HN user
Not only was Chat Control 1.0 already rejected twice by the European Parliament but:
- This vote took place on last day of the session when many MEPs had already left for Summer vacation - 112 MEPs of 719 didn't vote.
- The vote was called only two days before as an "Rule 170 - Urgent procedure" - 73 MEPs missed the vote making it "urgent". Normally it takes months of procedure to come up for a final vote.
Today both "newspapers" lie about everything. Sad.
The US uses ~0.5 TW of electricity on average but to go 100% solar you would need ~3 TW of solar capacity (6X average usage) and ~30 TWh of battery storage, maybe lots more, plus a massive upgrade to the grid.
Chrysler (now Stellantis), Honda, Toyota and Geely all had/have rocketry divisions and many more auto companies have/are involved in the Aerospace industry more generally.
Musk never promised $1T revenue by 2030. Maybe that's the problem here.
I think there are other reasons and am capable of critical thought. A variety of synergies have been discussed publicly for at least 9 years. This article lists several of them.
This guy joked about it in 2013:
https://x.com/Loh/status/362036803517169664
A Wall St analyst was asking questions about it on Tesla earnings calls in 2016 and later wrote a research note about the idea. Been widely discussed since.
https://www.roic.ai/quote/TSLA/transcripts/2016-year/2-quart...
That the earliest mentions I could quickly find.
It's been discussed for at least a decade. A Wall St analyst even wrote a note suggesting it back in 2017 that was widely covered in the media. Most people think is very likely to happen eventually.
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/05/the-case-for-elon-musk-to-co...
Google is paying $12.00 per gpu-hour which costs SpaceX $1.50-$3.50.
Who's taking advantage of who?
The saga of Musk's 2018 Tesla pay package.
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/12/19/musk-tesla-pay-delaware-supr...
The list of people saying they're going to put compute in space is getting long. Unlikely they're all dumb or faking it. It is clearly technically feasible but how the economics will develop is still unknown.
Starcloud
Axiom Space
SpaceX (Starlink orbital data center constellation)
Google (Project Suncatcher)
Lonestar Data Holdings
Blue Origin (TeraWave/Project Sunrise)
Aetherflux (Galactic Brain)
Kepler Communications
Sophia Space
Madari Space
Adaspace / ADA Space / Guoxing Aerospace (China)
Orbital (LA-based AI inference constellation)
Atomic-6
Planet Labs (with Google)
Crusoe (partnership with Starcloud)
Edge Aerospace
Rotonium
Lux Aeterna
Star Catcher
Loft Orbital
Cowboy Space
OrbitsEdge
Galaxia (Canada)
China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation (CASC)
Beijing Orbital Twilight / Orbital Chenguang
Astro-Future Institute
Space Compass (NTT + SKY Perfect JSAT JV, with JAXA support)
NASA + HPE (Spaceborne Computer)
European Union / ESA / ASCEND (Thales Alenia Space, Airbus, ArianeGroup, HPE, Orange)
UNOOSA (with Madari Space)
Canada’s Department of National Defence (with Galaxia)No I don't ever give up. I would have to be dead or completely incapacitated.
-Elon
It's a two-seater
Haha. It's less than 1,000 words that would take less than 5 minutes to read.
I bet much less than half of the hundreds of HN commenters here bother to read it. Many are clearly unfamiliar with its content.
Google is currently working on AI data centers in space.
https://blog.google/innovation-and-ai/technology/research/go...
What temperature were you assuming?
Because the amount of energy radiated varies with the temperature to the fourth power (P=εσT^4).
Assuming very good emissivity (ε=0.95) and ~75C (~350K) operating temperature I get 808 W/m2.
Power would almost certainly mostly come from solar panels. The SpaceX-xAI press release mentions using mass drivers which are electrically powered. Could make Hydrogen-Oxygen rocket fuel but not needed in Moon's lower gravity/thin atmosphere.
It was originally for $15B. They raised $20B of which $2B was from Tesla.
Your sources might be shady (Elektrek?).
Google, Blue Origin and a bunch of other companies have announced plans for data centers in space. I don't think cooling is the showstopper some assume.
Google, Blue Origin and at least 5 other smaller companies have announced plans to build data centers in space. My understanding is the cooling issue is not the show stopper you assume.
Context missing. This is in reference to a vision the (distant?) future where the satellites are manufactured in factories on the Moon and sent into space with mass drivers.
Full paragraph quote comes from:
While launching AI satellites from Earth is the immediate focus, Starship’s capabilities will also enable operations on other worlds. Thanks to advancements like in-space propellant transfer, Starship will be capable of landing massive amounts of cargo on the Moon. Once there, it will be possible to establish a permanent presence for scientific and manufacturing pursuits. Factories on the Moon can take advantage of lunar resources to manufacture satellites and deploy them further into space. By using an electromagnetic mass driver and lunar manufacturing, it is possible to put 500 to 1000 TW/year of AI satellites into deep space, meaningfully ascend the Kardashev scale and harness a non-trivial percentage of the Sun’s power.
A "bailout" is when a company rescued from bankruptcy. Common equity holders take large losses or are wiped out. This did not happen here.
We also know the Twitter buyout debt was sold at near par before the merger with xAI which is inconsistent with being near bankruptcy.
It has been widely reported for weeks that SpaceX is planning to go public in a few months. The reason is they have big plans to run a vast network of AI servers in orbit and will need to raise a massive amount of funding. xAI merger fits with that plan. I'd assume SpaceX still plans to go public.
Was ignored on HN but here's an article explaining:
https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/12/after-years-of-resisti...
The $44B Twitter/X buyout was not a failure. For example Fidelity has its $19M investment in the buyout - now xAI common shares - marked at $62M (up over 3X) as of 12/31/25. It was certainly valued even higher on 1/31/26 after xAI had an oversubcribed fund raise in January. All before this merger announcement.
Translation: Musk gets the full 2018 compensation plans (worth ~$139 billion); plaintiff get $1 and plaintiff's lawyers get $54.3 million plus interest.
Being the marginal energy supplier is
Not as familiar with EU statistics but for shorter trips (under 300km) public transit is well under 10% of trips while cars are over 50%. For all intra-EU travel in passenger-miles cars are around 75% while busses/trains of all types is well under 15%. Viable sure, more scalable probably not.
You have numbers for SE Asia?
Actually it's mass public transit that can't scale. Despite $1.3T in cumulative subsides US public transit usage is tiny: ~1.5% of trips and ~1% of passenger-miles.
Getting 100 people in a bus is not "easy" because very rarely do 100 people all want to from/to the same place at the same time. We end up bunching people in both time and space and making multiple stops and/or connections - which all make the journey longer and less competitive with alternatives.
And even then buses are only near capacity in our very biggest cities (top 10-15) for a hundful of hours during weekday rush hours. For example, in SF while buses/railcars may occasionally get crowded they are usually empty: Muni averages only 6 passengers per vehicle, BART only 8 per traincar. On a passenger-mile basis this makes the service very expensive (Muni ~$4 and BART ~$2 including capital) and very energy inefficient (Muni(LRV) ~400Wh and BART ~600Wh). Explaining why both systems are struggling financially and require massive ongoing subsides keep operating.
Because busses/subways/trains (i.e. mass transit) require lots of passengers to make financial - or even environmental - sense they will always be a niche, if very important, part of transportation. Robotaxis are competing in the much, much larger car/light truck market (80-85% of trips and passenger-miles). Uber/Lyft (plus traditional taxis) is already much bigger than public transit (~2% vs ~1-1.5%) and still growing and with what should eventually be a much lower cost structure robotaxis should greatly expand this. In other words robotaxis like Tesla will likely be much more scalable than public transit.
WayMore expensive