Musk has earned the vitriol, largely due to his political stunts. When the world's richest person starts dumping his money into elections and interfering in politics across the globe, why are we surprised people are angry and critical? When he takes a golden chainsaw to USAID, how many preventable deaths are directly attributable to these changes? How is it fair that an unelected, private citizen can contribute so much money to one person's political campaign, and then receive carte blanche to change our public services as a reward? How is it that this same person can unilaterally change how our military assets are used by an ally?

Something is deeply wrong with this. This is the heart of people's anger.

The 'CEO Said a Thing' in journalism is pervasive and detrimental when the critical analysis is missing (most cases). This part of the article is very on point, as is the basic analysis of the de jour technical stunt. That being said, I agree with you that this author puts too much click bait and feeding the fans language into this, doing a disservice to their own reputation (imo).

These are just a few of the reasons "oligarchy" is a word seeing increased usage. The politicians, the wealthy, the credentialed elite, the media - by and large are complicit.

Many of us here, myself included - the technocratic elite - are central and complicit in the world we built and pushed. We too have earned the peoples' ire, something I think we should reflect on and course correct. What do we actually want to bring to the world with our skills? What are we going to build and push in the age of Ai?