$PURP

My point on the tweet is not to minimize.

My point is what is more important in the macro: what he says or what he does?

He’s a flawed, complicated individual.

It’s not that complicated. Call out bad behavior in real-time. Stop excusing entertainers, businessmen & politicians who demonstrate terrible behavior.  Don’t elevate bad behavior just because it comes with humanity saving technology or claims of making someplace great again.

🥑🍋 Farmer / LAMP stack dev / Husband / 🌈 Dad / Web1 dude loving a web3 world / Collector of things digital & physical / 
CdeP ‘94

What the good deeds, though? Do they not count?

I noticed a stark change in coverage after Pedogate.  I call that accountability.

> They are already showered with accolades and tax breaks for those.

I guess we read different media.

The good deeds count.  They are already showered with accolades and tax breaks for those.  But we are all the sum of our actions.  It says a lot when folks ignore the bad and only celebrate the good.

Former neuroscientist working in AI and distributed data. https://relativereality.substack.com Writings.


Recursive nature of human experience: /mirror-loom

Getting closer! https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/neuralink-livestream-shows-paralyzed-person-playing-chess-laptop-rcna144374

Also Tesla impact on carbon emissions and Starlink connectivity in Ukraine strong examples of new technology already having had major positive impact.

Let’s also distinguish between harm happening in the present with the promise of new technology in the future. No blindness has been cured yet.

People can do great things and shitty things at the same time or in the same lifetime. Go figure. One does not excuse the other. People hurt by hate fueled twitter rage don’t square off against blind people with new sight.

What is the premise here, if Elon gets cancelled he'll stop helping disabled people with tech innovations? 

Why does being held accountable for one's actions in public have to prevent someone from doing good deeds?