Two Odes to Elon Musk’s Genius Need a Grain of Salt

This week saw the release of another ode to the genius of Elon Musk, gushingly accepting his pronouncements at face value. Also, Walter Isaacson published a book about him.

Isaacson’s 600-odd page Elon Musk, which debuted Tuesday, was beaten to the punch by Adam Jonas, a sell-side analyst at Morgan Stanley. He released a 60-odd page report the previous day boosting his target price for Tesla Inc., Musk’s electric vehicle manufacturer, on the thesis that Tesla is actually an artificial intelligence powerhouse in the making.

As Isaacson’s book chronicles, Dojo, the name for Tesla’s supercomputer moonshot, springs from Musk’s long-running fascination with, and unease about, artificial intelligence. Musk’s early backing of OpenAI, which eventually created the ChatGPT chatbot, evolved into a range of AI-related bets. In Tesla’s case, that is focused on Musk’s long-promised goal of creating intelligent vehicles offering fully autonomous rides that are safer than regular driving by meat with eyes. Dojo’s next-generation custom chips are intended to be the brains of Tesla’s self-driving vehicles and, by Jonas’ reckoning, will perform better at that than the chips on offer from AI hardware darling, Nvidia Corp. On the back of this, Jonas raised his target valuation by almost $480 billion. The same day, Tesla’s market cap jumped by $79 billion, an amount bigger than the individual market caps of roughly 80% of the S&P 500’s members.

One could say, I suppose, that the ever-rational market is ascribing an implied one-sixth probability to the Dojo thesis, but that would perhaps be overthinking things.

While Isaacson’s book and the “Enter the Dojo” report spring from very different places, both fit a long-running theme around Musk and Tesla: Extraordinary benefit of the doubt.

Isaacson’s take on some of the more out-there and dubious bits of Tesla’s history goes remarkably easy on his subject. For example, with regards to the “funding secured” fiasco in 2018 when Musk tweeted that he had a deal to take Tesla private in the bag, the book shows how, in fact, nothing about the deal had been secured in the way most humans would take that word to mean. Yet the brief section ends with a quote from Musk’s own lawyer saying “Elon Musk is just an impulsive kid with a terrible Twitter habit;” a sentiment Isaacson then endorses, rather eliding the complications arising when the impulsive kid happens to run a big public company. The weird episode just prior to the book’s launch whereby Isaacson undercut his own reporting, at Musk’s bidding, to change the story about Musk’s role in an abortive Ukrainian attack on Russian warships adds to the sense of hagiography (or, worse, inaccuracy).