There is clear evidence Musk's original goal with SpaceX was just to encourage more investment into NASA. Remember it was started before Tesla existed and before Musk was a billionaire.
Doge.gov already has the most transparent listing of everything they are cutting. This other website that starts out its header with "Tracking The Damage" is clearly a biased attempt by democrats to discredit a program that was started by republicans. It's actually kind of sad people don't realize that the two-party system involves tribalism where no matter how good something is, the other side will call it bad if it wasn't their idea.
I haven’t looked at it in almost a year, but was that the site that was full of basic errors and misleading info that was clearly designed to expose “waste, fraud, and abuse” that actually wasn’t any of those things? Yeah, I don’t know why we wouldn’t trust them…
Most things are clearly linked to the contracts themselves with descriptions. Waste is a broad term and things like DEI or many more definitely fall into that category. Imagine spending billions of dollars on your HR department for the specific purposes of DEI without any tangible return on the investment. Its definitely wasteful and at most corruption. Discretionary funds for things like 'payroll' were being used to fund a very specific political ideology that aligned with one political party and congress did not authorize the use in that manner, which is why they were able to cut it so easily.
The article refers to the DOGE employees as "bros" and "chucklefucks" throughout and says things like "as far as i can tell" when describing their history. This is clearly biased and not a real article - more like a forum post from a 4channer.
It's probably just sourcing data from doge.gov which already lists every single thing doge is cutting. This "tracking" website is just a way to add a democrat slant toa republican led project. This version literally starts with "tracking the damage" as their sub-header slogan.
Far from it. There has already been ample reporting on how inflated and distorted DOGE's savings are (for instance, they made rudimentary errors in understanding how blanket purchase agreements work and also counted the whole amounts of contracts as savings when they canceled ones that were already mostly disbursed). You can probably search for coverage by ProPublica or David Farenthold if you want to see what I mean, but I would guess you don't want to.
Instead, I have been focusing my efforts on tracking DOGE's staffing in agencies and their activities and system access there. DOGE has not been transparent at all. Rather, they have abused the Vacancies Act and government detailing to hide their activities and skirt many of the laws around government ethics, privacy and data security in the process. And they have been doing a lot of damage in the process, claiming to be doing "IT Modernization" but doing many things outside of the scope of the Executive Order that established them and also the separation of powers that gives Congress the power over appropriations.
>okay? Why are you browsing my comment history lol
Why not? That's kind of the whole point of having accounts here on HN. To create an environment where folks can discuss stuff in good faith. Posting history is public because the posts were public in the first place and they represent who you are (or present yourself to be) on the site.
It allows each of us to be authentically 'us'. Do you not stand by the things you've posted in the past four plus years?
If you do, why do you care if people are looking at your posting history?
If you don't stand by what you've written here in the past, you're likely not posting in good faith.
Either way, why are you concerned about folks looking at the stuff you've publicly posted in the past?
Do i seem concerned? You are the one whose only reply to my post was to my history rather than addressing the topic. I stand by all of those things, its just odd that you would be so concerned with that.
Doge did far more than cutting salaries, the salary cutting was almost entirely voluntary and actually a tiny fraction of what they were cutting. Mostly it actually is third party contracts being cut. You can see all the contracts being cut here: https://doge.gov/
Please don’t cite doge itself as if it’s a reliable source.
Citing doge as a source shows that your viewpoint is built on provenly bad info.
And Frankly it’s insulting to HN readers that it’s being cited given how well published it was that their estimates were grossly inflated, unreliable, and kept trying to claim credit for cutting things that were already ended.
Doge has not been proven unreliable anywhere I've seen, if you have data to show that please provide it. I have seen the kind of anti-doge news articles you are referring to but if you viewed the authors of those articles it was always folks who post entirely anti-elon or anti-republican articles like they are an attack ad placed by the democrat party and were debunked quickly.
Okay… well it was extensively reported like everywhere so I don’t know what you’ve been doing but it’s sure not reading the NYT, NPR, CBS or the similar.
Okay so you somehow haven’t seen any of the many many accounts of doge being extremely unreliable but today you’ve seen people tell you they are unreliable.
After hearing that, to you, surprising new info did you consider googling it or cross check it in anyway before replying?
have you so much as tried googling “are doge estimates reliable?” After hearing other people call them into question?
Anyway here’s the AI google summary for you to get you started:
Based on analyses of the "wall of receipts" posted by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in early 2025, their savings estimates are not considered reliable by budget experts, government contractors, and media outlets. Investigations have revealed that the claimed savings are heavily overstated, often misleading, and sometimes factually incorrect.
DOGE already address all of those political hit piece articles. The claims made in them were spurious such as that they could not use the full amount of the contract. DOGE addressed this criticism by saying over 99% of contracts end up fulfilling their full amount. I'd be wary of what you read in the news especially when it relates to politics. Those news sites even thought Elon Musk was saluting a long dead genocidal maniac when he waved to the crowd - but specifically only Elon Musk and not any other person who made similar waves - why would that be?
Tesla is a meme stock and will one day explode like a game of hot potato.
Going online and defending every poor decision musk makes won’t change the reality that these days musk is a drugged out buffoon with a penchant for white nationalism who pays people to cheat at videos games for him.
His main selling point these days is how He has a loyal core group of cheerleaders that sticks with him no matter what. It’s prolonging the inevitable.
The Germans tabloids hate him because he was destroying the German auto industry with better vehicles and isn't supporting their liberal party. Musk has never done anything racist ever.
You’re right! Elon musks is gods gift to man, an infallible modern day Einstein who’s absolutely not racist or off the deep end.
How did I not realize the thousands of reports suggesting otherwise were actually all examples of nefarious propaganda by the consortium or haters. How unjust! We must reject anything that paints the angel in bad light!
Google has been working on these exact same type of models far longer than all of the new entrants but was unable to make them good enough or useful enough. Money spent does not equate to value created or we would have one big company that runs everything.
Elon is moderate at best. If a democrat supported cutting the budget, having an actual border to the country, and keeping men out of women's bathrooms you'd get Elon.
Check out his X feed. He regularly posts unhinged things about white culture, western values, etc that are supremacist and often, lifted from other supremacists. In the last year he became far more radicalized towards the far right. If it was just the things you said I might agree.
Banks released pricing to sell their debt. When the debt gets to valued near market value, it means it is essentially guaranteed to get paid back. The company was making much less money but was more profitable, see the other posters comment on EBITDA.
The same services as Falcon 9 are 20x the cost and launch 1/20th as much as well. That's like producing hand made good in America versus via a manufacturing line in China.
Those figures are not accurate. Other launch vehicles are currently 2-4x the cost (with comparable pricing coming online ex New Glenn), and SpaceX accounts for half of launch volume, not 20x other services. Reduce your claims by a factor of ten.
Some claim launch costs are only at 2-4x the cost but they only have a few launches or are small rockets. On a per/kg basis at best the closest competitor in the US is ULA which claims about 3x the cost but only had 1 single launch in 2025, total payload launched was about 1/50th of Spacex's total payload launched. New Glenn has had zero commercial launches. SpaceX launched 5x the mass to orbit of all other US companies -combined-, easily 20x the cadence of any other company.
This is a classic case of listing all the problems but none of the benefits. If you had horses and someone told you they had a Tesla, you'd be complaining that a Tesla requires you to dig minerals where a horse can just be born!
