to Twitter appears to be a daily posting of “Joe Biden is the worst president ever LOOK AT ME I’M TRIGGERING THE LIBS!!!”. I eventually just muted him.
The engineering genius at work.
Overall, the article doesn’t really surprise me at all. Musk doesn’t strike me as a very good leader, and is more interested in form over function (e.g., the Cybertruck design).
The Twitter employees are probably thinking “Oh God, I wish he would go focus on Tesla or SpaceX.”
“Remember, Elon, it isn’t a lie… if you believe it”
I secured funding by thinking about it.
I declassified those documents by thinking about it.
Two more groups are suing Elmo for not paying his bills.
I would judge that by the way that truck looks that Musk doesn’t give too many shits about form.
… or function. You know since it doesn’t work. My cite is its lack of existence and his demo of the shatter proof glass that shattered when he hit it.
Describing the Cybertruck as putting form over function is the sickest burn on Musk I’ve heard in a while.
I agree but I think he thinks it looks cool. He’s wrong.
Yes, I think that’s the point. There is some quirk in Elmo’s sense of aesthetics that makes him perceive the Cybertruck as cool-looking, whereas it’s the ugliest, most bizarre thing I’ve ever seen on wheels.
As for “form follows function”, that bit of absurdity originally came from Tesla’s chief designer, although from what we know of Elmo, the designer is undoubtedly parroting every one of Elmo’s whims, wishes, and beliefs. To which I would have responded, no, you idiot, the “form” of the Cybertruck came solely from the ridiculous decision to use entirely impractical materials for no good reason, and furthermore doesn’t appear to perform any of its functions particularly well, or at all.
The true application of form following function often results in very natural-looking, often very beautiful objects. For example, compare many modern cars with understated designs that reflect practicality and operational efficiency, with some of the gaudy monstrosities of the 50s and 60s. Or the graceful form of a swept-wing jet, which is 100% about function.
And then you have the Cybertruck.
My God, that thing is ugly!
I saw one of these at a car museum this past summer, and it was the most beautiful vehicle I’ve ever seen in person. Just breathtaking:
http://findclassicars.com/uploads/carphotos/mille-miglia-eligible-superb-in-every-way-1.jpg
Those Italians, they knew better than to ask their people to put themselves in anything less than aesthetically pleasing.
(Now, if Italian engineers could produce a car than runs properly more than three weeks in a row, they’d really have something…)
I’m not a car-o-phile by any means, but that is a nice looking car.
I’m not a car guy either; I go to car museums occasionally for the cultural and engineering history. But this just flat-out left me breathless.
I expect the Italians to ban import of the Cybertruck on aesthetic grounds alone. “I miei occhi! Mio Dio, i miei occhi!”
(The French, now… their engineering is a bit better, but Christ they make some ugly cars. They’ll probably have a Kombucha Girl reaction to it.)
Very nice. That would obviously be an Alfa Romeo – I’d guess circa 1959, probably a Giulietta Spider.
Here is the sort of thing America was producing in 1959. These are the front and back of the 1959 Buick Invicta. Just something typical that I found – it’s not even the ugliest or most outrageous design. Cast your eye over that with a view to the principle of “form follows function”. Absolutely none of the major styling flourishes have any function whatsoever. The rear end looks … puzzling. Is it a car? Is it a plane? Is it a flying car with its afterburners ignited? From the expanse of trunk surface, perhaps “aircraft carrier” is also a possibility?
The front end looks like it’s snarling and baring its teeth. Elmo would probably love it for just that reason alone.
Love the grille, the rest not so much.
It’s a mobile picnic area.
Remember that from the manufacturer’s POV the absolutely most important function a car has is being bought. If early jet-age airplane styling sells cars, then early jet-age airplane styling is functional. Highly functional.
I know that’s not the original intent of the aphorism. But that is what it really means in a mass-marketing environment.
it reminds me of those futuristic outfits that used to be so common in sci-fi illustrations – all those form-fitting suits with the useless raised half-moons at the shoulders
It reminds me of Gerry Anderson vehicles in shows like UFO and Space 1999.
They were prettier, though.