Профиль

It's good that Epiq and siblings sell but they have almost no profit margin, unlike the huge Peaq that actually is profitable. You probably don't have VW shares to care but some of us do care about this not so subtle difference. Škoda made its homework, it's clear that larger models do better

Like in Kuwait they have cheaper oil than water, we have cheaper beer than water. This is really not a hyperbole in many cases. Rajec water costs up to czk 25 per 1.5 l, that is 8.3 per half liter, I often buy Argus 10 for 7.90

Takže od té chvíle jsem jednal jasně s předpokladem, že jsou podvodníci. Dal jsem mu totiž test znalostí, víceméně, a neprošel. Takže když mi řekl, že jistě nechci jet z Plzně do Svitav, jasně jsem mu řekl. Naopak, je to důležitá věc, rád za Vámi zajedu. Byl chudák zcela v rozkladu atd 😂

Mě volal falešný policajt na jaře. Jsem plukovník falešné jméno, odbor kriminality Svitavy, někdo si na Vás půjčil 600 tisíc Kč, známe ho, ale musíte spolupracovat. Pak mi dal ještě jednoho. Chvíli jsem byl rozhozen, samozřejmě berouc že je to podvod jako plán A. Sebevědomí se mi vrátilo za 5 minut

When the US was humiliated by the USSR, lots of money went to the US space program, it peaked in 1963 or so when whopping 5% of the US GDP was burned on the space program! Just to show "we're ahead of USSR now". You can't turn -5% of GDP to a positive number, there's no profit there.

During the Obama years, it was said the US didn't need most of the space research, Obama basically abandoned a half of NASA, the people etc. had to move somewhere, SPCX got things for free. But it's still not making a net profit so the gift was a "huge nothing". Space research was subsidized.

Cooling of hardware per lifetime will remain cheaper than getting the computers to the orbit. But anyway, the difference in cooling is limited, and it won't become safe and cheap enough to get expensive hardware to the orbit, either. It's a whole network of nonsensical and un-economic hype.

You clearly can't live on Mars, make sensible facilities that pay for themselves. The place is full of radiation and terrible abrasive dust (dust is smooth on Earth because of erosion by water). Also, computers on orbit can't be economically profitable.

Then you have the AI. Grok is just not a leader in the field, SPCX mainly resells some hardware, the volumes are tiny, anyway. On top of that, xAI that SPCX swallowed has a huge debt, threatening the whole SPCX because SPCX is not making a profit. And then the sci-fi nonsense about life on Mars...

Starlink makes below $10 billion in EBITDA profit, but amortization turns it into a net loss. But even if $10 billion were a net profit, it would be a company like Nokia, below $200 billion, not a trillion. The rockets won't create any profit anytime soon, the Chinese are ahead and cheaper now, too.

It surely is a failure of humanity, but it can still be fixed. The return of SPCX to sane values, around $10, is needed. The valuation over a trillion is complete nonsense. Everything makes a loss in SPCX. Starlink is the only part with a realistic chance of a profit in near future.

It's been often said that the 5 failures of Starship out of 13 launches en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpaceX_... is great because a failure means that one is learning. One is learning almost nothing, it's just an unreliable system breaking in one of many ways all the time. You just need to do things right!

They clearly make things that fail very often, and praise these outcomes, by the "fail fast" slogan en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fail_fast The whole "fail fast" meme is a terrible misunderstanding, especially in space research where you need much more survival skills than on Earth.

The SpaceX is just lousy as a rocket company. The Starship is the victory of scientifically illiterate ego over merit. It's huge, larger than what can ever be made safe. The reusability just won't reliably work, ever, too much mess, entropy is just made during launches. The process is even worse.

It didn't advance science at all. You know, I am a de facto retired Harvard theoretical physicist and I primarily hate the SpaceX-like cults because they redirect cash from science, like $20 billion new 100 TeV collider that we could easily have, to $2 trillion to SpaceX-like stuff.

It wasn't months, just one month. The record high above 225 was on June 16

They are promised to be reusable but it hasn't worked. On Thursday, the booster blew again

By the claim

Morgan Stanley tried to support the price, but the claim that the price is already absurdly low because non AI is worth some 100 and nothing would be left for AI. Except that the non AI part is even more worthless than the AI part, closer to 10 than 100, and their wording undercut the stock further

It was a strong one but this vibrating picture is intense partly because the camera was loosely attached, isn't it?