• Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Once again, the IPO ($135/share or $2.1 Trillion) was based on the success of some long term goals like space-based data centers and a Mars colony of one million permanent residents.

    This is from the same guy who promised a fleet of Tesla robotaxis by 2025.

    Space experts have since pointed out that the vacuum of space does not sink heat.

    Some of the assets thrown into the SpaceX valuation include xAI (which is falling behind OpenAI and Anthropic) and Starlink (which is suffering from congestion problems already and cannot be scaled up).

    So this is not unexpected.

    • anomnom@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      12 hours ago

      I still want to know how having anyone on mars was supposed to be profitable.

      Unless a government is paying you to run a private prison there.

      • Uriel238 [all pronouns]@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 hours ago

        The point of manned missions and colonies now is proof of concept for the expansion of human civilization to other worlds, but yes, that’s not a private for profit endeavor but a public interest one.

        That said, the research and development done for the Apollo moon shots returned to the economy $14 for every one dollar spent, so it was absolutely a sound investment. Also, those patents were sold to the US government for a dollar each (at most), and so the technology gained like microcircuitry and memory foam, are public domain.

        ( RANT: The public domain, the creation of a robust one is – according to the Constitution of the United States – the very purpose of the whole temporary monopoly system that is the foundation of intellectual property law.)

    • Zos_Kia@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      20 hours ago

      To clarify, the problem with starlink is that the investment is mostly done (they have the projected number of sats in orbit, give or take a couple thousands) so there is no rational reason for them to raise billions in cash.

      In a rational world it would now have to prove itself on its own dime.

    • Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Space experts have since pointed out that the vacuum of space does not sink heat.

      I’m merely a casual Elite: Dangerous player and I could have told him that.

      He’s a genius btw

    • Faithless@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      To me it is unexpected in the sense that the market has been responding positive to all previous recent fantasies …

      Bit sadly it is still extremly overvalued