I guess I feel differently. Musk strikes me as the archetypal “watched a couple youtube videos and now thinks he’s an expert” kind of guy, and he seems to have trouble composing coherent thoughts longer than a tweet. Asimov, for all his flaws, is a legit smart and well-informed guy who in addition to all the fiction wrote a bunch of well-regarded non-fiction books as well.
I get how you could read, for example, the Foundation novels and think that “psychohistory” was basically magic for science fiction nerds (and I think Asimov made a similar observation himself in later years), but even if you want to use that as a sort of referendum on Asimov’s hubris about his insight or scientific understanding or whatever, I still think that’s just him being “merely wrong”. As opposed to the stereotypical bitcoin/tech bro “Dunning-Kruger incarnate” level of being wrong.
That’s what I see the fundamental difference as, anyway.