Summary of Musk's story

 Good summary.

https://x.com/BaptisteVicini/status/1862186280270139547

114 views

Baptiste

@BaptisteVicini

22h • 14 tweets • 4 min read •  Read on X

 Scrolly

After losing his $180 Million PayPal fortune...

Elon was 3 weeks from bankruptcy.

Tesla was losing $10 Million/month. Everyone thought he was finished.

Then, he bet his last $6 Million on his cousin's dying startup.

Here's how a family meeting saved him: 🧵

2008: Everything was falling apart.

SpaceX couldn't get a rocket to orbit.
Three failed launches had drained millions.

Tesla was bleeding $10M every month trying to deliver the Roadster.

And Elon? He was living off personal loans just to pay rent... 

The PayPal fortune was gone.

From $180M to nearly zero in just a few years.

Most billionaires would've cut their losses. Declared bankruptcy. Started over.

But Elon was about to make a decision that seemed completely insane:

With just weeks of cash left...

He called a family meeting.

What happened next would either destroy his last chance at survival...

Or change the future of energy forever.

His cousins Lyndon and Peter had a radical idea:

Make solar power accessible to everyone, not just the wealthy.

When they started in 2006, this seemed impossible. Solar panels cost a fortune. Oil was king.

But they had cracked a revolutionary model: 

Instead of selling expensive panels, they'd lease them to homeowners.

No massive upfront costs. No maintenance nightmares.

Just clean energy at prices anyone could afford.

The catch? They needed $6M to launch... 

Elon had a choice:

Save his last millions for Tesla and SpaceX...

Or bet everything on a third company in an industry investors called "dead on arrival."

He wrote the check. And became chairman. 

By 2012, that "doomed" bet became SolarCity – America's largest solar provider.

They went public at $1.6 Billion

The same company investors mocked was now powering more homes than any competitor in the country.

2016: The master plan revealed itself.

Tesla acquired SolarCity for $2.6 Billion.

Critics screamed "bailout!" Shareholders sued.

But they missed what Elon saw in that family meeting years ago:

He wasn't just saving a solar company... 

He was building the world's first complete sustainable energy ecosystem:

• Cars powered by electricity
• Homes powered by sun
• Batteries storing clean energy

All working as one. 

The courts eventually cleared him.

That desperate family meeting didn't just save his fortune.

It laid the foundation for a world beyond fossil fuels. 

Today, that "crazy" solar bet is powering millions of homes.

What started as a last-ditch family meeting became an energy revolution.

The future belongs to those bold enough to bet everything on it.

Even when they're weeks away from losing it all... 

Want more on becoming the future of tech?

• Join our 300K+ community
• Follow @BaptisteVicini for more on APIs, tech, and the future of AI.
• Repost for your network if you found it helpful! ♻️

The future is connected.

Become part of it...

Apidays NewsletterTurn data collection into an experience with Typeform. Create beautiful online forms, surveys, quizzes, and so much more. Try it for FREE.https://apidays.typeform.com/to/i1MPEW

I am Baptiste Parravicini:

• Tech entrepreneur & API visionary
• Co-founder of apidays, world's leading API conference
• Passionate about AI integration & tech for the greater good

Follow for insights on how APIs are connecting our future

Repost for your network 🔄:

Unroll available on Thread Reader

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Marc Andreessen on political reality

Ultimately, this post on X is an ad, but it's a good summary anyway.

https://x.com/hosun_chung/status/1862211468588110220

884 views

Hosun

@hosun_chung

20h • 16 tweets • 6 min read •  Read on X

 Scrolly

Marc Andreessen just shocked the world on JRE.

He revealed the government is:

• Kicking people off banking networks
• Using NGOs to do their dirty work
• Secretly trying to control AI

I took a day to digest it all...

And these are the 11 things I can't stop thinking about:

1. The AI Takeover Plan

The Biden administration has been secretly meeting with AI companies.

Their message was chilling:

"Don't even bother starting AI companies. There will only be 2-3 approved companies, and we'll control them completely."

This isn't speculation. These were actual closed-door conversations.

2. The Control Mechanism

They're using something called "regulatory capture."

The government blesses 2-3 large companies with a monopoly. In exchange, these companies do whatever the government wants.

It's how they controlled social media. Now they want to do it with AI.

But it gets darker:

3. The Real Threat

AI won't just control what you see online.

It will be the control layer for EVERYTHING:

• Who gets loans
• What your kids learn in school
• If your front door opens
• What you're allowed to buy

Imagine China's social credit system, but 100x more sophisticated.

4. The Banking Weapon

The government has been secretly debanking people for having the wrong politics.

An employee at Andreessen's firm got kicked out of their bank just for having "crypto" in their job title.

No warning. No appeal process. Just frozen out of the financial system.

5. The Secret Classification

There's a government category called "politically exposed persons" (PEPs).

If you're labeled a PEP, banks are REQUIRED to kick you out.

Not a single person on the left has been debanked. Only those with the "wrong" views.

The pattern is clear: 

6. No Due Process

There's no court. No appeal. No written rules.

Your life can be destroyed with a phone call from a bureaucrat to a bank CEO.

And it's already happened to hundreds of people.

But here's where it gets truly Orwellian: 

7. The NGO Loophole

The government doesn't do this directly.

They fund "non-governmental organizations" (NGOs) to do their dirty work.

Why? Because the First Amendment prevents the government from censoring directly.

These are their attack dogs: 

8. The Pressure Campaign

These NGOs then pressure companies to:

• Censor speech
• Close bank accounts
• Deny services

All while maintaining "plausible deniability" for the government.

It's like hiring a hitman - technically your hands are clean. 

9. The Social Credit Future

The endgame?

A social credit system where your ability to participate in society depends on your political compliance.

But unlike China's system, which is obvious, this one is hidden behind layers of private companies and NGOs. 

10. The Critical Moment

Marc believes we're at a crossroads:

If Trump wins, there's a chance to dismantle this system.

If not, we're looking at a future where every aspect of life is controlled by AI systems programmed with government-approved ideology. 

There's a powerful weapon against centralized control:

The ability to speak truth directly to millions.

The government can control a few big tech companies.

But they can't control millions of individual voices, each with their own direct audience and influence... 

This is why personal brands are becoming the most powerful force for maintaining freedom.

When enough people build direct audiences, control becomes impossible.

This is why they fear creators and personal brands so much — and why JRE played such a big part in the election: 

The antidote to centralized power isn't just technology.

It's individuals building trust at scale.

When you have a strong personal brand, your truth can't be silenced.

Your message can't be controlled.

Andreessen opened our eyes. You could too: 

Founders: We’ll build your personal/company brand on 𝕏 (and beyond) without you lifting a finger.

To date, we've already helped 60+ founders get 2+ Billion combined views.

Interested in how we can do this for you? Book your free discovery call here:

Book Your Free Thoughtleadr Strategy CallOur premium media agency is designed to build personal and company brands on 𝕏 (and beyond).http://form.typeform.com/to/JWuXNkxQ?utm_source=xposth

Thanks for reading! A bit about me:

In 2023, I was a banker in London when I found the opportunity of the decade: Personal Branding.

So, I dropped everything to build @ThoughtleadrX — a premium media agency designed to build personal and company brands.

Follow me for more content like this!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Democrat post-mortem

 

https://x.com/caesar_pounce/status/1862233194143023591

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1862233194143023591.html

160 views

Caesar

@caesar_pounce

19h • 26 tweets • 7 min read •  Read on X

I listened to this so you don't have to. Long form interview with the heads of the Kamala campaign.

Actually you should also go listen to it if you're interested in where the Dem's heads are at right now after 2024. I'll post some of my takeaways below.

1. The campaign was perfect.

It's a low key interview but there's an air of defensiveness and avoiding criticism. Overall it's very illuminative but the short end of it is these people told their story and they're sticking to it.

They do not point to anything in particular they could've done to change the outcome. It was just a jump ball and that's that. 

2. Kamala was the perfect candidate in every way. They are pretty clear about this. She receives no criticism from them that I noticed.

This is more surprising than the first point. It's manifestly untrue to everyone. She could be their scapegoat and would deserve it.

The way I read it is she is not going to be totally rejected by the party. Remember when Obama felt like he had to endorse her because the Clintons did? I see the same energy. Everyone's thinking it but no one wants to be the one to say it. 

3. Did you know it was a short campaign?

They keep saying they are not making excuses but they are. Some of them are pretty valid. But "we weren't given time" is also used as a catch-all. They don't say it but ultimately this shifts the blame to Biden. 

4. It's also Trump's fault, obviously.

One thing they get really defensive about is going negative on Trump. The criticism against them is that people already knew Trump and they should've put their focus on giving a positive presentation of Harris instead.

They vehemently argue against this. They maintain (hilariously) that they just didn't say "convicted felon" enough times to enough people. 

5. They keep saying they aren't blaming the media but they are. There's anger there. Above all that the media kept going on about how Harris wouldn't give interviews.

This was totally unfair you see because it was a double standard. Why didn't CNN say anything bad about Trump?? 

6. Men are still to blame, folks. They are supposed to be more political and like Democrats more but they keep failing at it!

Trump had some mysterious way of connecting with them, esp the low propensities. Total mystery why men won't do as they're told. 

7. Kamala DID go on all the podcasts actually. She would go anywhere anytime. All the ones she didn't go on were just due to scheduling conflicts (you know it was a short campaign).

She was totally stoked to go on Rogan. Kamala is fearless and confident in any space!!

But also the podcasts were inconsequential. Going on Rogan et al would not have made any difference in the race.

Podcasts didn't play any role in how Trump was secretly able to target men. Those men have to be reached by Democrats but it's not possible. They must just love Trump because they stink. 

8. The efficacy and credibility of the "Trump is a criminal and insurrectionist and fascist" narrative is totally unquestioned. It is bulletproof. There is no way it will not convince you to vote against Trump if you're not already being mind controlled by him.

It's not a perspective, it's scientific facts. It's not that disagreement is wrong. There is no disagreement. There are normal people that obey Democrats and then some people that like voting for criminal insurrectionist hitlers. 

(The question I would pose to them would be: were there any voters who were well informed about the criminal convictions and J6 and the ~former Trump officials~ and all the other stuff you think is pertinent, who were not in a Trump personality cult, but who voted for him anyway, considering the charges and allegations against him false? Astonishingly I think they would say no.) 

9. There is a desperation for the Republican breakaway vote. They consider these voters to have been absolutely key to all of their recent election victories. That's why they maintain campaigning with Liz Cheney and that whole crew to have been exactly the right move.

But they don't see the far left as expendable either. Their position is that the party must and can satisfy both. They noted there are Senate seats coming up in 2026 that absolutely hinge on the Republican breakaway caucus. 

From the Republican perspective, this makes the actions of the NeverTrumpers even more egregious than I have held them. I'm starting to think this is the correct take.

I have some hope that this contingent will weaken as the power of the lib media is breaking. In my view this is a cohort made up of people that are informed primarily and equally by both CNN and NRO.

It is a luxury position, held mostly by people that are comfortable enough that they think they do not have skin in the game. The good news is the price of eggs does effect them, the bad news is they easily forget that fact. 

10. Trump's advantages are all unique to him.

This is repeated often, and the effect is "don't worry, no other Republican will ever be about to do this to us again."

It's hard to know that particularly they are referring to, though. It sounds like "no other Republican would be able to be convicted of crimes during the campaign and it not hurt them politically."

That's true enough, but that fact would only be good for them if they plan on lawfare against all opposing candidates generally going forward. Maybe they are just giving with game away. If they wanted to pretend that the lawfare is legitimate, they would admit that Trump's unique strengths (being convicted of crimes not harming him politically) are paired with his unique weaknesses (being convicted of crimes).

I guess the implication could be that all Republicans are actually criminals and they just need to find the crimes. Aight.

A more compelling case would be that what if unique to Trump is that he is especially likable, authentic, celebrated, and trusted. But they can't say things like that. 

11. If they had had more time (remember that the campaign was short!!) the Puerto Rican vote following Garbagegate would have won the day for the Democratics. They just didn't have enough time to spread the news in the community that the joke had been made and that it needed to mobilize. 

12. Dems have always owned kitchen table issues. Kamala was so perfect at speaking to them. Dems in general should make a return to talking about kitchen table issues, following Kamala's leadership in this space. 

13. Climate change didn't come up. Abortion barely came up. 

14. The trans ad seemed effective but actually it didn't change anyone's vote.

The Harris campaign was right not to respond to it, cuz that would've distracted from central issues.

The ad was dishonest of course, which is why it's so frustrating that the center of it was a clip of Kamala Harris clearly stating her position about taxpayer funded sex changes. Classic dirty trick by the seizers and pouncers.

The ad was also of racist intent, because it was blasted primarily in urban markets, clearly to target black men (aka the white men of the BIPOCverse).

It didn't move the needle with black man, it just made it impossible for the Dems to move the needle to the correct place for black men, which is totally different (???).

And really that ad was an economic message rather than a cultural one. 

15. Later in the interview there is some divergence in perspective which was the most interesting part.

One perspective was that Trump leaned into machismo by going to UFC and in to podcasts and stuff, and that was his appeal to men.

But Dems should not take from that that they need to do the same thing. (Why that would be something to avoid is not clarified). Rather, the men who are attracted by that kind of thing will be attracted also by kitchen table issues like prices. Fortunately Dems will now be going back to their dominance of kitchen table issues, so this shouldn't be a problem. 

(That from Steph Cutter and Jen OMalley) 

16. The opposing view came from Quentin Fulks. His contributions to the interview were by far the most interesting. The next couple will be from him. 

17. Men don't like men that apologize. Trump doesn't apologize. Democrats are constantly apologizing. There is a culture in the Dem party of scoring political points off other Democrats by demanding they make an apology, or bow to a shibboleth. The purity tests are ways from individual Dems to boost themselves in the party.

(This is obviously all true) 

18. The Republicans in 2024 were strong online. Their stuff reverberated throughout X, Tiktok, YouTube. He called it an "echo chamber", but what he's describing is not an echo chamber. It's just success online. 

19. "We're losing the culture war."

(Said first by the interview Dan Pfieffer then repeated by Fulks).

While the Dems stuck to legacy media and talking points, Trump was popping off on X, on podcasts, at UFC, roping in actual cultural figures.

The arsenal of legacy corporate celebrities that supported the Dems were useless. The legacy corporate media was useless. 

20. That paired with a perspective, though, that the Republicans are lock-step.

It blew my mind but, these people really see our side the same way we see their side. They see Republicans as totally unified, homogenous, always on message, trapped in an echo chamber, always propped up by the liberal legacy media, and Republican voters as totally reliable to turn out unquestioningly. 

21. My big takeaway question:

Will the progressives allow a long term pivot toward the center? The marquis issues of the Dem party for decades have been climate, abortion, LGBTQAAIP+2, and victim politics (racism, sexism).

What is going to happen to those? In one sense they have been screwed by 2024 because they were all pushed out of the spotlight (except, arguably, abortion). On the other hand, the movement to push them out of the spotlight lost the election. Which way will the Dem party go?

Who is to blame, Kamala 2024 or Kamala 2019? 

All of the other points touched on are under the umbrella of that question.

Fulk's insights are alarming. If the Dem party as a whole is able to recognize that it is losing the culture war, they have a shot of getting back in the fight by pivoting. But can you imagine? "Let's cancel the pride events." "A little climate change is ok." "Maybe not DEI."

Moreover--can you imagine their base letting Dem leadership doing it? This train has momentum. The interparty cannibalization culture they have created for themselves is a death spiral, forcing them to get more and more radical and farther and farther away from men and from kitchen table issues. 

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh