Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why wouldn't you listen to a company on why their product solves the problem you're having?
Companies lie.
Humans lie
Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
131–140 of 300 posts
Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
#132The only objective information we really have is SpaceX's pre-IPO S-1 filing, which breaks down their revenue into Space, Communications and AI segments, with 2025 revenue for each given as.
Communications (i.e. Starlink) 11.3B
Space (i.e. launch services) 4.0B
AI (i.e. Twitter, Grok) 3.2B
According to Google's AI summary, Twitter 2025 revenue was 2.9B, and Grok was 0.5B, so the 2025 "AI" revenue is basically all Twitter, although at least temporarily going forward there will also be significant datacenter/GPU rental income from Anthropic and Google, and now we also have Cursor with an ARR of 4B.
The only significant "AI" revenue here is from Cursor. Datacenter rental seems like it will bring in a lot of money in 2026, but that's hardly "AI".
Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
#133SpaceX renting out their compute to competitors is what crashes the "AI company" notion. They are either datacenter company or an AI company - but it cannot be both.
You can be both but you probably are not very good AI company if you have significant amount of extra computing to rent. Or you calculated your own demand significantly wrong somewhere. Which again does not make you great AI company...
Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
#134Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
The SpaceX IPO prospectus states that the company is targeting a TAM of $28.5T, equal to roughly a quarter of the world's gross economic output. Patrick Boyle said it best. Roughly 1 billion people on the planet make more than $12k annually (folks with "discretionary" income). Divide that TAM of $28.5T by 1B and the every single person needs to give SpaceX ~$28.5K every year forever in order for that figure to make s…
If this happened it would make Elon emperor of the known universe. Can’t imagine the level of influence this would buy. It also seems impossible. What are people seeing that I don’t?
Nobody (with money to invest) actually believes that SpaceX or Tesla will ever catch up to their valuations. People investing in things like this only believe that somebody else believes it.
This will continue to work until they run out of morons willing to buy a stock with a PE of 300 at which point it will contract spectacularly.
Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the total picture of SpaceX, right. Does SpaceX as a whole make financial sense? No. Everyone knows the SpaceX "value story": AI means that a company that makes a minus 5 billion per year really makes plus 200 billion per year! IN SPACE! But, uh, about those Space parts? Surely those are cashflow positive ... right? RIGHT? Well, no. SpaceX it is the 50th or so rocket company. The previous ones did not fail bec…
> What is their fix for too small a market? Make Spaceship, an even bigger rocket ... for a market that sees no use for the existing Falcon 9 launch capacity ... It’s designed to go to Mars. It boggles the mind that anyone would invest in a company and just ignore and/or disbelieve the reason the company was created. Either they’re just gambling or they’re delusional when they discuss so called fundamentals.
Going to Mars is absolutely insane value proposition for public company. There is no monetary gain from it. You have some political gain. But even that is one bad administration away from crashing for multiple years...
Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
#137Earlier quoted context omitted.
Companies lie.
Yes, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't listen to them. You listen to them and you evaluate their claims.
To be truly impartial I don't think you should even evaluate their claims directly. This allows them to focus the comparison on things they care about, not the things you care about. Instead you should decide what problems you need solving, and evaluate solutions to those problems against your own rubric.
Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
#138> The asymmetry—Anthropic penalized while OpenAI was not—is what troubles him most
This isn’t the asymmetry that worries me. Anthropic was penalized, which makes OpenAI (and xAI and every other American company) theoretically subject to the same class of penalties.
DeepSeek is not.
Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
#139Re: Reid Hoffman says SpaceX 'not an AI company', xAI 'complete train wreck'
#140"The pitch deck, he revealed, describes Manas as “an AI drug discovery factory for creating monopolies” legally permissible, he notes, because pharmaceutical IP functions as a sanctioned monopoly by design."
He's got it all figured out, like Myhrvold and Intellectual Ventures