Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross Did he read Singularity Sky and feel he could make that future happen with more computers everywhere?
-
@fazalmajid Well, that, probably, but also "power broker".
The Epstein files function to identify the de facto real power structure. (As he saw it, but considering how long he kept what running, he can't have been too far off.)
(It also identifies the help and the wannabes.)
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross But it's great hype for AI bros and TESCREAL cretins.
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross isn't Starship becoming less and less useful as they keep 'iterating' it's development?
That giant cargo capacity keeps on dropping.
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
Here's a fine blog about what appears to be Musk's latest SpaceX hoax by an actual physics and astronomy professor:
https://www.physicsmatt.com/blog/2025/12/11/the-dumbest-thing-ive-seen-this-week
»The only reason to launch a shitload of GPUs into orbit is to say you did it, because they sure as hell aren’t going to add meaningful capacity to the datacenters on Earth, will cost far more, and would have short usable lifespans. […] So why are a bunch of techbros and their pet journalists hyping this?«
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross Not to mention it probably arrived as a ketamine induced hallucination.
Or maybe grok predicted it.
He possibly even believes it himself, he's so full of it, it's hard to tell. -
Here's a fine blog about what appears to be Musk's latest SpaceX hoax by an actual physics and astronomy professor:
https://www.physicsmatt.com/blog/2025/12/11/the-dumbest-thing-ive-seen-this-week
»The only reason to launch a shitload of GPUs into orbit is to say you did it, because they sure as hell aren’t going to add meaningful capacity to the datacenters on Earth, will cost far more, and would have short usable lifespans. […] So why are a bunch of techbros and their pet journalists hyping this?«
Hier ein Blog auf Deutsch, das diesen KI-Satelliten Gigaquatsch sachlich zerlegt.
https://www.bernd-leitenberger.de/blog/2026/01/27/musks-ki-rechenzentren-im-orbit/
»Meiner Ansicht nach macht dieser kuriose Vorschlag nur einen Sinn: Kunden für Starlink und Falcons zu beschaffen. 1 Million Satelliten erfordern weit über 100.000 Falcon 9 Starts […] Es muss schlecht um Starlink stehen, wenn es solche Vorschläge von Musk gibt…«
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross the thing is, the big money knows it's BS or, at least, doesn't care if it's BS. They'll get in early, ride the hype wave and then try to cash out before it all falls apart.
"The stock markets are a way for everyone to participate in owning a company and promote growth." Is nonsense. The markets have become casinos and are disconnected from the economy.
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross I remember when he claimed his rocket would be on Mars by 2025 and everyone who doesn't know about Space believed him because he's nothing more than a huckster, selling Science Fiction as fact and Journalism not bothering to look beyond the hype.
This man, who was SO keen to visit the Paedo Island....
#ElonMusk #Space #SpaceX #Hustlers #Grifters #ClanOfPaedophiles
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross yup. Tesla is dead, X is basically dead. He needs to create more hype, so here comes the physics breaking con to take more investors money.
-
Tell me he did not say this. It's like Elon's playing a game to see what he can get away with. Like a child might when testing boundaries. Oh wait, narcissists actually have the emotional maturity of a child...
"SpaceX will start launching Starships to Mars in 2026, Elon Musk says"
@elasticsoul @NMBA @cstross actually he said it was 2025. He's late....
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
"laws of physics say "nope""
But there is a way, figured it out. If "elon" wants the secret then it will cost him the trillion the "board of directors" (doge) .. paid him. 300,000,000 would get a tax refund of $3,333.33 -
@clintruin @mkoek @cstross here's one of my favourite Wikipedia pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_predictions_for_autonomous_Tesla_vehicles_by_Elon_Musk
@kthy @clintruin @cstross but what does Grokipedia have to say on the subject? Not going to check, but I strongly suspect not much.
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross I'd be interested in finding out if Scott Manley got anything wrong here.
His take, as I understand it, is basically (1) the physics makes it complicated but not non-doable, and (2) can't be profitable now but may well be so within the foreseeable future -- making it likely that whoever gets there first, even before it's profitable, stands to make the usual absurd amounts of money (especially if orbital access is never properly regulated) once it does become cheap enough for it to be profitable.
-
@cstross Starlink might be the only thing one of his companies got right. I've been using one for a while now and it's a game changer when living somewhere remote. I wish we had a suitable EU competitor and not have to contribute to this man's lunacy...
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross Elon Musk wants datacenters in space because he read Neuromancer once in high school and didn't understand any of it.
-
@cstross yup. Tesla is dead, X is basically dead. He needs to create more hype, so here comes the physics breaking con to take more investors money.
@bellegraylane @cstross
Musk merged Xitter with xAI to justify its high valuation to investors as an AI company now.
The same crap with Tesla being rebranded an AI robotaxi and humanoid robot company.So makes sense to pull the same trick with SpaceX to gullible investors. That it's really an AI company so that SpaceX can afford to bail out Tesla when it buys all those unsold Cybertrucks.
Won't be surprised when Neuralink is touted as an AI company next
-
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross
I've been thinking about that. I ran across this today, and thought Musk might be able to work it in to his pitch: -
Because a LOT of people are missing the point:
No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".
But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.
Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.
So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.
@cstross when his other shit starts to break up it's going to be a pretty busy game of billiards
-
@cstross won't Kessler Syndrome make space launch dead as a business long before that?
@fazalmajid No, because the density of particles in orbit falls off as the inverse cube of their altitude—the volume of space around Earth is vast, and the probability of an impact is a function of the particle density at any given altitude and how long your payload spends there on the way up. Starship could plausibly deliver comsat constellations to altitudes much higher than the overcrowded 200km orbits Starlink is crammed into, where impact probability is far lower.
