a) SpaceX is currently trading at ~>1.5T in secondary markets

and

b) most of what the market is reacting to is the _chance_ that SpaceX goes on to become one of the largest companies in the world.

Remember the reaction when Facebook IPOed? It was hilariously overpriced (at the time, on paper, based on existing revenues) and yet here we are. A 1% chance of earning a trillion dollars is worth 10B - SpaceX can more accurately be thought of as a 10% chance of earning 10T rather than a nominal everyday business.

Also I’m concerned that if AI “works” (ie: country-of-genuses-in-a-box) that the moat of reusable rockets decreases substantially. What would stop Northrop from vibe coding their own starship?

There's no need for insults. Have you considered that "the boot" in this case is the structure of market capitalism itself and that this structure has benefited humanity immeasurably? It could be argued heartless bankers have done more to reduce human suffering than any other group of people to have ever lived. If bootlicking means "maybe its not so bad that humanity allocates resources rationally instead of based on some arbitrary sense of fairness" than show me the boot and I'll lick. At least this boot generates excess grain and beef.

All that said, of course it was highly stupid to say this in a place that would be heard be people outside the capital allocation system and whose feelings would be hurt by the unfuzzy truth that banks exist to make money.

If you think anyone who employs people is a psychopath and deserves ire, you're more or less condemning capitalism itself. If that's the case, well then my defense of the banking CEO is strongly justified and I'll sleep well at night knowing _at least some jobs exist_ because of capital allocators who can make tough decisions.

Socializing losses is definitionally a byproduct of government action, not of a private business.

> There is strategic business value in managing your company in a way that doesn't contribute to the collapse of the middle class.

I genuinely don't know what this means, and I'm not trying to be snarky. People, and Americans in particular, are considerably more wealthy today than they were in some imagined golden age of the middle class. If you want to keep your capital in a bank that is out for some imagined social restructuring, by all means go ahead, but I do not think a compelling banking product that will make.

A nuclear bomb and Jesus Christ are both resources and capital. The denotation is not demeaning.

Having employees represents deployed capital. Some of that "human capital" is lower value than others. Obviously AI will replace the lowest segments first. Call it heartless or accurate, you're correct either way, but these are not words that cut deep into the heart of heads of banks - its more or less their entire job to be heartless and accurate.

I've worked for companies who have kind, sensitive, and inaccurate leadership. The result was everyone was out of a job, rather than just the low performers. Pick your poison.

I understand your point, but this is the least bad world we're in. If you mandated no-firing or mandated year-long compensation for laid-off workers, you would be crushing the small business economy and destroying more jobs than you were trying to save.

"I've gone from making plenty of money to 100k+ in debt and having less money in the bank than I need to pay the rent + buy food next month" is pretty intense. I'm sorry you went through that, but if you get ~7 months of paid time to job search and still wind up 100k in debt, there are definitely other problems. I don't think it's at all fair to characterize getting laid off from an extremely highly paid job as a humanitarian crisis.

Should tech companies hire more slowly and carefully? Yes, definitely. Does that actually help employees? I'm not sure, in this case they're getting paid more than they would have had they not been hired at all. Are there plenty of jobs available outside of software? Yes.

I personally don't like the cybertruck and wish they made something much closer to Rivian, but getting upset about a product you don't like is a small man ting

Still, I do feel bad for younger folks trying to break into the industry - but "work for cloudflare or go hungry" is beyond a stretch.

1. http://latimes.com/world-nation/story/2026-05-05/u-s-job-ope...

Edit: Cloudflare is paying out terminated employees thru the end of 2026, imagining this is a case of people going hungry requires some very serious ideological capture.

Assuming I hijack a production pod, can I not just make an http call to myself with the `kloak:...` secret and get back the real secret? Is there a way to validate destination?

Similar to the "I fell in love with an AI!" folks, it's largely undercover salesmen hawking their goods to the gullible.

I'm not arguing that it's a good idea, but that is the idea.

I'm not a gambler and I personally find gambling morally questionable and intellectually embarrassing, but golly I'm tired of sports gambling being pointed in a sort of "see, freedom doesn't work!" sort of way.

1% of people will ruin their lives no matter what society does to prevent it. If you have a gambling problem (if it even appeals to you), I would as a _friend_, recommend you seek help; but as your fellow citizen? Up to you.

He’s clearly saying “lots of important things consume energy” not “let’s replace humans with GPUs” or “humans are wasteful too”.

If Altman is to blame for anything, it’s that AI is a scissor-generator extraordinaire.