See You On Mars

I like spaceflight and sometimes talk about it.

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

@IterIntellectus Hey @grok, what can an MRI discover that an ultrasonic CT can’t and vice-versa?

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

Apparently, $SPCX earnings call is happening on August the 6th.

Source: Revolut

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

The scale of what is to come has no precedent

[Peter H. Diamandis, MD @PeterDiamandis]

Pessimists sound smart. 

Optimists build the world.

[Robin @xdNiBoR]

CNBC interview with Gwynne Shotwell about the IPO, Starship, Starlink and AI satellites.

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

@stevenmarkryan 100% on one platform and 78.5% on another.
I have to say I was early asking for them.

[Sawyer Merritt @SawyerMerritt]

Oppenheimer has initiated coverage on SpaceX stock ($SPCX) with an Outperform rating and a $190 price target, which would be a $2.5 trillion market cap.

"We see potential for SPCX to leverage terrestrial compute expertise as a bridge (and possible back-up plan) to enable key scale and cost advantages. We see it as the only vertically-integrated AI company with the required capital, data, LLMs, hardware, manufacturing and engineering talent.

We believe that SpaceX will use its expertise in engineering, manufacturing and space technologies to grow to the largest communications, cloud/AI company in the world, in our scenario. This is a very large TAM with high barriers to entry. We expect extreme stock and operational volatility. The company faces complex engineering/manufacturing/physics challenges that are
likely to be resolved but create the risk of falling behind schedule. SPCX will leverage a monopoly on reusable rockets and hardware manufacturing—antennas, hardware, solar panels, satellites, chips etc.—to do so."

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

The craziest take here is that in the worst reusability case possible, if they keep the price at $400 million or under per expended Starship and Super Heavy Booster, they will be paying the same for bandwidth that they have been with the current reusable Falcon 9 launches and Starlink satellites.

[Rob Maurer @robmaurer]

The metric I keep coming back to for SpaceX is $/Mbps to orbit

Starlink exists because Falcon 9 dropped bandwidth deployment costs ~10x to ~$6.55/Mbps. That’s about to drop again to just $0.30/Mbps because of Starship.

A business that is doubling users annually with a 63% adjusted EBITDA margin is about to cut their biggest cost by 95%… It really seems like people don't understand the implications of this.

The math assumes a reusable Falcon 9 launch is 17 tonnes at $1,000/kg and 2,600 Gbps per launch. Starship is targeting 100 tonnes at under $185/kg and 61,000 Gbps per launch. That's $17M for 2,600 Gbps ($6.55/Mbps) verse $18.5M for 61,000 Gbps ($0.30/Mbps).

Starship's additional volume allows for larger satellites, enabling simultaneous gains on multiple cost curves. The math suggests V3 satellites are ~600 Mbps/kg vs ~150 Mbps/kg from V2 mini.

Combining the 4x improvement on satellite bandwidth density with a 5x improvement in launch gets you the 20x improvement to 30 cents per Mbps to orbit.

These are fairly conservative assumptions because launch probably comes in even lower as Starship ramps, and satellite improvements probably keep coming. At $0.10 / Mbps, $1 billion spend on launch represents 10,000 Tbps or about 15x the bandwidth of Starlink's constellation today.

$1B is 90 days of operating income for Starlink... at it's current scale...

Yeah, I really don't think people are getting this. Starlink is the internet now.

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

Hey Jerry, we both know vacuum in space is at ~3K (-454ºF) while on Earth… Warm walls at 277K to 294K (40ºF to 70°F) bounce heat right back, so net cooling is basically zero.

That’s why real testing happens in orbit.
The key is radiating straight into deep space at basically 0K with nothing radiating back.

SpaceX’s AI1 satellite unfurls huge panels (1200ft², size of a small house) that easily dump 120 kW of GPU waste heat. The ISS already deals with 70 kW the same way, Starlink does it daily.

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

Facts

[Startup Wisdom @StartupWisdom_]

The opportunity cost of not being around ambitious people is too high

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

@PhilHKG @ErenChenAI Glad to hear that, I’m always excited for any tech progress and attempts to make things great or better :)

The hands still seem better on the Optimus robot though!

What’s the most significant thing that those teams have achieved with the G1?

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

Absolute CINEMA

[NASA @NASA]

Coming soon: one of history’s most complex missions

Tune in on Tuesday, June 9, at 11am ET, to meet the astronauts flying aboard Artemis III, the mission that will test docking capabilities with commercial landers in low Earth orbit — an important step to crewed lunar landings.

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

@PhilHKG @ErenChenAI Are you aware how ahead of your robot they are with the one you’re replying to?
And, how the demo they’re showing is the same they’ve been showing for a year…?

They are keeping all Optimus progress secret!

[Christian Concern @CConcern]

🚨(1)BREAKING: Christian community police officer wins settlement after being forced out of his role for questioning and criticising Islam during diversity training.

Luke Salmons, who has been supported by the Christian Legal Centre, was suspended for six months, forced to resign and put on a police barring list after he had questioned radical Islam in a training session.

He had been told that the session was a 'safe place' for discussion, but after expressing his beliefs, the consequences were devastating.

After taking legal action, his case has now been settled on confidential terms, however his story raises serious concerns about free speech and religious freedom in UK policing.

See more in this thread 🧵on our website and breaking in the media:
https://t.co/Ed9elAMIKa

https://t.co/sAkxcVf9PW

[Sawyer Merritt @SawyerMerritt]

Here is @SpaceX's full IPO roadshow presentation from CFO Bret Johnson, who has been CFO at the company for the last 15 years.

It's worth watching.

[See You On Mars @SeeYouOnMars_]

This hits so HARD!

[SpaceX @SpaceX]

SpaceX is the only company building the infrastructure of the future across space, connectivity, and AI → https://t.co/PSCyWrNsOg

[Auron MacIntyre @AuronMacintyre]

But why? Why did every western nation do this after WWII?

Why did every country start to replace its population, create systems of ethnic advantage for foreigners, teach their populations to hate the color of their own skin?

You can't fix anything until you have basic answers

[BasedBiohacker @BasedBiohacker]

https://t.co/pjvbSoGFOr

[Brivael Le Pogam @brivael]

Je me suis longtemps passionné pour la psychologie, et une période m'obsède plus que toutes les autres.

L'après-guerre.

Le moment où des chercheurs se sont posé la question la plus dérangeante du siècle: comment l'Allemagne nazie avait-elle transformé des pères de famille ordinaires en bourreaux de camp?

La réponse, ils ne l'ont pas trouvée chez des monstres. Ils l'ont trouvée chez des hommes parfaitement banals.

Hannah Arendt a appelé ça la banalité du mal. L'historien Christopher Browning, en étudiant le bataillon de réserve 101 (des policiers d'âge mûr, des pères, des commerçants), a montré que ce ne sont pas des fanatiques qui ont fusillé des civils, mais des hommes normaux incapables de désobéir au cadre dominant.

Puis vint Milgram. À Yale, environ deux tiers de gens ordinaires ont infligé ce qu'ils croyaient être des décharges mortelles, simplement parce qu'une autorité en blouse blanche le leur ordonnait. L'expérience de la prison de Stanford a montré la même chose sous un autre angle: donnez à quelqu'un un rôle et un cadre, et il s'y conformera jusqu'à l'inhumain.

La leçon n'est pas allemande. Elle est humaine.

Le mécanisme s'active dès qu'un cadre moral dominant fait craindre la sanction sociale plus que ne compte le témoignage de ses propres yeux. L'individu cesse de voir ce qu'il voit. Il voit ce que le cadre l'autorise à voir.

Maintenant, regardez Southampton.

Henry Nowak, 18 ans, poignardé, allongé au sol, répète aux policiers « j'ai été poignardé », « je ne peux plus respirer ».

Réponse de l'officier: « I don't think you have, mate. »

Pendant ce temps, son meurtrier retourne la situation d'une phrase: il aurait été victime d'une agression raciste. Quatre mots ont suffi pour déplacer le soupçon de l'agresseur vers la victime.

Et l'officier a obéi. Pas à un ordre. À un cadre.

Un cadre qui lui a appris, pendant des années, qu'une plainte pour racisme est l'accusation la plus dangereuse de sa carrière. Plus dangereuse, dans son réflexe conditionné, qu'un corps qui se vide de son sang devant lui.

Exactement le mécanisme de Milgram, de Browning. Un homme normal qui cesse de croire ses propres yeux parce qu'un cadre moral lui a appris ce qu'il devait craindre.

C'est précisément ça qui me terrifie.

Souvenez-vous: le monde entier s'est agenouillé pour quatre mots, « I can't breathe ». Des entreprises, des gouvernements, des stades entiers.

Henry a prononcé les mêmes mots, en train de mourir. Il n'y aura ni genou à terre, ni hashtag, ni minute de silence.

Parce que sa mort ne sert pas le cadre. Elle le contredit.

Et un système qui apprend à une société entière à faire passer l'accusation de racisme avant les faits, avant le corps, avant la vie, n'est pas une posture morale inoffensive.

C'est une machine à fabriquer des hommes qui, face à un enfant en train de mourir, choisissent les menottes.