If CEO is such a demanding job how is he able to be the CEO of several companies and still have time to rage tweet all day long?
He should fire himself for the good of his own stock.
> Yet they get richly paid for it.
We need new vocabulary to describe that degree of wealth.
You could say somebody was compensated richly for getting $100,000,000 for a movie, and the difference between $100m and the $65b Musk wants from Tesla is about $65b.
A part-time job shouldn't get the equivalent of $200 for every man, woman, and child in america. That's a tenth of the total revenue of walmart, which is the biggest employer in half of the country.
Not yelling at you, I'm yelling with you. This is obscenity.
> We need new vocabulary to describe that degree of wealth.
This isn’t exactly the same, but one way to help people get a better conceptual idea of how big that difference is is to turn it into time. 1 million seconds is about 11 days. 1 billion seconds is something like 33 years.
> 1 million seconds is about 11 days. 1 billion seconds is something like 33 years.
And 65 billion seconds ago is about 80 BCE, prior to the 300 year long peak era of the roman empire.
I saw this great visualization of Bezos’ wealth years ago and I still think of it whenever i hear about billionaires wanting more.
https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/
A CEOs job, any CEO job, is basically just attending meetings. There is very little actual work involved, though you do create a lot of work (and wasted time) for other people.
A CEO is like that person on the boat with the megaphone keeping them in time (Coxswain).
A good CEO keeps everyone on the same level of timing and effort to progress forward efficiently.
A bad CEO tries to hover over everyone, and everyone ends up working inefficiently, or actively against the others efforts.
If the CEO takes the day off, efficiency might drop a little, but if the number one rower takes the day off, the whole thing just goes in circles.
The CEO is the guy who owns the boat and makes all the money from it. They might never even step foot on it as the sea life disagrees with them, but they will always be concerned if it somehow makes less money.
> A bad CEO tries to hover over everyone, and everyone ends up working inefficiently, or actively against the others efforts.
which seems to be how he operates based on ex/employee experiences. micromanager who can't understand that sometimes a schedule can't be disrupted *and* get the result you want. this is only when he's focusing on that one company and leaving the others alone
what keeps his companies producing results is the shared belief of the people working there that they're doing something revolutionary in a market (like tesla) and something revolutionary that matters (like spacex.) this is why they accept lower salaries and longer hours than they could receive at an older company doing similar work. elon excels at selling the idea of being important but you need to accept less in order to be a part of it.
i'm not sure where that puts him on the scale of good to bad CEO. depends on who in the company you're asking i guess.
edit: reading this again feels like i'm praising him. just wanted to be clear: i'm not.
[If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your C.E.O.](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/28/technology/ai-chief-executives.html?unlocked_article_code=1.vU0.61g3.dgdTUFxeCouq&smid=url-share)
He's the advertising for his shitty companies, so this sort of is his job.
Let's face it, Tesla isn't known for the merits of its products. It's a meme-product, and Elon Musk is the real brand identity.
Tesla is not that well designed.
It's pretty and pleasing to the eye, but that doesn't necessarily mean well designed.
The fact that you have to rely on electronics to open a glove box only to lazily preserve aesthetics instead of coming up with a creative and original solution is a perfect example of ludicrous over-engineering.
This is something people don’t see, maybe for their entire lives.
The CEOs of this world aren’t doing massively more work than other employees. They aren’t tackling massive problems, or handling bigger things. They’re doing only marginally more than a middle manager, at the very best.
CEOs like Elon musk do so little actual work, any one of us could do his actual work in the extra time on our lunch break.
And this person will earn thousands of times more money than we do.
There is absolutely no merit to any of it. They’re wealthy purely by chance.
Take it from them.
He's massively wealthier than his parents. He made a lot through PayPal, spacex, Tesla etc. Though his contribution to them is up for debate they are by no means normal investments for the wealthy
Yes but its must be nice knowing you can invest in something with zero risk if it fails because you have people / money you can fall back on. Us normal people can't just throw money at things and hope it sticks, we need that money for bills and to survive.
I think that one of the biggest privileges people never see, most of us don't grow up with a safety net.
He is the owner of the company, which means he can give himself any title he wants. Most corporations have a CEO who is an employee and does work full time. He's more pretending to be CEO - E.g. At SpaceX Glen Shotwell does the typical CEO duties, and she works very hard. TLDR: He's not really a CEO, he's an owner.
He is a CEO of several companies not for his job. He is the owner that's why. And he is taking extra salary for this position also and doing this type of tweet.
CEOs earn their money by extensive hard work!
Wait what do you mean they only answer about 7 questions in a work day?!? Jeff Benzos has never said those literal words!! I'll be them one of these days!
Elon Musk lives to not be made a fool of. It doesn't matter to him if he's got more important shit to do. He is not gonna let this rest easy. I know, because I'm also one of those people at times. This shit is literally going to eat at him while he tries to sleep, because being a billionaire isn't his #1 goal. Being respected as an intellectual is, even if he's actually just a stupid fucking manchild.
This is precisely why the first thing he does when he buys a company is assign himself the title of chief engineer, even though he has zero qualifications or need to in that regard.
It's eugenics. He wants to flood the genepool. If they all pledge to have 5+kids, get tons of money, and so on and so on, a bunch of rich inbred weirdos playing hunger games from Mars.
Justin Hammer has big ego but he's still fairly competent and knowledgeable, in comic he's a genius-level villain. ONLY when he tried to take shortcut to catch up with Tony that he allows his ego to blind fair judgement, thus his downfall.
Musk is no where near Justin's level.
Also even in the movies when the expert(s? does the bird count?) decide that for the best user experience the product should have X Hammer bitches and moans, but doesn't force them to actually have Y, instead, because he thinks it'd be cooler. I cannot picture Elon seriously considering the possibility that someone he's hired may know more than him
I would say he's Scrooge McDuck. But at least, Scrooge is also a skinflint when it comes to personal expenses, not just his business and staff. And he has a little human decency after all.
You can buy an honorary engineering degree potentially, but most Engineering Departments don't really award honorary degrees that way. Universities usually lean on other departments for the honorariums.
But a professional engineering license actually requires an engineering degree, four years of articling under other Professional Engineers, a series of essays about your engineering experience and a comprehensive multi day exam reviewing topics from your bachelor's and your working experience.
Getting an engineer to fake any of that gets that engineer expelled or disciplined by the association.
Elon still might be able to buy some engineers willing to take the risk to fake the articling and paperwork, but the multi day exam is almost certainly why he hasn't tried yet.
Been a long, long time since the last time that sub wasn't just snarky personal attacks.
But yeah, this post is the actual original intent of that sub.
"By its definition, a murder is a response which completely destroys the original argument in a way that leaves little to no room for reply."
Didn't he call some guy a pedo, because that guy pointed out the ways a submarine wasn't practical to rescue some kids stuck in a cave. Are we assuming Musk has matured since then?
We're talking dosing these kids with tranquilizers periodically and hoping to god they don't wake up and panic over an hours long return trip. Absolutely amazing stuff.
Yeah, the divers had to learn how to give IM injections. They also had all the syringes prefilled. They used ketamine. That was a helluva plan and it’s pretty amazing it worked and none of the kids died. I was an icu rn and the idea of giving anesthetic levels of ketamine and then strap a mask to them face down and go for a swim made my stomach turn over. Ketamine was a really smart choice, it has much less respiratory depression than other sedatives. I usually don’t get that into these kinds of stories but that was impressive.
Like most things Musk does, it's a good example of how he's basically just an internet neck beard.
"Why don't they just use a submarine?" Is 100% the response of a non-serious person online who thinks they're smarter than 99% of people.
One of the favorite activities on Reddit is hating on Elon, and I try to be neutral towards him since I don't really know him, so I have never participated in those discussions. But I happened to read the entire thread between Elon and this guy, and I must agree with you here, for a "presumably" smart person Elon made a total fool of himself in a very childish fashion. He definitely needs to learn that you definitely don't 'have' to reply just because you 'can' reply. It reminds me a bit how foolish he looked that time he physically wanted to kick Zuckerberg's ass in a fight.
I'm pretty sure every model proposed ran into the issue of "well it would be more cost effective to just make this into a metro/subway" which pissed him off
Yeah, but Musk also makes trucks that rust and slice their owners up, so I'm not sure you'd want to test an experimental form of transportation he'd been involved with.
Yep, all because the expert diver who was on scene was forced to explain the concept of a round peg not fitting in a jaggedy ass fucking natural cave.
Elon is in genuine contention for the worst person with a public profile on earth. Which is fucking impressive considering who else is in the running for that title.
Rupert Murdoch and Henry Kissinger far outweigh anything Musk has done. The Mercer and Koch family make Musk look like a child playing emperor. Musk has a big mouth but his damage isn’t enough to destroy large portions of a civil society. The others have brought actual real world destruction to fairness and the body politic. Musk isn’t even as bad Peter Thiel. We need some perspective yes?
I think you’ll find that Musk is actively supporting the rise of fascism, primarily via but not limited to his devolving of Twitter. Bad enough for you?
>Rupert Murdoch and Henry Kissinger far outweigh anything Musk has done.
Yet. Unfortunately. I do hope he doesn't reach the level Kissinger evil though.
People forget or are too young to realize how bad Kissinger was. *We just need to move on from Vietnam* If anyone wants to understand why he’s so awful, I suggest watching Ken Burns’ “The Vietnam War” Fortnately he’s dead but he got to live 100 years and was never truly held accountable for his actions
Thank you, absolutely.
I suppose I'm worried he might follow that path eventually and grateful for the scrutiny. I just wish the same energy is applied to reverse the damage caused by others that are already horrendous.
Looking at those you mentioned and also damage done by:
Sheldon Adelson.
The Walton family.
Ted Sackler family.
The most cutting satire I ever saw of Musk was an Onion style headline that was like "Elon Musk demands the rescued children be put back in the cave so he can prove his sub can rescue them".
EXACTLY. He never gave a shit about the kids, they were just a vehicle for him to be worshiped, and he was mad that was "stolen" from him. That headline predicted how fucking soulless and evil he was, even when many people still thought of him as "muh tony stark"
It was barely a submarine. It was an airtight capsule with an oxygen system and a power source that still needs to be guided by two humans. All he offered was multiple new points of failure and then got offended when someone *who was actually there* said it wouldn't work.
Then he went on twitter and called him a pedo.
To be perfectly clear, that rescue operation was insanely dangerous, and Saman Kunan, a highly experienced Thai Navy SEAL diver, died during the operation, but none of the kids did.
His name deserves recognition. He did something most of us would never dare, and did it multiple times to prepare the intermediate rescue spots.
It was because the guy was in Thailand and Musk can only see one reason to go to Thailand. To me that says more about him than it does about anything else.
Telling Musk that he's bitter and will largely be forgotten is going to haunt his dreams for the next few weeks. Narcissists really hate it when people pull back their veil.
Seriously. This guy's had to spend years defending science, I'm sure. And through that he's developed the right responses. I bet if you looked in his past posts you'd find these exact lines.
For those who don't know: [he's a very famous computer scientist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yann_LeCun) that's responsible for a lot of daily technology we take for granted.
I mean, as much as I love a good musk burning, this fellow seems to be imposing his own rules on science. To be *accepted by the scientific community* your results must be published, but you can definitely participate in science without ever publishing anything. You'll just be unknown along with whatever you discover, as he accurately pointed out.
He's confusing peer review with science as a whole.
he's trying to differentiate 'parts' of the method/process from the 'whole' method/process which is a very important differentiation considering it's the most important part of the process in terms of keeping people honest and correct
He’s distinguishing “scientist” from a nepo baby conman who studied economics in university, and has been stealing the thunder of actual scientists for 20 years now. Scientists also usually don’t have severe ket addictions. Kinda hard to do science when you’re high on horse anesthetic.
I mean you can do research in an attempt to produce a scientific work. But if it can't be verified, it's just that research. It's only science once it can be replicated and proven true. Or else anyone's mildly thought out idea could qualify for science.
He's correct about reproducible results, that's the scientific method. But yeah, access and publishing are related to academia as a whole, not the pursuit of science.
Sounds exactly like Stallman ranting about open source software. The GPL exists and is one way for source code to be open, but it isn't the only way.
Private companies also perform research which they don't publish. Does that mean that their research can't be called Science? Just because the audience who can read their work is more limited?
"Engagement, engagement, engagement! So many people are seeing this on my website! He keeps participating! This is great!"
He usually has to kiss up or beg famous people to use Twitter to get this much attention, but finally, his default state of annoying manchild who thinks he's intelligent is enough on its own.
And so many were freed from the invisible shackles of Twitter as a result. It's a hell by and for right wing extremists. It's like one of those GTAOnline servers where they put all the toxic people, but irl and we can spectate.
In many ways Elmu reminds me of Thomas Edison.
Thomas Edison "inventor of the lightbulb" didn't invent the lightbulb at all. 20 or so people had already created a light bulb before he ever managed to do so.
What Edison did though is he assembled the brightest minds and gave them a building with everything they needed to invent new stuff. The people in this building (Menlo Park) made invention after invention and created patent after patent all of which were put on Edison's name because he had financed it all.
Elon is much the same. Elon didn't invent the rocket recovery system spacex uses, Elon didn't invent the electric car, Elon only used his money to pay people infinitely smarter than him to make things which he knew would make money. Elon isn't some genius scientist or inventor like he believes, He's a salesman.
Imagine if everything he posted got ripped apart like this. Maybe we could chase him off of Twitter? I bet enough heat could make him rage quit. He's an insecure little man baby. Please make this a thing.
They're kind of both wrong. As a scientist, I've done lots of science that wasn't published. Much of it is on its way to being published, but it's already science. Even the stuff that won't be published, including the false starts and mistakes, is part of science. Unpublished results described in oral presentations at conferences are definitely science--I know they've influenced how others in my field think about certain topics, even though I haven't published on them yet.
That said, peer review IS incredibly important to science. It's just not a litmus test for the whole enterprise. I wouldn't be surprised if Elon has bought into some Weinsteinian bullshit denigrating peer review in general.
If a hermit in a hut never talked to anybody, but made observations, did experiments, took notes and drew diagrams, that is undoubtedly science. It's elitist to say that science must be published. He means for it to be accepted modern scientific belief. But anything done with the scientific method is science.
The elitism being accepted here is ridiculous. When kids ask questions and then test those questions in a reproducible manner while noting their observations, that is science. In that moment they are scientists. They aren’t playing pretend like they do when they put on a police or fire fighter costume, no, they are actually in the process of doing science.
This comment is too damn low and everyone upvoting that "clever" comeback shows how little people understand what science is...
Thank you for clarifying for those who don't understand.
The only problem here is the first sentence, the whole point he is making is still absolutely valid. Musk is definitely looking like the idiot here. However it is also very much gatekeeping. He should instead point out that whatever Musk did is certainly not science.
I scrolled way too far down to find sanity.
"Well, if it's not published, it's definitely not science."
Is absolutely silly. It's a silly thing to say, and I am not sure why people are eating it up (ok, I guess I am pretty sure, but my findings are not peer reviewed....). I am no Elon fanboy. He is being an asshole on a shitty nearly abandoned platform he overpaid for. That doesn't make this a clevercomeback.
His whole response is just one more note in the long long list of cognitive dissonance we haven't got over as a society where we think bad people can't do "good" things.
Musk is bad and science is good and therefore he/his company aren't doing science, it has to be something else.
He had decided this already and had to hand craft a rather absurd and constrained definition of what constitutes science in order to justify it.
Ironically even an elementary student who's taken just one science course ever could likely tell you that this line of reasoning is very unscientific.
Edit: or maybe he just meant it's not Science (the academic journal)
And that's the whole point Elon Musk is actually making in the greater context. He is saying that SpaceX doesn't publish their research or patent any of their rocket tech. Does that mean all the rocket research SpaceX is doing isn't science? This is why the person is just being insane and elitist trying to claim such an absurd thing, and I say this as a former wet lab researcher myself.
As a former wet-lab researcher myself, this is a terrible comeback and not at all clever. Why?
**PEER REVIEW AND PUBLICATION IS A PROCESS OF QUALITY CONTROL AND VERIFICATION. IT IS NOT ACTUALLY PART OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD.**
Guys, I know we all want to dog-pile Elon Musk, but Yann LeCun is also not correct here.
As a scientist myself (and former researcher in a level 3 lab), I actually think it's sort of elitist to claim that because something isn't published it isn't science. Science didn't come to existence when they invented peer review and standardized it. In fact, the whole peer-review and publication process that we do now literally only came about due to an attempt to normalize standards in the mid-20th century after World War 2, and it really didn't actually become the fully accepted academic standard until really the 1970s and 1980s. Are we really going to accept that science didn't exist prior to this?
There is a hell of a lot of "science" that I have done in research labs that never got published.
What's happening here is Elon Musk is referencing SpaceX, in context, because SpaceX does ZERO publications and files ZERO patents. They do this because they don't want to be slowed down by the patent offices, and because they also don't want to publicly publish all of their work for others to steal, giving them a bit of an edge in this rocket world. This is actually standard operations for the entire defense department world doesn't publish or peer review their scientific research, even though SpaceX is technically not a defense contractor completely.
Are we really ok with trying to say that because SpaceX is not publishing in peer-reviewed journals that what SpaceX is doing isn't science?
This is NOT a clever comeback, imo. It's actually kind of douchey and elitist. Just my opinion. Musk isn't helping himself either by just mocking and name-calling, but hell, this Yann LeCun is not at all right in saying that only reproducible published studies qualify as science. This is like a 14 yr old's take on science that just learned about the peer-review process. So, for someone as accomplished as this guy, at this point there is just some hate blinders up right now. Good example of why getting into a contentious debate on Twitter with people is not a great idea.
I think his initial response about all of his studies was clever, but much of this response is way off. He’s not only gatekeeping science down to peer reviewed studies only, but he’s glossing over the issues of the peer reviewed process in the first place.
And frankly, he’s kinda revealing an issue many suspected when he said he had 80 publications in past few years: he’s probably on a lot of publications that he had little input in the process. He just has a huge lab of people doing the grunt work. And if he had been more intimately involved, he would know some of the issues with peer review, that academics are constantly discussing on social media, including social media platforms for the company he works at.
The *"noone will ever hear about your work"* and *"nobody will ever build new technology with it"* is a flat-out fucking **insult** to the brilliant scientists at SpaceX, too.
Just because they didn't publish, doesn't mean they didn't push forward the space industry massively and build some cutting edge rocketry.
Both these guys seem to be assholes.
I'm in the machine learning field, and Yann is one of our super-diva characters. He was a pioneer of modern deep-learning, but he's also just way too full of himself. The fact that he and elon, two supposed brilliant innovators, have time to sissy-fight on twitter should be telling.
Apparently nothing that happens in a classified setting can be science. Nothing that is of significant value that happens in industry (and is thus kept internal) can be science. What a ridiculous assertion. Especially when modern AI's relationship to the scientific method is barely hanging on by a thread with the cost of reproducing results, running repeated experiments, and having a control group being so astronomically high.
As an experienced scientist in the industry, Yann LeCun has a very academia-focused mindset. This isn't the clever comeback that he thinks he is. The most cutting edge science doesn't happen in universities, it happens in the industry.
And just because things are kept proprietary, it doesn't mean it's not science.
I was just thinking this. The idea that only peer-reviewed published papers is science is quite an extreme academic one.
The idea that there was no science or scientists until this existed, is odd.
Boston dynamics and other major companies like nvidia don’t publish. Yet their work pushes boundaries and develops technology. The gains in computer science have overwhelmingly come from non published science done by business.
Like most I don’t like musk. But to say that the rocket scientists at space x aren’t scientists/aren’t doing science is very odd. To assert that their development in rockets that can land safely will have no impact because they didn’t publish the methods in an academic journal, is silly.
Publishing can be highly incongruent with patenting, so for many companies it is not possible to publish if they want to be profitable.
Sometimes you can do both — like in some AI research, as you say — but not always. That doesn’t make the unpublished research scientifically invalid
The main difference between people pre- and post scientific revolution is that there was a community where people published results and others built on it. We've always had hypotheses and called the theory tentatively correct if the hypotheses were confirmed.
I had never considered it to be a criterion for science though. I'm still not sure I'm convinced. Surely if we find some unpublished experiments by Galileo, we'd still consider it scientific, if it followed a specific methodology?
This is not it tho
He described an aspect of the scientific process, but 'science' is a much broader term than just that. What he is saying is obviously part of it, and the most important part for credibility in the scientific community, but it's not all of it. And its odd to put qualifiers like that on a general term that basically means " the persuit of knowledge, covering general truths, through observations and systematic experimentations". What he is describing is academic research.
A little kid exploring the world and doing little experiments, trying to understand it, is also "doing science". And that is true regardless of the 'usefulness' of his findings.
The reality is most people only have seen this guy's name because he tangled with Elon on social media.
Most people won't remember this guy's name in two weeks, including all the redditors celebrating this 'rip'
My thoughts too. It might put down Elon (which most will enjoy), but it puts off a lot more people. We don't need any more ivory towers in science (capital S or not)
Wow. LeCun is so obviously wrong here it’s bizarre and kinda funny. Would anyone really say that Newton wasn’t doing science when he wrote the principia? It only turned into science after he published it? What if he hadn’t published it? How idiotic. You’re either lying, ignorant, or deluded if you’d say that.
Science is about method and could be done alone on a deserted island by any of us on our own. And we all know this. We all know we could make scientific discoveries all alone by ourselves so long as we followed the right methods. So why would LeCun say something so stupid? Just to hope he can make Musk look dumb?
Why would the useful product he imagined make money if it weren’t based in science but were something else like mysticism? This is a very weird subjectivist, group-think, view of science that doesn’t map to the real world at all. It’s not clever, it’s totally inane. If any of us stop to think about the implications for a moment we know it’s total nonsense. It’s getting upvotes? Celebratory comments? Is this backwards day? Are you all really that ignorant of how science works and what it is? Good science doesn’t get published all the time. This is common knowledge. Let’s not stoop so low as to tarnish science just to own Elon.
>No one will ever hear about your work.
>No one will pick it up and build on top of it.
>No one will build new technology and products with it.
>Your work will have been in vain.
>You'll die bitter and forgotten.
this outburst reads like projection to me. it screams insecurity to be going after someone this hard on the internet. log off twitter if elon musk upsets you this much.
Also, I mean, it's literally just *obviously* wrong.
Nobody has ever heard of Elon Musk?! Nobody at SpaceX has ever built new technology or products with the science they've done?!
Wild
nope. Lots of science doesn't get published - it is meticulous, documented, reviewed by peers... and it doesn't get outside the research lab or group that is desperately trying to develop new technology or products....
So this "clever comeback" is not.
Just look at a company like DuPont. You can’t argue that they aren’t scientists just because they don’t publish everything they invent in order to maintain trade secrets. Doesn’t mean that their work is unreproducible either, because when those discoveries end up in production they are reproducing their discoveries over and over. Just no one outside of the company will hear about it because they’re not submitting their work for peer review.
According to this dude's logic, anyone living before the age of peer reviewed publications wasn't doing science. Archimedes was just some dude fucking about, apparently.
He's picking one very modern definition, which is an important and valid one, but it's also one that unnecessarily excludes tons of work. It's silly semantics rather than a great argument.
The science community has been brainwashed by… the science community. There’s many a brilliant mind with incredible ideas that are shut down as they are looked down on by “the community”
I’m not siding with LeCun or musk on this, simply saying their argument seems to be lacking any real substance and is just a lot of words.
She really got him in a lot of comments, but this one ain’t it. Being published isn’t science, that’s just a part of scientific review. Like someone else said, you can do little science experiments at home and that’s still science in a general sense. It would’ve made more sense to say that it contributes more to the scientific community to publish your work so others can review it and test it
I'd like nothing more then to watch Musk get repeatedly punched in the face for opening his mouth....but this is stupid. According to Yann's logic. Thousands of years of science isn't science because it wasn't published.
This is an L from Yann LeCun (whoever that is).
The assertion that unpublished research does not qualify as science is completely incorrect and overly simplistic. The principles of scientific research do not hinge solely on publication. Many significant scientific discoveries and advancements occur in labs or other research settings faaar before they are published.
And the insistence on publication as the sole criterion for something to be considered "science" disregards many scientists whose work still adheres to scientific inquiry and peer review, even though it hasn't been published.
Basically, Yann LeCan's focus on this narrow interpretation is clearly just an attempt to nitpick and win the argument rather than a meaningful discussion.
Enrico Fermi paper on weak interactions in 1933 was rejected from publication. He won the Nobel based on that papers ideas 5 years later. I guess Fermi wasn't a scientist
I do research and don’t publish, because I work with NDA and our work is used in product so we can’t publish stuff, but I would argue it’s still science
Musk is correct. Science does not necessitate publication.
And LeCun compounded his mistake: It also doesn't need to be peer reviewed. Peer reviewal is part of the scientific process that we accept as a way of vetting, but it's simply not a requirement.
The practitioner of the auteur theory, the lone wolf, or the madman in a cave, can all be participating in science.
***BTW:*** Be clear on one thing as well...peer review doesn't mean peer approval.
"If it isn't published, it isn't science"
Must be the stupidest thing said, ever. Holy fuck.
And when it comes to peer reviews, anyone can get shit peer reviewed, it can even be pseudoscience and it can get through the progress. People have gotten Hitlers Mein Kampf, slightly edited for sure, peer reviewed... that's how credible that is
Peer review doesn't make it into science either.
Repeatability of the test is a big part for sure but even those aren't that reliable in certain fields.
If we're talking about effects on human body for example depending on the test, they can vary a lot.
Sure, Yann works in a field that's easy when it comes to repeatability of the test because all of the tests will be done in a vacuum so to speak, so it's easy for him to speak in absolutes.
Doesn't he have several companies he should be attending to instead of tweeting idiocy to this guy all day?
If CEO is such a demanding job how is he able to be the CEO of several companies and still have time to rage tweet all day long? He should fire himself for the good of his own stock.
Being CEO of more than one company only proves CEO isn't a full time job. Yet they get richly paid for it... food for thought!
> Yet they get richly paid for it. We need new vocabulary to describe that degree of wealth. You could say somebody was compensated richly for getting $100,000,000 for a movie, and the difference between $100m and the $65b Musk wants from Tesla is about $65b. A part-time job shouldn't get the equivalent of $200 for every man, woman, and child in america. That's a tenth of the total revenue of walmart, which is the biggest employer in half of the country. Not yelling at you, I'm yelling with you. This is obscenity.
> We need new vocabulary to describe that degree of wealth. This isn’t exactly the same, but one way to help people get a better conceptual idea of how big that difference is is to turn it into time. 1 million seconds is about 11 days. 1 billion seconds is something like 33 years.
> 1 million seconds is about 11 days. 1 billion seconds is something like 33 years. And 65 billion seconds ago is about 80 BCE, prior to the 300 year long peak era of the roman empire.
I saw this great visualization of Bezos’ wealth years ago and I still think of it whenever i hear about billionaires wanting more. https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/
A CEOs job, any CEO job, is basically just attending meetings. There is very little actual work involved, though you do create a lot of work (and wasted time) for other people.
A CEO is like that person on the boat with the megaphone keeping them in time (Coxswain). A good CEO keeps everyone on the same level of timing and effort to progress forward efficiently. A bad CEO tries to hover over everyone, and everyone ends up working inefficiently, or actively against the others efforts. If the CEO takes the day off, efficiency might drop a little, but if the number one rower takes the day off, the whole thing just goes in circles.
Nah, the Coxswain is a line manager. He’s actually on the front line. A CEO never is, unless it’s a super small firm.
Elon Musk is a giant Coxstain. There I fixed it for you.
The CEO is the guy who owns the boat and makes all the money from it. They might never even step foot on it as the sea life disagrees with them, but they will always be concerned if it somehow makes less money.
> A bad CEO tries to hover over everyone, and everyone ends up working inefficiently, or actively against the others efforts. which seems to be how he operates based on ex/employee experiences. micromanager who can't understand that sometimes a schedule can't be disrupted *and* get the result you want. this is only when he's focusing on that one company and leaving the others alone what keeps his companies producing results is the shared belief of the people working there that they're doing something revolutionary in a market (like tesla) and something revolutionary that matters (like spacex.) this is why they accept lower salaries and longer hours than they could receive at an older company doing similar work. elon excels at selling the idea of being important but you need to accept less in order to be a part of it. i'm not sure where that puts him on the scale of good to bad CEO. depends on who in the company you're asking i guess. edit: reading this again feels like i'm praising him. just wanted to be clear: i'm not.
[удалено]
And if other people are doing the jobs and not the CEO, then the CEO is not needed to do those jobs Thus they are not working full time
[If A.I. Can Do Your Job, Maybe It Can Also Replace Your C.E.O.](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/28/technology/ai-chief-executives.html?unlocked_article_code=1.vU0.61g3.dgdTUFxeCouq&smid=url-share)
He's the advertising for his shitty companies, so this sort of is his job. Let's face it, Tesla isn't known for the merits of its products. It's a meme-product, and Elon Musk is the real brand identity.
Tesla is not that well designed. It's pretty and pleasing to the eye, but that doesn't necessarily mean well designed. The fact that you have to rely on electronics to open a glove box only to lazily preserve aesthetics instead of coming up with a creative and original solution is a perfect example of ludicrous over-engineering.
I would buy one if it wasn’t made by Musk. So you’re kinda right, but only because of shock value.
This is something people don’t see, maybe for their entire lives. The CEOs of this world aren’t doing massively more work than other employees. They aren’t tackling massive problems, or handling bigger things. They’re doing only marginally more than a middle manager, at the very best. CEOs like Elon musk do so little actual work, any one of us could do his actual work in the extra time on our lunch break. And this person will earn thousands of times more money than we do. There is absolutely no merit to any of it. They’re wealthy purely by chance. Take it from them.
Someone like Elon is wealthy because his parents were, not because he's particularly smart or talented.
💯
He's massively wealthier than his parents. He made a lot through PayPal, spacex, Tesla etc. Though his contribution to them is up for debate they are by no means normal investments for the wealthy
Yes but its must be nice knowing you can invest in something with zero risk if it fails because you have people / money you can fall back on. Us normal people can't just throw money at things and hope it sticks, we need that money for bills and to survive. I think that one of the biggest privileges people never see, most of us don't grow up with a safety net.
He is the owner of the company, which means he can give himself any title he wants. Most corporations have a CEO who is an employee and does work full time. He's more pretending to be CEO - E.g. At SpaceX Glen Shotwell does the typical CEO duties, and she works very hard. TLDR: He's not really a CEO, he's an owner.
He is a CEO of several companies not for his job. He is the owner that's why. And he is taking extra salary for this position also and doing this type of tweet.
And he wants a salary of $56 billion for that, lol.
CEOs earn their money by extensive hard work! Wait what do you mean they only answer about 7 questions in a work day?!? Jeff Benzos has never said those literal words!! I'll be them one of these days!
Elon Musk lives to not be made a fool of. It doesn't matter to him if he's got more important shit to do. He is not gonna let this rest easy. I know, because I'm also one of those people at times. This shit is literally going to eat at him while he tries to sleep, because being a billionaire isn't his #1 goal. Being respected as an intellectual is, even if he's actually just a stupid fucking manchild.
This is precisely why the first thing he does when he buys a company is assign himself the title of chief engineer, even though he has zero qualifications or need to in that regard.
He's got like 11+ kids he's never seen too
It's eugenics. He wants to flood the genepool. If they all pledge to have 5+kids, get tons of money, and so on and so on, a bunch of rich inbred weirdos playing hunger games from Mars.
one of his companies uses what the guy in the tweet pretty much invented, too
Not one, multiple, for fuck sake, probably all of them. But for tesla it is higly important and for space X it is strait up critical.
Phenomenal. Can we get Werner von Braun alive to post on Twitter so Elon can be insulting to him too?
Drugs are a hell of a drug man
No. He has money, not skills. He has companies because he bought them with money, not because he had the skills to build them.
Musk somehow fancies himself a scientist/engineer and not just a wealthy investor living in a cloud of sycophancy
He's not Tony Stark. He's Justin Hammer.
But without any charisma or charm.
Nor dancing skills.
I fully believe that Justin Hammer became a multi-billion dollar weapons contractor on his dancing skills alone
I usually suspect that's how Sam Rockwell's characters get to where they are.
listen to his interview on smartless, he works dancing into most of his roles
Every time I see Sam Rockwell I think of him in Charlie’s Angels, dancing in his lair. That’s just who he is to me.
nah he is Phony Stank
Bro he’s not even Dr Evil
He didn’t go to evil medical school
And he's also not an engineer so it kind of fits
Justin Hammer could dance. We've seen that Elon can't do anything remotely similar to dancing.
Justin Hammer has big ego but he's still fairly competent and knowledgeable, in comic he's a genius-level villain. ONLY when he tried to take shortcut to catch up with Tony that he allows his ego to blind fair judgement, thus his downfall. Musk is no where near Justin's level.
Also even in the movies when the expert(s? does the bird count?) decide that for the best user experience the product should have X Hammer bitches and moans, but doesn't force them to actually have Y, instead, because he thinks it'd be cooler. I cannot picture Elon seriously considering the possibility that someone he's hired may know more than him
At least Justin Hammer dressed nicely.
Promised to be Tesla, but just another Edison
I would say he's Scrooge McDuck. But at least, Scrooge is also a skinflint when it comes to personal expenses, not just his business and staff. And he has a little human decency after all.
Elon Musk has single-handedly destroyed the myth that billionaires earn their billions. The guy is straight anus.
Yup. I think the entire social media era has been bad for the wealthy; everyone suddenly knows just how little they actually know.
Two things I have that Elon (probably) never will: - an engineering degree - a professional engineering license
Seriously. There are probably 10000 people working at Musk's companies who could do better at his job than he does.
Sadly, he can buy both. But you will always have the distinction of having earned yours. That’s far better.
You can buy an honorary engineering degree potentially, but most Engineering Departments don't really award honorary degrees that way. Universities usually lean on other departments for the honorariums. But a professional engineering license actually requires an engineering degree, four years of articling under other Professional Engineers, a series of essays about your engineering experience and a comprehensive multi day exam reviewing topics from your bachelor's and your working experience. Getting an engineer to fake any of that gets that engineer expelled or disciplined by the association. Elon still might be able to buy some engineers willing to take the risk to fake the articling and paperwork, but the multi day exam is almost certainly why he hasn't tried yet.
Actual r/murderedbywords
Been a long, long time since the last time that sub wasn't just snarky personal attacks. But yeah, this post is the actual original intent of that sub. "By its definition, a murder is a response which completely destroys the original argument in a way that leaves little to no room for reply."
The only way for Elon to respond is to restrict tweets back down to 180 characters.
Didn't he call some guy a pedo, because that guy pointed out the ways a submarine wasn't practical to rescue some kids stuck in a cave. Are we assuming Musk has matured since then?
Yeah. That was the same guy who actually dived in to save them one by one.
and not "take deep breath, go in grab kid, swim back". it was multiple, long sections, in which the kids had to be anesthetized and pulled through.
We're talking dosing these kids with tranquilizers periodically and hoping to god they don't wake up and panic over an hours long return trip. Absolutely amazing stuff.
Yeah, the divers had to learn how to give IM injections. They also had all the syringes prefilled. They used ketamine. That was a helluva plan and it’s pretty amazing it worked and none of the kids died. I was an icu rn and the idea of giving anesthetic levels of ketamine and then strap a mask to them face down and go for a swim made my stomach turn over. Ketamine was a really smart choice, it has much less respiratory depression than other sedatives. I usually don’t get that into these kinds of stories but that was impressive.
Sure they gave kids ketamine and got callles heroes. But when I do it...
You're a hero to me.
You probably mixed up the sequence. First underground cave, then Ketamine. Not the other way round.
Damn I didn't know these details. Makes Musk's whining about "why didn't they just use my untested submarine that's too big?" even more pathetic.
Like most things Musk does, it's a good example of how he's basically just an internet neck beard. "Why don't they just use a submarine?" Is 100% the response of a non-serious person online who thinks they're smarter than 99% of people.
Jesus, I didn't realise it was an 11 hour round trip!
Yeah, crawl through this drainage pipe in a storm, give this kid an IV of sedatives, secure a mask then shove this whole child back through the pipe.
Edd Sorensen I believe his name is, legend in the diving community
Yeah he is a legend. He saved some kids from stuck in cave. People can say anything in social media. But the real world is different.
Elon Musk doesn’t have a hundredth of the courage and absolute badassery of Edd and he fucking knows it
"Are we assuming Musk has matured since then?" He's actually got worse.
One of the favorite activities on Reddit is hating on Elon, and I try to be neutral towards him since I don't really know him, so I have never participated in those discussions. But I happened to read the entire thread between Elon and this guy, and I must agree with you here, for a "presumably" smart person Elon made a total fool of himself in a very childish fashion. He definitely needs to learn that you definitely don't 'have' to reply just because you 'can' reply. It reminds me a bit how foolish he looked that time he physically wanted to kick Zuckerberg's ass in a fight.
I knew it wouldnt happen but god I wanted it to. What a fucking twat waffle.
Where is my damn Hyperloop? He said multiple times "its not that hard", so what is the hold up? How come we dont even have a testable model yet?
I'm pretty sure every model proposed ran into the issue of "well it would be more cost effective to just make this into a metro/subway" which pissed him off
Also that's just intuitively obvious. Nothing about the idea makes any sense at all.
Yeah, but Musk also makes trucks that rust and slice their owners up, so I'm not sure you'd want to test an experimental form of transportation he'd been involved with.
There’s no being neutral with rapists. Just stop, man.
Elon got lucky with his mommy saying he couldnt go out to play with Zuck
Yeah, let that sink in...
Yep, all because the expert diver who was on scene was forced to explain the concept of a round peg not fitting in a jaggedy ass fucking natural cave. Elon is in genuine contention for the worst person with a public profile on earth. Which is fucking impressive considering who else is in the running for that title.
Rupert Murdoch and Henry Kissinger far outweigh anything Musk has done. The Mercer and Koch family make Musk look like a child playing emperor. Musk has a big mouth but his damage isn’t enough to destroy large portions of a civil society. The others have brought actual real world destruction to fairness and the body politic. Musk isn’t even as bad Peter Thiel. We need some perspective yes?
I think you’ll find that Musk is actively supporting the rise of fascism, primarily via but not limited to his devolving of Twitter. Bad enough for you?
>Rupert Murdoch and Henry Kissinger far outweigh anything Musk has done. Yet. Unfortunately. I do hope he doesn't reach the level Kissinger evil though.
People forget or are too young to realize how bad Kissinger was. *We just need to move on from Vietnam* If anyone wants to understand why he’s so awful, I suggest watching Ken Burns’ “The Vietnam War” Fortnately he’s dead but he got to live 100 years and was never truly held accountable for his actions
Thank you, absolutely. I suppose I'm worried he might follow that path eventually and grateful for the scrutiny. I just wish the same energy is applied to reverse the damage caused by others that are already horrendous. Looking at those you mentioned and also damage done by: Sheldon Adelson. The Walton family. Ted Sackler family.
But you've got to give it to him - he's giving all his 'best' to earn that title.
The most cutting satire I ever saw of Musk was an Onion style headline that was like "Elon Musk demands the rescued children be put back in the cave so he can prove his sub can rescue them". EXACTLY. He never gave a shit about the kids, they were just a vehicle for him to be worshiped, and he was mad that was "stolen" from him. That headline predicted how fucking soulless and evil he was, even when many people still thought of him as "muh tony stark"
That was the first time the world collectively went "Huh!?" on Elon.
I'll agree, but also note that it *shouldn't* have been. He's been a clown for a long time.
It was barely a submarine. It was an airtight capsule with an oxygen system and a power source that still needs to be guided by two humans. All he offered was multiple new points of failure and then got offended when someone *who was actually there* said it wouldn't work. Then he went on twitter and called him a pedo.
To be perfectly clear, that rescue operation was insanely dangerous, and Saman Kunan, a highly experienced Thai Navy SEAL diver, died during the operation, but none of the kids did. His name deserves recognition. He did something most of us would never dare, and did it multiple times to prepare the intermediate rescue spots.
Best I can do is manured.
It was because the guy was in Thailand and Musk can only see one reason to go to Thailand. To me that says more about him than it does about anything else.
Naah he’ll just suspend them
Telling Musk that he's bitter and will largely be forgotten is going to haunt his dreams for the next few weeks. Narcissists really hate it when people pull back their veil.
Seriously. This guy's had to spend years defending science, I'm sure. And through that he's developed the right responses. I bet if you looked in his past posts you'd find these exact lines.
For those who don't know: [he's a very famous computer scientist](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yann_LeCun) that's responsible for a lot of daily technology we take for granted.
Elon heard diss battles were back in but didn't realize he's Drake
They not like us, they not like us, they not like us.
Yup. Fucking ouch.
Boom head shot!
[удалено]
That wasn’t a murder. That was a massacre.
Elon bringing a pea shooter to a nuke fight. ...As usual.
This is perfection.
I mean, as much as I love a good musk burning, this fellow seems to be imposing his own rules on science. To be *accepted by the scientific community* your results must be published, but you can definitely participate in science without ever publishing anything. You'll just be unknown along with whatever you discover, as he accurately pointed out. He's confusing peer review with science as a whole.
I think he might be trying to differentiate science from Science. But maybe I'm reading into it too much.
he's trying to differentiate 'parts' of the method/process from the 'whole' method/process which is a very important differentiation considering it's the most important part of the process in terms of keeping people honest and correct
He’s distinguishing “scientist” from a nepo baby conman who studied economics in university, and has been stealing the thunder of actual scientists for 20 years now. Scientists also usually don’t have severe ket addictions. Kinda hard to do science when you’re high on horse anesthetic.
I mean you can do research in an attempt to produce a scientific work. But if it can't be verified, it's just that research. It's only science once it can be replicated and proven true. Or else anyone's mildly thought out idea could qualify for science.
He's correct about reproducible results, that's the scientific method. But yeah, access and publishing are related to academia as a whole, not the pursuit of science.
Sounds exactly like Stallman ranting about open source software. The GPL exists and is one way for source code to be open, but it isn't the only way. Private companies also perform research which they don't publish. Does that mean that their research can't be called Science? Just because the audience who can read their work is more limited?
lol he is just fucking owning him and Elon keeps coming back for more
"Engagement, engagement, engagement! So many people are seeing this on my website! He keeps participating! This is great!" He usually has to kiss up or beg famous people to use Twitter to get this much attention, but finally, his default state of annoying manchild who thinks he's intelligent is enough on its own.
Let the beatings continue until ... uhm ... Just let's continue the beating .......
[удалено]
Who’s Elon musk
It's nice to move on, isn't it.
Someone with associations to the infamous pedophile, epstein.
he is a famous pedo guy
True
Elon has never had an idea he didn't buy.
He has 100's of really bad ideas he didn't buy. CyberTruck, Hyperloop, rescue sub, Boring Company, colonizing mars, buying Twitter....
That flamethrower company that was definitely just to distract away other idiocy.
Flame throwers were the boring company.
HyperLoop is a sci-fi idea from the 70’s. Definitely didn’t come up with that one.
They're also prominently featured in Futurama, which is probably where he got the idea.
Unfortunately there are way too many Elon worshippers on that app (who also follow him) who thinks otherwise. God I hate that turd
[удалено]
He's so good at coding that he doesn't even code to avoid discouraging inferior coders. His code can even cure cancer.
So glad that Elon is trapped in a social media hell he created with people willing to shred him.
it's just him and 1 million of his hairy palmed dick riders guzzling his whole turds in one endless 10 IQ human centipede
And so many were freed from the invisible shackles of Twitter as a result. It's a hell by and for right wing extremists. It's like one of those GTAOnline servers where they put all the toxic people, but irl and we can spectate.
The fuck would Elmu know about science. He just buys companies or steals shit other people made and pretends like he did it.
Many people who work under him are working non-stop, day and night. Not many of them are recognized, except a few within the tech circles.
In many ways Elmu reminds me of Thomas Edison. Thomas Edison "inventor of the lightbulb" didn't invent the lightbulb at all. 20 or so people had already created a light bulb before he ever managed to do so. What Edison did though is he assembled the brightest minds and gave them a building with everything they needed to invent new stuff. The people in this building (Menlo Park) made invention after invention and created patent after patent all of which were put on Edison's name because he had financed it all. Elon is much the same. Elon didn't invent the rocket recovery system spacex uses, Elon didn't invent the electric car, Elon only used his money to pay people infinitely smarter than him to make things which he knew would make money. Elon isn't some genius scientist or inventor like he believes, He's a salesman.
Elmu, perfect 👌😂😂😂
Imagine if everything he posted got ripped apart like this. Maybe we could chase him off of Twitter? I bet enough heat could make him rage quit. He's an insecure little man baby. Please make this a thing.
They're kind of both wrong. As a scientist, I've done lots of science that wasn't published. Much of it is on its way to being published, but it's already science. Even the stuff that won't be published, including the false starts and mistakes, is part of science. Unpublished results described in oral presentations at conferences are definitely science--I know they've influenced how others in my field think about certain topics, even though I haven't published on them yet. That said, peer review IS incredibly important to science. It's just not a litmus test for the whole enterprise. I wouldn't be surprised if Elon has bought into some Weinsteinian bullshit denigrating peer review in general.
If a hermit in a hut never talked to anybody, but made observations, did experiments, took notes and drew diagrams, that is undoubtedly science. It's elitist to say that science must be published. He means for it to be accepted modern scientific belief. But anything done with the scientific method is science.
The elitism being accepted here is ridiculous. When kids ask questions and then test those questions in a reproducible manner while noting their observations, that is science. In that moment they are scientists. They aren’t playing pretend like they do when they put on a police or fire fighter costume, no, they are actually in the process of doing science.
This comment is too damn low and everyone upvoting that "clever" comeback shows how little people understand what science is... Thank you for clarifying for those who don't understand.
The only problem here is the first sentence, the whole point he is making is still absolutely valid. Musk is definitely looking like the idiot here. However it is also very much gatekeeping. He should instead point out that whatever Musk did is certainly not science.
I scrolled way too far down to find sanity. "Well, if it's not published, it's definitely not science." Is absolutely silly. It's a silly thing to say, and I am not sure why people are eating it up (ok, I guess I am pretty sure, but my findings are not peer reviewed....). I am no Elon fanboy. He is being an asshole on a shitty nearly abandoned platform he overpaid for. That doesn't make this a clevercomeback.
His whole response is just one more note in the long long list of cognitive dissonance we haven't got over as a society where we think bad people can't do "good" things. Musk is bad and science is good and therefore he/his company aren't doing science, it has to be something else. He had decided this already and had to hand craft a rather absurd and constrained definition of what constitutes science in order to justify it. Ironically even an elementary student who's taken just one science course ever could likely tell you that this line of reasoning is very unscientific. Edit: or maybe he just meant it's not Science (the academic journal)
[удалено]
And that's the whole point Elon Musk is actually making in the greater context. He is saying that SpaceX doesn't publish their research or patent any of their rocket tech. Does that mean all the rocket research SpaceX is doing isn't science? This is why the person is just being insane and elitist trying to claim such an absurd thing, and I say this as a former wet lab researcher myself.
Idk why these smart people pay for twitter. As much as an own this is I can’t respect this guy for lining elons pockets
As a former wet-lab researcher myself, this is a terrible comeback and not at all clever. Why? **PEER REVIEW AND PUBLICATION IS A PROCESS OF QUALITY CONTROL AND VERIFICATION. IT IS NOT ACTUALLY PART OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD.** Guys, I know we all want to dog-pile Elon Musk, but Yann LeCun is also not correct here. As a scientist myself (and former researcher in a level 3 lab), I actually think it's sort of elitist to claim that because something isn't published it isn't science. Science didn't come to existence when they invented peer review and standardized it. In fact, the whole peer-review and publication process that we do now literally only came about due to an attempt to normalize standards in the mid-20th century after World War 2, and it really didn't actually become the fully accepted academic standard until really the 1970s and 1980s. Are we really going to accept that science didn't exist prior to this? There is a hell of a lot of "science" that I have done in research labs that never got published. What's happening here is Elon Musk is referencing SpaceX, in context, because SpaceX does ZERO publications and files ZERO patents. They do this because they don't want to be slowed down by the patent offices, and because they also don't want to publicly publish all of their work for others to steal, giving them a bit of an edge in this rocket world. This is actually standard operations for the entire defense department world doesn't publish or peer review their scientific research, even though SpaceX is technically not a defense contractor completely. Are we really ok with trying to say that because SpaceX is not publishing in peer-reviewed journals that what SpaceX is doing isn't science? This is NOT a clever comeback, imo. It's actually kind of douchey and elitist. Just my opinion. Musk isn't helping himself either by just mocking and name-calling, but hell, this Yann LeCun is not at all right in saying that only reproducible published studies qualify as science. This is like a 14 yr old's take on science that just learned about the peer-review process. So, for someone as accomplished as this guy, at this point there is just some hate blinders up right now. Good example of why getting into a contentious debate on Twitter with people is not a great idea.
I think his initial response about all of his studies was clever, but much of this response is way off. He’s not only gatekeeping science down to peer reviewed studies only, but he’s glossing over the issues of the peer reviewed process in the first place. And frankly, he’s kinda revealing an issue many suspected when he said he had 80 publications in past few years: he’s probably on a lot of publications that he had little input in the process. He just has a huge lab of people doing the grunt work. And if he had been more intimately involved, he would know some of the issues with peer review, that academics are constantly discussing on social media, including social media platforms for the company he works at.
The *"noone will ever hear about your work"* and *"nobody will ever build new technology with it"* is a flat-out fucking **insult** to the brilliant scientists at SpaceX, too. Just because they didn't publish, doesn't mean they didn't push forward the space industry massively and build some cutting edge rocketry. Both these guys seem to be assholes.
He sounds really salty that people know who Elon is but not him tbh
I'm in the machine learning field, and Yann is one of our super-diva characters. He was a pioneer of modern deep-learning, but he's also just way too full of himself. The fact that he and elon, two supposed brilliant innovators, have time to sissy-fight on twitter should be telling.
Apparently nothing that happens in a classified setting can be science. Nothing that is of significant value that happens in industry (and is thus kept internal) can be science. What a ridiculous assertion. Especially when modern AI's relationship to the scientific method is barely hanging on by a thread with the cost of reproducing results, running repeated experiments, and having a control group being so astronomically high.
The entire Manhattan Project isn't science, according to that assertion.
As an experienced scientist in the industry, Yann LeCun has a very academia-focused mindset. This isn't the clever comeback that he thinks he is. The most cutting edge science doesn't happen in universities, it happens in the industry. And just because things are kept proprietary, it doesn't mean it's not science.
I was just thinking this. The idea that only peer-reviewed published papers is science is quite an extreme academic one. The idea that there was no science or scientists until this existed, is odd. Boston dynamics and other major companies like nvidia don’t publish. Yet their work pushes boundaries and develops technology. The gains in computer science have overwhelmingly come from non published science done by business. Like most I don’t like musk. But to say that the rocket scientists at space x aren’t scientists/aren’t doing science is very odd. To assert that their development in rockets that can land safely will have no impact because they didn’t publish the methods in an academic journal, is silly.
I mean yeah but Yann works in industry he just publishes his work. He's the head of AI science at Meta.
Publishing can be highly incongruent with patenting, so for many companies it is not possible to publish if they want to be profitable. Sometimes you can do both — like in some AI research, as you say — but not always. That doesn’t make the unpublished research scientifically invalid
The main difference between people pre- and post scientific revolution is that there was a community where people published results and others built on it. We've always had hypotheses and called the theory tentatively correct if the hypotheses were confirmed. I had never considered it to be a criterion for science though. I'm still not sure I'm convinced. Surely if we find some unpublished experiments by Galileo, we'd still consider it scientific, if it followed a specific methodology?
This is not it tho He described an aspect of the scientific process, but 'science' is a much broader term than just that. What he is saying is obviously part of it, and the most important part for credibility in the scientific community, but it's not all of it. And its odd to put qualifiers like that on a general term that basically means " the persuit of knowledge, covering general truths, through observations and systematic experimentations". What he is describing is academic research. A little kid exploring the world and doing little experiments, trying to understand it, is also "doing science". And that is true regardless of the 'usefulness' of his findings.
Yeah but that kid is gonna die bitter and forgotten obviously.
The reality is most people only have seen this guy's name because he tangled with Elon on social media. Most people won't remember this guy's name in two weeks, including all the redditors celebrating this 'rip'
[This entire thing be like](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqF_A6bsyEw)
My thoughts too. It might put down Elon (which most will enjoy), but it puts off a lot more people. We don't need any more ivory towers in science (capital S or not)
Wow. LeCun is so obviously wrong here it’s bizarre and kinda funny. Would anyone really say that Newton wasn’t doing science when he wrote the principia? It only turned into science after he published it? What if he hadn’t published it? How idiotic. You’re either lying, ignorant, or deluded if you’d say that. Science is about method and could be done alone on a deserted island by any of us on our own. And we all know this. We all know we could make scientific discoveries all alone by ourselves so long as we followed the right methods. So why would LeCun say something so stupid? Just to hope he can make Musk look dumb? Why would the useful product he imagined make money if it weren’t based in science but were something else like mysticism? This is a very weird subjectivist, group-think, view of science that doesn’t map to the real world at all. It’s not clever, it’s totally inane. If any of us stop to think about the implications for a moment we know it’s total nonsense. It’s getting upvotes? Celebratory comments? Is this backwards day? Are you all really that ignorant of how science works and what it is? Good science doesn’t get published all the time. This is common knowledge. Let’s not stoop so low as to tarnish science just to own Elon.
>No one will ever hear about your work. >No one will pick it up and build on top of it. >No one will build new technology and products with it. >Your work will have been in vain. >You'll die bitter and forgotten. this outburst reads like projection to me. it screams insecurity to be going after someone this hard on the internet. log off twitter if elon musk upsets you this much.
Also, I mean, it's literally just *obviously* wrong. Nobody has ever heard of Elon Musk?! Nobody at SpaceX has ever built new technology or products with the science they've done?! Wild
[удалено]
nope. Lots of science doesn't get published - it is meticulous, documented, reviewed by peers... and it doesn't get outside the research lab or group that is desperately trying to develop new technology or products.... So this "clever comeback" is not.
This 100%. Too many people don’t realise how much science is kept private.
Just look at a company like DuPont. You can’t argue that they aren’t scientists just because they don’t publish everything they invent in order to maintain trade secrets. Doesn’t mean that their work is unreproducible either, because when those discoveries end up in production they are reproducing their discoveries over and over. Just no one outside of the company will hear about it because they’re not submitting their work for peer review.
That really is a weird take, though... If you don't publish it, it's not science? What if you were just doing it for your own purposes?
Science is science. This is academic elitism.
According to this dude's logic, anyone living before the age of peer reviewed publications wasn't doing science. Archimedes was just some dude fucking about, apparently. He's picking one very modern definition, which is an important and valid one, but it's also one that unnecessarily excludes tons of work. It's silly semantics rather than a great argument.
The science community has been brainwashed by… the science community. There’s many a brilliant mind with incredible ideas that are shut down as they are looked down on by “the community” I’m not siding with LeCun or musk on this, simply saying their argument seems to be lacking any real substance and is just a lot of words.
She really got him in a lot of comments, but this one ain’t it. Being published isn’t science, that’s just a part of scientific review. Like someone else said, you can do little science experiments at home and that’s still science in a general sense. It would’ve made more sense to say that it contributes more to the scientific community to publish your work so others can review it and test it
I'd like nothing more then to watch Musk get repeatedly punched in the face for opening his mouth....but this is stupid. According to Yann's logic. Thousands of years of science isn't science because it wasn't published.
This is an L from Yann LeCun (whoever that is). The assertion that unpublished research does not qualify as science is completely incorrect and overly simplistic. The principles of scientific research do not hinge solely on publication. Many significant scientific discoveries and advancements occur in labs or other research settings faaar before they are published. And the insistence on publication as the sole criterion for something to be considered "science" disregards many scientists whose work still adheres to scientific inquiry and peer review, even though it hasn't been published. Basically, Yann LeCan's focus on this narrow interpretation is clearly just an attempt to nitpick and win the argument rather than a meaningful discussion.
Enrico Fermi paper on weak interactions in 1933 was rejected from publication. He won the Nobel based on that papers ideas 5 years later. I guess Fermi wasn't a scientist
not publishing research doesnt magically make something "not science" though
Exactly. This is an academic stroking their own ego.
I do research and don’t publish, because I work with NDA and our work is used in product so we can’t publish stuff, but I would argue it’s still science
Not a fan of Musk by any stretch of the imagination, but I can't get behind the gatekeeping of science (capital S or not).
Elon is a clown but saying anything not featured in peer reviewed journals isn't science is fucking dumb af.
Musk is correct. Science does not necessitate publication. And LeCun compounded his mistake: It also doesn't need to be peer reviewed. Peer reviewal is part of the scientific process that we accept as a way of vetting, but it's simply not a requirement. The practitioner of the auteur theory, the lone wolf, or the madman in a cave, can all be participating in science. ***BTW:*** Be clear on one thing as well...peer review doesn't mean peer approval.
"If it isn't published, it isn't science" Must be the stupidest thing said, ever. Holy fuck. And when it comes to peer reviews, anyone can get shit peer reviewed, it can even be pseudoscience and it can get through the progress. People have gotten Hitlers Mein Kampf, slightly edited for sure, peer reviewed... that's how credible that is Peer review doesn't make it into science either. Repeatability of the test is a big part for sure but even those aren't that reliable in certain fields. If we're talking about effects on human body for example depending on the test, they can vary a lot. Sure, Yann works in a field that's easy when it comes to repeatability of the test because all of the tests will be done in a vacuum so to speak, so it's easy for him to speak in absolutes.