M&A: xAI, A SpaceX Company

[thespacecow]

Elon agreed with this: https://x.com/skorusARK/status/1998764063862456472

Space based data centers may finally reignite/rescue solar in the US from the trough of disillusionment.

I assume this means SpaceX will be building their own solar cells for the satellites.

[Vultur]

See, the very near term part of the plan, "compute on Starlink v3" seems entirely plausible to me.

It's the longer term expectation of continued exponential growth in demand, scaling up to terawatts of AI use, that doesn't.

As long as it's constellation based, they can always stop launching if demand dries up, this is true for the broadband/D2D business as well. One could also ask if there's enough demand for 40,000 broadband satellites and 15,000 D2D satellites, we don't know, but they can grow the constellation gradually until they hit the limit, so I don't see this is big risk.

This is true. I do think there's a difference in the sense that demand for connectivity is well established at known costs, whereas AI costs are currently hugely subsidized by unsustainable investment capital firehose, so it's very unclear what demand will look like at something like "real" costs.

But yeah, they can just stop launching.

The question is what a major stock price crash shortly post-IPO would do to the company's future though.

There's more risk if they start investing in lunar factories,

I totally don't buy hyperautomated lunar factories. Mars is already difficult and will probably need significant human input to make ISRU work, I think doing practical large scale industrial ISRU on the Moon is going to be quite a bit harder (PSRs are deep-cryogenic cold, Mars shallow subsurface ice is only Antarctic-winter cold; Mars has carbon and oxygen available from atmosphere, Moon doesn't; solar power is much more practical on Mars with its "normal" day-night cycle; etc)

Also, I really don't think rapid demand growth will last anywhere near long enough. GPUs on Starlink v3 could happen next year, in contrast.

[Crispy]

Not to mention that silicon chips need some of the most complex manufacturing processes ever invented. Multiple stages with exotic chemicals, machines and conditions. It's hard enough on Earth!

I actually hope the AI bubble pops before SpaceX gets a chance to IPO. It's a massive distraction.

[meekGee]

Musk hates beamed solar, but for all its inefficiencies, if you have Terawatts of it, you can probably build a case for it even if the AI doesn't pan out.

It's not a matter of hate, it's a matter of the impracticality of beaming it (power) down.

Orbital AI (and compute in general) gets around that.

On the bright side, if it works, all the current central compute can go to orbit, freeing up a good amount of terrestrial power to do actual useful shit, without adding emissions.

[Vultur]

Not to mention that silicon chips need some of the most complex manufacturing processes ever invented. Multiple stages with exotic chemicals, machines and conditions. It's hard enough on Earth!

Yeah I was just thinking of building the solar panels and satellite buses on the Moon. Actually building the chips themselves would be another level of crazy difficult.

[meekGee]

See, the very near term part of the plan, "compute on Starlink v3" seems entirely plausible to me.

It's the longer term expectation of continued exponential growth in demand, scaling up to terawatts of AI use, that doesn't.

As long as it's constellation based, they can always stop launching if demand dries up, this is true for the broadband/D2D business as well. One could also ask if there's enough demand for 40,000 broadband satellites and 15,000 D2D satellites, we don't know, but they can grow the constellation gradually until they hit the limit, so I don't see this is big risk.

This is true. I do think there's a difference in the sense that demand for connectivity is well established at known costs, whereas AI costs are currently hugely subsidized by unsustainable investment capital firehose, so it's very unclear what demand will look like at something like "real" costs.

But yeah, they can just stop launching.

The question is what a major stock price crash shortly post-IPO would do to the company's future though.

There's more risk if they start investing in lunar factories,

I totally don't buy hyperautomated lunar factories. Mars is already difficult and will probably need significant human input to make ISRU work, I think doing practical large scale industrial ISRU on the Moon is going to be quite a bit harder (PSRs are deep-cryogenic cold, Mars shallow subsurface ice is only Antarctic-winter cold; Mars has carbon and oxygen available from atmosphere, Moon doesn't; solar power is much more practical on Mars with its "normal" day-night cycle; etc)

Also, I really don't think rapid demand growth will last anywhere near long enough. GPUs on Starlink v3 could happen next year, in contrast.

Nothing.

Revenue is revenue, and money raised is money raised.

The stock will recover as long as the fundamentals are good.

'tis a tale twice told. Again, e.g. Amazon or any of the others that didn't let the stock market distract them.

[Vultur]

See, the very near term part of the plan, "compute on Starlink v3" seems entirely plausible to me.

It's the longer term expectation of continued exponential growth in demand, scaling up to terawatts of AI use, that doesn't.

As long as it's constellation based, they can always stop launching if demand dries up, this is true for the broadband/D2D business as well. One could also ask if there's enough demand for 40,000 broadband satellites and 15,000 D2D satellites, we don't know, but they can grow the constellation gradually until they hit the limit, so I don't see this is big risk.

This is true. I do think there's a difference in the sense that demand for connectivity is well established at known costs, whereas AI costs are currently hugely subsidized by unsustainable investment capital firehose, so it's very unclear what demand will look like at something like "real" costs.

But yeah, they can just stop launching.

The question is what a major stock price crash shortly post-IPO would do to the company's future though.

There's more risk if they start investing in lunar factories,

I totally don't buy hyperautomated lunar factories. Mars is already difficult and will probably need significant human input to make ISRU work, I think doing practical large scale industrial ISRU on the Moon is going to be quite a bit harder (PSRs are deep-cryogenic cold, Mars shallow subsurface ice is only Antarctic-winter cold; Mars has carbon and oxygen available from atmosphere, Moon doesn't; solar power is much more practical on Mars with its "normal" day-night cycle; etc)

Also, I really don't think rapid demand growth will last anywhere near long enough. GPUs on Starlink v3 could happen next year, in contrast.

Nothing.

Revenue is revenue, and money raised is money raised.

The stock will recover as long as the fundamentals are good.

'tis a tale twice told. Again, e.g. Amazon or any of the others that didn't let the stock market distract them.

I guess as long as they don't overbuild for demand that ends up never existing it will be fine.

[meekGee]

I guess as long as they don't overbuild for demand that ends up never existing it will be fine.

Well they need to manage risk, not avoid it.

Of course they'll build more than is guaranteed to be needed...  Managing risk over years is what Musk does for a living.

Think about each investment in a Tesla or SpaceX factory, which takes years to even start producing, and yet the market is volatile even in the monthly outlook.  How do you navigate that? Just not ever do anything?

[Ludus]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">SpaceX has way more satellites in orbit than the rest of the world combined, so maybe we know a thing or two about the subject 🤣

Starlink V3 will be 20kW and launched at scale around Q4 next year. No problem to scale that to &gt;100kW if the satellite mass is shifted towards solar…</p>&mdash; Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 10, 2025 <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The shift to Space based AI seems to be the main reason for the 2026 SpaceX IPO plans. It’s widely projected at $1.5 T market cap raising $30B+.

The near term project seems to sun synchronous orbit with the V3 Starlink platform minus antennas and related electronics which is the majority of its mass then scaling power and thermal dissipation from 20 kW to 100+kW. Laser comm connecting it to Starlink net.

Sats are mass produced and launched just like Starlink V3 on Starship.

The hyperscalers are already reaching the terrestrial limits. Every new data center becomes a problem competing for limited locations that have power and local regulatory tolerance.Expanding AI compute in space can be done systematically effectively just by scaling up mass production, of Starships, Starship infrastructure, Starlink platform satellites, etc.

One obvious prediction from this is that the SpaceForce will come out with approval of Starship launch and landing facility at SLC6 Vandenberg very soon - because this requires LOTS of Starship launches into Sun Synchronous orbit.

[thespacecow]

I totally don't buy hyperautomated lunar factories. Mars is already difficult and will probably need significant human input to make ISRU work, I think doing practical large scale industrial ISRU on the Moon is going to be quite a bit harder (PSRs are deep-cryogenic cold, Mars shallow subsurface ice is only Antarctic-winter cold; Mars has carbon and oxygen available from atmosphere, Moon doesn't; solar power is much more practical on Mars with its "normal" day-night cycle; etc)

Also, I really don't think rapid demand growth will last anywhere near long enough. GPUs on Starlink v3 could happen next year, in contrast.

I'm not saying they'll start building lunar factories immediately, I think it'll be the next step after AI satellites based on Starlink bus. Although if they plan to do this, they'll probably start precursor missions soon, such as prospecting.

As for its feasibility, I guess we'll see. There are a lot of proponents of lunar industry, so I think it's a mistake to totally write it off. It's just before there's no products they can export to gain revenue, now they may have one.

[thespacecow]

Not to mention that silicon chips need some of the most complex manufacturing processes ever invented. Multiple stages with exotic chemicals, machines and conditions. It's hard enough on Earth!

Chips have very little mass, initially you can just import from Earth.

But to make a Mars colony truly self-sustaining, you'll have to tackle chip making outside Earth sooner or later. If you have a commercial reason to do this, all the better.

I actually hope the AI bubble pops before SpaceX gets a chance to IPO.

Terrible idea, given how important AI is to US economy, both short term and long term.

It's a massive distraction.

What is the criteria to determine if something is a distraction? Why is HLS, Starlink, Starshield not a distraction, but AI satellites based on Starlink bus or lunar factory a distraction?

[meekGee]

Not to mention that silicon chips need some of the most complex manufacturing processes ever invented. Multiple stages with exotic chemicals, machines and conditions. It's hard enough on Earth!

I actually hope the AI bubble pops before SpaceX gets a chance to IPO. It's a massive distraction.

Wouldn't it be better to hope that AI doesn't experience a bubble, or that the bubble is only a consolidation that doesn't affect the overall market size?

I mean why is AI a distraction? It seems at the very least a very fundamental technology.

[steveleach]

Not to mention that silicon chips need some of the most complex manufacturing processes ever invented. Multiple stages with exotic chemicals, machines and conditions. It's hard enough on Earth!

I actually hope the AI bubble pops before SpaceX gets a chance to IPO. It's a massive distraction.

Wouldn't it be better to hope that AI doesn't experience a bubble, or that the bubble is only a consolidation that doesn't affect the overall market size?

I mean why is AI a distraction? It seems at the very least a very fundamental technology.

It can be both, tbh.

Once the hype bubble pops there are still going to be a lot of viable uses for AI, but most of the money that AI companies thought they had to spend will be gone.

[meekGee]

Not to mention that silicon chips need some of the most complex manufacturing processes ever invented. Multiple stages with exotic chemicals, machines and conditions. It's hard enough on Earth!

I actually hope the AI bubble pops before SpaceX gets a chance to IPO. It's a massive distraction.

Wouldn't it be better to hope that AI doesn't experience a bubble, or that the bubble is only a consolidation that doesn't affect the overall market size?

I mean why is AI a distraction? It seems at the very least a very fundamental technology.

It can be both, tbh.

Once the hype bubble pops there are still going to be a lot of viable uses for AI, but most of the money that AI companies thought they had to spend will be gone.

Many companies will fail, which is the nature of start-ups.

The only thing that's guaranteed is that there will be a lot of headlines dramatizing everything. Which is actually true of every weekday.

[JaimeZX]

....as we develop Super AI, we play the roles of creators, sort of little demi-gods.

6. The biggest single problem I see in this mad rush of ours to evolve, is that it seems very unlikely that we will be able to keep control of our AI invention, as it becomes more intelligent than we are.

The biggest problem is that the demi-gods are motivated by quarterly financial reporting and not What Is Best For The Species.

Pets or batteries. Take your pick.

Iain Banks' "Minds" are best-case scenario.
Pets is almost second-best, and almost certainly preferable to our extinction.

[seb21051]

....as we develop Super AI, we play the roles of creators, sort of little demi-gods.

6. The biggest single problem I see in this mad rush of ours to evolve, is that it seems very unlikely that we will be able to keep control of our AI invention, as it becomes more intelligent than we are.

The biggest problem is that the demi-gods are motivated by quarterly financial reporting and not What Is Best For The Species.

Pets or batteries. Take your pick.

Iain Banks' "Minds" are best-case scenario.
Pets is almost second-best, and almost certainly preferable to our extinction.

We are doomed to live in what the Chinese call "Interesting Times".

What I would give to be able to be a fly on the wall for the next 200 years. Neuralink needs to get its Psyche-Upload-To-The-Cloud service launched.

[Vultur]

What I would give to be able to be a fly on the wall for the next 200 years. Neuralink needs to get its Psyche-Upload-To-The-Cloud service launched.

I am very skeptical that uploading minds is even theoretically possible, even with arbitrarily advanced technology. The brain doesn't store information in the same way an electronic computer does; how would you get all the information out without destroying the 3D structure that is key to storing it? I think you'd need something like Star Trek scanners, which probably aren't physically possible.

(Anyway even if possible it would be the Star Trek transporter problem .. it's a copy of you not *you*. It's not immortality just a nonbiological form of reproduction, a sort of mental cloning.)

[Vultur]

Not to mention that silicon chips need some of the most complex manufacturing processes ever invented. Multiple stages with exotic chemicals, machines and conditions. It's hard enough on Earth!

I actually hope the AI bubble pops before SpaceX gets a chance to IPO. It's a massive distraction.

Wouldn't it be better to hope that AI doesn't experience a bubble, or that the bubble is only a consolidation that doesn't affect the overall market size?

I mean why is AI a distraction? It seems at the very least a very fundamental technology.

If one takes the existence of a bubble as a fact, and I pretty much do, bursting sooner is better, because it means less wealth erased and fewer plans committed to things that won't work out.

A bubble doesn't mean the technology is useless. The Internet was a bubble in the 1990s. US railroads were a bubble bursting in 1873.

"AI" is a very broad term. If "AI" in some sense is an eventual huge success but with a technology totally different from LLMs (and possibly far less energy-hungry) much of the current investment, hardware, etc.

[seb21051]

What I would give to be able to be a fly on the wall for the next 200 years. Neuralink needs to get its Psyche-Upload-To-The-Cloud service launched.

I am very skeptical that uploading minds is even theoretically possible, even with arbitrarily advanced technology. The brain doesn't store information in the same way an electronic computer does; how would you get all the information out without destroying the 3D structure that is key to storing it? I think you'd need something like Star Trek scanners, which probably aren't physically possible.

(Anyway even if possible it would be the Star Trek transporter problem .. it's a copy of you not *you*. It's not immortality just a nonbiological form of reproduction, a sort of mental cloning.)

All I can do is live in hope, lol. I really wouldn't be worried what version of me lives on if it became a possibility.

On the other hand, look at the technological advances we have made in the last 100 years! I sometimes think of how I would try to explain the present to a Rip Van Winkeled Leonardo Da Vinci. That is after getting him to bathe, get a haircut and dressing him in cargo pants, nikes and a hawaiian shirt. Silly, I know.

[meekGee]

Not to mention that silicon chips need some of the most complex manufacturing processes ever invented. Multiple stages with exotic chemicals, machines and conditions. It's hard enough on Earth!

I actually hope the AI bubble pops before SpaceX gets a chance to IPO. It's a massive distraction.

Wouldn't it be better to hope that AI doesn't experience a bubble, or that the bubble is only a consolidation that doesn't affect the overall market size?

I mean why is AI a distraction? It seems at the very least a very fundamental technology.

If one takes the existence of a bubble as a fact, and I pretty much do, bursting sooner is better, because it means less wealth erased and fewer plans committed to things that won't work out.

A bubble doesn't mean the technology is useless. The Internet was a bubble in the 1990s. US railroads were a bubble bursting in 1873.

"AI" is a very broad term. If "AI" in some sense is an eventual huge success but with a technology totally different from LLMs (and possibly far less energy-hungry) much of the current investment, hardware, etc.

The market leaders, if they were based on technology rather than hype, survive.

Stocks take a couple of years to recover, but the failure of the smaller players makes it easier to become even more dominant.

Like I said before - money already raised is already raised, and revenue will be generally unaffected. It's not like people will stop talking on their phones or using the web.

You worry too much. It's not healthy.