371–380 of 631 posts
Patrick Boyle (fund manager, professor, youtuber) recently discussed this IPO on his channel. Informative and entertaining. https://youtu.be/8rS3fTbC7TE?is=TGpEdM2Y7sknP-cW
I used to watch him a lot, but he started talking about AI (I work at a big lab) and it was all wrong, so I'm not sure if I can trust his analysis anymore :(
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Who is using Grok seriously?
Overall it's worse than the other frontier models, but it's decent for queries about breaking news, due to being trained on twitter data. It's also better for queries about controversial topics, and topics that the other labs have deemed to be "unsafe". Politically, it differs quite a bit from other models.[0] It's right leaning, although it's closer neutral than other models, defining what neutral is a challenge tho…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it's a space-based alternative that serves areas carriers have no financial incentive to cover In a nutshell: they're serving a market that has less money to spend using more expensive tech than the current industry leaders. Maybe I'm wrong but it doesn't scream "massive profit".
I think Airplanes are going to be pretty profitable. They are sort of running a market cornering operation there. But, there will be competition eventually. Starlink is way faster than the alternatives so most airlines have switched and Starlink has rapidly increased their prices for aviation. Idk if it's enough though, they are definitely running lots of promos for home customers.
I think SpaceX is an incredible company but at this valuation I’d expect it to have something as pervasive as the iPhone or Nvidia chips. It seems to have only small niches.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you link to those serious analyses? The ones I've seen don't portray it as a total impossibility? Scott Manley did a runthrough that seemed reasonably positive on the possibility.
Could you build a data center in space? Yes, absolutely I am sure there are no physical barriers. We have computers in space now, and those computers have telecom links to Earth. Without even going into the numbers, terrestrial data centers have significant cost advantages. They don't have to spend $$$$$$$ to get to orbit. They can upgrade and/or fix components easily (likely safe to assume a hypothetical orbital DC…
A GB300 costs about 70k, a rack is 72 of them.
The cost to launch is less than 2% overhead. Its is extremely feasible.
SpaceX has reduced the cost of getting a ton of mass into orbit by a factor of 10 and with their new system (Starship) it's poised further reduce that to 100x. They launch, land and re-use their rockets so often now that what was considered impossible 15 years ago is now routine. They currently put more things into space than the rest of the world combined and by a huge margin. They also have the most advanced intern…
I'm a SpaceX investor, and from reading the comments here, I think most people here are missing why SpaceX has an outrageously high valuation. SpaceX's valuation only makes sense if you buy into their mission of creating a civilization on Mars, and that the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation is the vehicle that creates this future. If SpaceX achieves this, it would be the most valuable company ever created. I…
> SpaceX's valuation only makes sense if It’s funny, I hear the exact same phrasing used when justifying Tesla’s valuation. “It only makes sense if…” … if you ignore what the actual, physical business does today, and picture it doing something entirely different, beyond its current capabilities (robotaxis, androids, etc) The difference with this pie-in-the-sky ambition (Mars Colony) is that I don’t even understand ho…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> SpaceX's valuation only makes sense if It’s funny, I hear the exact same phrasing used when justifying Tesla’s valuation. “It only makes sense if…” … if you ignore what the actual, physical business does today, and picture it doing something entirely different, beyond its current capabilities (robotaxis, androids, etc) The difference with this pie-in-the-sky ambition (Mars Colony) is that I don’t even understand ho…
My belief is that Mars will be colonized for ideological reasons, not for profit. A Mars colony won't be profitable. But it will be colonized, mostly for prestige, and also because of overcrowding & pollution, which will become bigger issues in the coming decades.
Turns out the real overpopulation is in places people want to live.
I'm a SpaceX investor, and from reading the comments here, I think most people here are missing why SpaceX has an outrageously high valuation. SpaceX's valuation only makes sense if you buy into their mission of creating a civilization on Mars, and that the Space Exploration Technologies Corporation is the vehicle that creates this future. If SpaceX achieves this, it would be the most valuable company ever created. I…
Good to know. So if you're in the majority and figured out Musk is full of shit, don't invest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My belief is that Mars will be colonized for ideological reasons, not for profit. A Mars colony won't be profitable. But it will be colonized, mostly for prestige, and also because of overcrowding & pollution, which will become bigger issues in the coming decades.
But why? We’ve not colonised either of the poles of our own planet in any real way out of a sense of prestige. Heck there’s huge areas in Canada and Russia uninhabited and these are all a dream to live in compared to Mars. Turns out the real overpopulation is in places people want to live.