The Musk Myth Through the Eyes of a Long-Term User

Elon Musk is, without a doubt, a formidable figure of our time.

SpaceX, Tesla, Starlink—he has certainly accomplished many things that others haven’t. His business acumen, engineering prowess, and ability to execute on a wild idea are all worthy of admiration.

But I’ve always felt that:

Acknowledging someone’s brilliance and believing that everything they say and do is the best in the world are two different things.

Especially with Musk.

One of his most potent skills is communication.

He is a master storyteller, exceptionally skilled at packaging a technology into a world-changing concept.

Over time, this has created a fascinating phenomenon:

Many people who have never actually used a Tesla, FSD, or Starlink are already staunch believers—that Tesla’s autonomous driving is number one, that Starlink will upend traditional communications, and that whatever Musk does is a generation ahead of everyone else.

But if you strip away the halo and look only at the products and the facts, many of these things aren’t quite true.

1. I Drove a Tesla for Years; Its Pros and Cons are Very Obvious

I used to be a Tesla owner in China and drove one for several years.

So my assessment of Tesla is actually quite simple:

It’s a high-value electric car, but by no means a great car in every respect.

Its biggest advantages, in my opinion, are its relatively low price, good performance, solid safety, and high degree of technological integration.

Where Tesla truly excels is in bringing down the cost of electric cars through mass production, supply chain integration, and manufacturing innovation.

I acknowledge all of that.

But its shortcomings are also very apparent.

The suspension is stiff, the shock absorption is poor, and the sound insulation is lacking.

This is my clear conclusion after driving it for several years.

On slightly rough roads, the bumps are transmitted directly into the cabin. At high speeds, tire noise, road noise, and wind noise are also quite noticeable.

So, I believe Tesla’s real advantage is:

Value for money.

You get a decent-performing, safe, and software-savvy electric car for a relatively reasonable price.

That’s where its true competitiveness lies.

As for comfort, sound insulation, and chassis—personally, I don’t think they live up to the online hype.

2. One of Tesla’s Greatest Successes is Making People Believe Its Autonomous Driving is “World’s Best”

Autonomous driving is perhaps the most classic example concerning Tesla.

Just ask any ordinary person:

Who has the best autonomous driving in the world right now?

Many people’s first reaction is:

Tesla.

But if you actually look at the technical definitions, you’ll find it’s not that simple.

The name of the FSD system Tesla currently offers to consumers already makes it clear:

Full Self-Driving (Supervised).

That is, “fully autonomous driving that requires supervision.”

According to the SAE classification, it is still Level 2.

The driver must continuously monitor the road and be prepared to take over at any time. The driving responsibility still lies with the human.

Even Tesla’s own official materials now explicitly define FSD (Supervised) as Level 2.

What’s interesting is:

Why has a Level 2 system that explicitly requires full driver supervision become perceived by many ordinary people as “the world’s most advanced driverless technology”?

That is the power of marketing.

3. Real Robotaxis? Waymo Has Been Operating Them for a While

If we’re talking about genuine robotaxis that don’t require a driver ready to take the wheel, they’ve been around in the United States for some time.

The most prominent example is Waymo.

Waymo already offers a fully driverless Robotaxi service in several US cities.

When passengers get in, there is no driver up front.

The car completes the entire driving task on its own.

By 2026, Waymo has accumulated over 200 million miles of fully autonomous driving and is continuing to expand to more US cities.

This is a completely different concept from a consumer buying a Tesla, enabling FSD, and then remaining responsible for supervising the vehicle.

So, when people talk about Robotaxis now as if it’s a new invention by Musk, I think that’s unnecessary.

Of course, Tesla can do it.

And it’s entirely possible they will do it very well in the future.

But we should at least acknowledge:

Tesla was not the first to create a true robotaxi, and others have been in commercial operation for many years.

4. China’s Apollo Go Has Also Come a Long Way

And it’s not just the United States.

China also has very mature Robotaxi projects.

The most typical is Baidu’s Apollo Go (萝卜快跑).

It follows the L4 autonomous driving Robotaxi route.

As of 2026, Apollo Go has launched operations in multiple cities in China and abroad.

Data released by Baidu shows that by the second quarter of 2026, its global operations covered 28 cities, with a cumulative autonomous driving mileage of over 350 million kilometers, of which over 240 million kilometers were fully driverless.

In the cities where it operates in mainland China, Apollo Go has achieved fully driverless operations.

In other words:

True robotaxis without a safety driver are no longer a PowerPoint presentation or a concept in China; they are already operating at a very large scale.

So, when discussing “driverless technology,” we can’t just focus on Musk and Tesla.

Waymo is doing it.

Baidu’s Apollo Go is also doing it.

And in many cases, they have been in commercial operation for years.

5. One of Musk’s True Strengths is Selling the “Future” as the “Present”

This is what I find to be Musk’s most formidable skill, and also the point where consumers should be most cautious.

Musk is exceptionally good at talking about the future.

Autonomous driving.

Robotaxis.

Mars colonization.

Humanoid robots.

Global satellite internet.

Direct-to-cell satellite connectivity.

Each one is a grand narrative.

And he has a powerful ability:

To make you feel like this future has already arrived.

For an entrepreneur, this is, of course, a tremendous asset.

It can attract capital, talent, and media attention, and it can prime society to accept a new technological direction.

But for the average consumer, it’s crucial to distinguish between:

What has been achieved today and what is planned for the future are two different things.

Entrepreneurs are responsible for selling the future.

Consumers should focus on what is actually being delivered to them today.

I’ve used Starlink myself for a long time—I’m still using it now, and this article was published using Starlink.

First, I admit:

Starlink is a remarkable feat of engineering.

Deploying such a massive low-Earth orbit satellite network to provide high-speed internet to places untouched by traditional infrastructure is an incredible achievement.

But where is it truly suitable?

I think the answer is very clear:

Places without broadband.

Mountains, farms, wilderness, campsites, boats, remote areas…

In these places with no fiber optics, or even 4G/5G, Starlink is nothing short of a miracle.

But if you live in a city and already have stable, high-speed fiber at home, I personally don’t see any advantage to Starlink.

Because no matter how advanced satellite internet is, it cannot defy the laws of physics.

First is latency.

Low-Earth orbit satellites have significantly reduced the latency of traditional satellite internet, but compared to high-quality fiber, they still have no inherent advantage.

Second is weather.

In my own experience, I’ve encountered packet loss during rain and thunderstorms, and service can even be interrupted during severe weather.

Another factor is obstruction.

The Starlink dish requires a relatively open sky.

If there are trees, buildings, or other obstructions nearby, the connection can be affected.

So it’s not a “high-speed internet anywhere” device.

It has very specific environmental requirements.

In my time using Starlink, I’ve encountered another very real problem.

Because Starlink’s routing jumps through a global network, it might route a Spanish user’s request through the US network, or perhaps through Australia. As a result, some Chinese internet services can sometimes be unstable.

WeChat, QQ, or certain domestic services would sometimes fail to connect properly, and I’d have to turn off Wi-Fi and switch back to my phone’s 4G/5G network.

The specific reasons for this could involve IP address recognition, international network routing, service provider policies, and more. It’s not necessarily Starlink’s fault alone.

But for a user, it’s not that complicated.

I only care about one thing:

Does it work?

So when evaluating a product, the specs from the launch event are important.

But the problems encountered during long-term use are equally important.

For years, there have been rumors online:

Musk is going to make a phone.

The Tesla Phone, Model Pi, Starlink Phone.

No SIM card.

No cell towers.

Directly connects to satellites.

Some even say it will replace traditional mobile networks.

This is actually a mix of a lot of unverified information and concepts.

As of now, there is no officially released, commercially available “Tesla Starlink phone” that you can buy.

The reason is actually quite simple.

The satellites are in the sky.

And where do we use our phones the most?

At home.

In the office.

In shopping malls.

In underground parking garages.

In subways.

In elevators.

In dense cities with tall buildings.

These are precisely the places with a lot of obstruction.

Starlink’s own official description of satellite communication includes a very important condition:

“wherever you can see the sky.”

So its truly logical positioning is not to eliminate 4G and 5G, but to supplement them.

In cities with plenty of cell towers, you use the terrestrial network.

When you’re at sea, in the mountains, or in the wilderness with no towers, the satellite takes over.

This is the true, immense value of direct-to-cell satellite technology.

So those stories online about “Musk is about to launch a Starlink phone, providing high-speed internet anywhere in the world and making traditional carriers and cell towers obsolete”—just take them with a grain of salt.

Real technology is often much more complex than these stories.

9. The Same Applies to Musk Himself: Talented, but Not All His Views are Correct

I have the same attitude towards Musk himself.

I greatly admire his business acumen and his ability to drive engineering projects forward.

But I do not agree with some of his statements on politics, race, immigration, and certain social issues.

There is no contradiction between these two things.

I can admire him for founding SpaceX.

I can admire him for commercializing reusable rockets.

I can acknowledge that Tesla has changed the global electric vehicle industry.

I can also believe that Starlink is a very important engineering project in the history of human communication.

At the same time, I can still criticize Tesla’s flaws, question his marketing, and disagree with his political and social views.

Acknowledging a person’s achievements does not mean you must accept everything about them.

10. What I Really Dislike is the “Worship of Success”

So, as I reach the end, what I really want to talk about is no longer just Musk.

It’s about a habit we have in how we view successful people.

When a person achieves great success in one field, it’s easy for people to fall into a delusion:

Since he was so successful at this, he’s probably right about other things too.

This can even evolve into:

Whatever he says the future will be, that’s how it will be.

If he says his technology is the best in the world, then it is the best in the world.

This is no longer rational judgment; it’s the worship of a successful person.

A great entrepreneur is not necessarily a great politician.

A brilliant engineer doesn’t necessarily understand sociology.

A great scientist’s judgments on economics, history, education, politics, or even life itself are not automatically correct.

People’s abilities have limits.

Success also has its boundaries.

And in today’s social media era, we should be especially wary of another thing:

Communication skill does not equal technical capability.

Whoever has the loudest voice, tells the best stories, and has the most followers does not necessarily have the best technology.

How advanced Tesla’s autonomous driving really is shouldn’t be judged by what Musk says, or by how many fans he has.

Look at its actual capabilities.

Look at its technical limitations.

Look at whether the driving responsibility lies with the human or the machine.

And then look at what Waymo, Apollo Go, and other competitors have already achieved.

Starlink is the same.

Don’t just watch the launch event.

Install it in your own home, use it for a year or two, and then judge whether it’s actually good.

11. True Rationality: Neither Deify nor Deny

Of course, I also oppose the other extreme.

Saying SpaceX is worthless, Tesla is garbage, and Starlink is a scam just because you dislike Musk.

That is equally irrational.

SpaceX’s achievements don’t disappear just because Musk said something you didn’t like.

Starlink’s engineering value doesn’t become zero just because it has flaws.

So I think the simplest attitude is this:

Acknowledge what’s great, and call out what’s not.

Don’t defend all of someone’s problems just because you like them.

And don’t deny all of their achievements just because you dislike them.

A product is a product.

Technology is technology.

Whether it’s good or not depends on real-world use.

Whether it’s advanced or not depends on facts, data, and what has actually been achieved.

Not on who tells the best story.

One of the most important principles of science and technology is skepticism.

Respect facts, not authority.

Musk is brilliant, of course.

But we really don’t need to deify anyone.