HN user

logicalfails

149 karma
Posts1
Comments28
View on HN

"SpaceX’s revenue could reach $3.4 trillion in 2040, according to a Morgan Stanley analysis shared with top investors Thursday, according to people familiar with the matter. Morgan Stanley told investors the rocket maker’s adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization in 2040 could top $2.7 trillion, the people said."

To achieve this, SpaceX would have to grow at an average annualized rate of about 42% per year for the next 15 years.

While riding the one of the largest periods of CAPEX in history, Nvidia's CAGR over the past 5 years has averaged about 67%. I don't see how SpaceX can accomplish this outside of continued, consistent growth in investment across AI infrastructure and space-related revenue streams.

I suspect this is more a function of the corporate sanitization of language within the models. When I have passed my resume through the models for refinement, it often sanitizes some of the more easy going or simpler wording. It expands the vocabulary, makes it more dense, and uses more corpo speak in the bullets and formatting.

Each model likely has its own biases in terms of what constitutes correct corporate speak, and it chooses the resumes that best fit this. Ultimately, I suspect it's more a function of model saying "this grammer, syntax structure, and formatting is most aligned with what is correct corporate language, so flag as high quality".

From what I can tell, much of the recent layoffs by Amazon and other large companies has been relatively surgical, focused on specific projects or silos within the company. According to the WSJ, part of these layoffs are directly tied to the shutting down of the Fresh and Go Business. Looking back, in October 2025, there was Gaming division layoffs. Echo division in 2023. Meta laid off VR reality employees a couple weeks ago.

These layoffs don't seem to be driven by "productivity" gains of AI (yet), more so shifting out of failed business experiments. I wonder if this will act as a signaling mechanism for employees to avoid "novel" projects to avoid getting laid off or being associated with a whole division getting shutdown.

From what I can tell, much of the recent layoffs by Amazon and other large companies has been relatively surgical, focused on specific projects or silos within the company. According to the WSJ, part of these layoffs are directly tied to the shutting down of the Fresh and Go Business. Looking back, in October 2025, there was Gaming division layoffs. Echo division in 2023. Meta laid off VR reality employees a couple weeks ago.

These layoffs don't seem to be driven by productivity gains of AI (yet), more so shifting out of failed business experiments. I wonder if this will act as a signaling mechanism for employees to avoid "novel" projects to avoid getting laid off or being associated with a whole division getting shutdown.

The new AirTag is designed with the environment in mind, with 85 percent recycled plastic in the enclosure, 100 percent recycled rare earth elements in all magnets, and 100 percent recycled gold plating in all Apple-designed printed circuit boards. The paper packaging is 100 percent fiber-based and can be easily recycled.

I'm no material scientist, but this seems pretty impressive to me that Apple's economy of scale can pull this off, and upgrade the device capabilities, for less than $30 USD.

To play the devils advocate, does that take into the "cost" to the government if pensioners are living longer because Alzheimers was cured? I could easily see this turning into a debate behind politicians closed doors of

"If "x" % of the population has their life is extended an average of "y" years, how much more does that cost in pension payouts over the life of the individual vs the medical savings from curing Alzheimers?"

While I am all for the free market, making disposable battery companies label the estimated MAH on batteries would be a win-win in so many ways. For consumers, the environment, waste management, etc...

In 2017, I listened to a highly cited Political Economist rant about how

"The whole damn field is turning into a bunch of Data Monkeys"

Referring to the rise of CS and DS minded economists in the field. His top student was a computer science major...

My first thought is wondering if it's one of two things:

A. The bottom half of PhD Economists are not being trained in the data science/Big Data side of analysis increasingly needed

B. There is less demand for Theory-sided Economists over computationally trained ones

iPhone Air 11 months ago

I'm trying to hang on to my 13 mini until next year, when hopefully Apple will have figured out Apple Intelligence and upgrade the phone hardware to run it. But I'm worried my 13 mini won't make it that long. It's starting to struggle with even basic apps and lags just reading news articles. Battery is still at over 80% though

the use of AI on the battlefield is also raising ethical concerns that machines could be left to decide the fate of combatants and civilians

This bears echos of the handwringing of nukes. Sure, we can all recognize the implicit moral qualms that AI and drones will bring. We will see news flashes of civilians being killed by drones, politicians parroting something about "poor safeguards for 'edge cases'", and NGO's yelling into the void about humanitarian issues under unjust regimes AI drones. We will wash our hands by way of virtue signaling that "we knew this would happen" or "I vote to stop AI drones" etc...

But at the end of the day, nations will utilize whatever they can to enforce their leader's aims. Drones are not the defunct landmines the UN "outlawed" nor the Nuclear weapons we merely banned from nations too weak to produce. They are cheap, and ever more accessible. Drones mark a fundamental change in warfare, not some temporary hiccup before return to norms. Ethical concerns will sadly remain just that, concerns.

I try to sample well-investigated news articles from both sides of the aisle, and it is unfortunate how often I notice the "omission" of key topics from headline reporting on one side or the other. Likely because the conclusion undermines their leanings in other areas. And rather than exploring exceptional topics deeply from their side, they just avoid it altogether.

That doesn't really prove that much. They only made 3 accounts on X, then with each account they followed the 4 major parties and their leaders. Not a very good sample size.

Additionally, the underlying algo could lean toward to what causes more engagement rather than equally tailoring each party. Without having any information personally about German politics or their cultural engagement with social media, I can only anecdotally say that in America, it appears to me that the ones most engaged with social media on X are more often than not right leaning. More of the left-leaning engagement seems increasingly moving towards other outlets, such as Bluesky.

This assumes the friendships were established and maintained in an environment that could potentially be friendly to kids. If your friend group is based around hanging out at barbecues at each other's home, or more child-friendly environments, it will be much easier and likely to maintain those friendships VS. friendships built on generally less child-friendly activities, like long-distance cycling, weekend trips to other states/countries, bar-hopping, etc... Friendships are often built within shared social settings. Changing up the terms minimizes the very shared experience your friendship was built on

While this makes a lot of sense in theory (I do agree that people need to be moving away from flood plains), this policy would create a nightmare of downstream effects. Such as, substantially increasing housing/land/construction prices elsewhere, as you have a flood of insurance filled wallets looking for new areas to move. It may even incentivize moving to nearby areas that were not flooded but still eligible for insurance, since they will just get paid out again. Not to mention all the political ramifications from the political willpower to pass this, to local/state electors crying against it.

Elites for the most part did not democratize on their own terms and stand to lose from open electoral politics

On a slightly related note, I'm under the impression there are many countries with disillusioned youth, combined with relatively entrenched incompetence/corruption in their respective governments. Are there any recent examples of countries that reformed their government without requiring a violent upheaval? (Tunisia looks like a floundering example?). Vested interests prefer to remain vested, so I'm looking for examples where "discussion and debates" have secured long term reforms against established stakeholders.

Incumbents have little incentive to lose their profit margins which not only include the profit margins of the initial purchase, but also its long-term maintenance and repair profit margins. Electric vehicles save buyers something like 40% of maintenance costs, which the dealer/automanufacturer lose out on. So no wonder Incumbent combustion car manufacturers charge exorbitant prices for their electric versions, and claim the "transition will take years".

Anecdotally, my cousin works in operations for a small minor-minor league USA soccer team, and even he and some of the other staff suspect it's a money-laundering scheme. They've never met the owner or know his name (The whole staff is only 10 people). They are told he's from Portugal but that's it. Nothing about the press releases in local papers even mentions who owns or funded the team, outside of two "partners" that are a pair of coaches who started a local soccer club. If you take a look at its registration, it's just an LLC with no other names or information available.

In my very subjective opinion, we are reaching a question of what is the meaning of life when you essentially have most of what you need. Outside of religion, many people don't have a reason to live for, except pursuing even more wealth/goods/comfort. And if they don't believe that's possible for themselves, living in mediocrity becomes a depressing, routine grind for many.