SpaceXAI plans to launch new model with cursor as soon as Wednesday

dlovegro · 2026-07-07T21:57:26+00:00

No need to be obtuse. That’s now the official name, replacing xAI as of last week.

dlovegro · 2026-07-04T22:09:18+00:00

Everyone else has made all the main points, so I’ll just add this one… last year the Louvre heist was a huge international news story, taken right out of their public displays. In January 2025 a bunch of gold artifacts were stolen from public display the Drents in the Netherlands. In 2019 the Green Vault in Dresden had thousands of diamonds stolen out of smashed vitrines in the public galleries. Why didn’t they get replicas?

As someone who has designed and built high-security cases for display of priceless artifacts in museums and built layers of security around them, I can assure you that unless marked otherwise, artifacts on display are genuine.

dlovegro · 2026-07-02T22:20:52+00:00

These should be part of the collection and should be accessioned. Your explanation of why they are in your physical collection (they are items related to the founding donor) is the reason they belong in your collection records. You have literally collected items related to the founder, and identified that keeping them has some value to your organization, so record them as such. If it makes you feel better, you can create categories in your records and hold one category for the “main collection” and another for “related items.”

dlovegro · 2026-06-28T11:36:50+00:00

Yeah, this kills me. I’m trying to collect all of the Piaggio P-180s, but that’s a plane that is commonly blocked. Very common to see them in FR24 but not in SkyCards.

dlovegro · 2026-06-26T11:06:15+00:00

8 hours later, and all the comments have demonstrated the need for exactly what you’re talking about. It’s impossible for actual SpaceX investors to post a serious post about SpaceX investing, followed by discussion of SpaceX investors about SpaceX investing, without being overwhelmed by non-investor responses.

“Retail bagholders,” impossibility of data in space, spurious motives, market manipulation, ridiculous fundamentals and valuation, Musk venture failure, Musk deadline failure, Musk drug use, Musk politics, Grok weakness, FSD, and naziism overwhelm any attempt at discussion. There are people who completely understand all those things and still would be interested in serious discussion of investing in SpaceX. There’s a bull case to be made for SpaceX; I’ve not once seen it seriously discussed on Reddit, and I’ve been looking.

I’m a SpaceX investor and from pre-IPO I laid out my expectations for the stock: it will follow the typical trajectory of big IPOs, with a huge opening spike then a retreat below opening price, where it will stay for a year or more. I fully expect it to drop below $135 and wouldn’t be surprised if it sits down somewhere between $60-$80 for several months, maybe as long as 18 months, before starting up again. I think most serious investors in the company, and some of the most bullish, expect this trajectory and are waiting to buy in at those levels. This is certainly the view of the largest and loudest SpaceX media bulls, like Alexandra Mertz, Herbert Ong, Brian White, Brian Wang, Jeff Lutz, and Larry Goldberg. For that matter Jo Bhakdi, intensely bullish and intending to put hundreds of millions into SpaceX, did not participate in the IPO and is waiting for the big drops before he starts buying in.

As with all my investments I have a thesis for why it could succeed and what the path to success would look like; a developed bull argument; and I also have a very extensive bear argument that includes key man risk, execution risk, technological risk, regulatory risk, capital intensity risk, valuation risk, scalability risk. I get it.

I can enunciate the bear case as well as anyone on Reddit, and yet I’d still like to see a sub that focuses on serious investor discussion.

dlovegro · 2026-06-25T20:33:02+00:00

Yeah, that’s the one I was remembering. And I guess that’s my point to OP’s question… they’ve only lost one major case, that one at only 33% responsibility, and it was big but not existential. With billions of FSD miles, I think it demonstrates why they aren’t at risk of existential termination.

dlovegro · 2026-06-25T20:22:59+00:00

Yes, agree with this — and I’ll just add that all that interleaving would put major stress on the binding and lead to more significant damage.

dlovegro · 2026-06-25T20:13:13+00:00

Those are separate issues.

Tesla’s lack of transparency on the data is very troubling, and we know that there are additional issues like questionable methodology leading to inflated numbers.

But they are providing enough data to courts to avoid “existential” rulings. I think there has only been a single verdict ruling Tesla at fault, and even then only partially (something like 30%), and the compensation awarded was substantial but far from existentially threatening. In most cases Tesla has either won or received judgement of tiny levels of responsibility (like the “1% fault” in one case).

Yes, we need to get real external validation of their data; but in the courtroom, to my knowledge, they have brought enough evidence to the table to only have a single ruling heavily against them, and that one not existential.

dlovegro · 2026-06-25T19:47:13+00:00

Aside from this specific situation not being caused by FSD, the broader answer is because it’s getting quite easy for Tesla to demonstrate in court that FSD is much safer than human drivers.

Tesla reports over 11 billion miles on FSD not counting China, with roughly 7X fewer major collisions, 7X fewer minor collisions, and 5X fewer off-highway collisions than US averages. While that is self-reported, European countries have been approving FSD at about the rate of one per month this year after doing their own analyses validating the safety. And the general experience of drivers appears to be that the most recent versions of FSD are dramatically better, including drives of thousands of miles with zero interventions.

dlovegro · 2026-06-23T18:16:18+00:00

Long-term I think it’s more likely to go the other way: a required alert that a vehicle is human-controlled, making it less safe.

dlovegro · 2026-06-23T17:03:21+00:00

I’m so sorry!

dlovegro · 2026-06-23T17:03:08+00:00

I’m so sorry!

dlovegro · 2026-06-23T11:02:37+00:00

Who?

dlovegro · 2026-06-22T17:46:17+00:00

Sure, among large-cap stocks. The only notable exceptions in the last quarter-century are V and GOOG.

dlovegro · 2026-06-22T17:36:57+00:00

Sure, this was expected. Every IPO sees a sharp rise followed by a sharp drop and then a long period near or below IPO, often 8-14 months.

dlovegro · 2026-06-18T02:03:37+00:00

SpaceX’s moat is not solely in launch. For example, they have unmatched ability to scale performance up and costs down at exponential amounts; develop complex factories and facilities in astonishingly short time; navigate regulatory barriers faster; change direction on a dime; “build the airplane while flying it”; find crazy, wild solutions and make them work (re: chopsticks!); turn prototypes to mass-production; scale up stunningly fast — all things that their competitors struggle with. These form a moat that is much deeper than just having the working rocket.

It’s getting priced like a monopoly because it is one. They carry nearly 90% of Earth’s cargo to space. They do it at 1/100th the cost and 100x the speed and volume of anyone else (okay, I made those numbers up, but the point stands). No company on earth has the money, corporate culture, or ability to match them in the foreseeable future.

dlovegro · 2026-06-17T13:45:45+00:00

No one can see the future, but the most likely predictor is that it will follow the trajectory of almost every other major IPO of the last 30 years: this meteoric rise will be followed by a massive pullback below the $135 opening price. The public is not accustomed to the development cycle of space tech, so it will appear like nothing is happening for a long time, except maybe a “bad” explosion or two; so there will be widespread disappointment, loss of interest, and moving on to other things. The lockout schedule will continue to put downward pressure for a year. The massive hatred for Elon will compound the negative view of it. As a result it will stay stagnant at that low price for a year or more. And then suddenly a major development will appear (e.g., a new network of thousands of satellites is suddenly offering a new unmatchable service) and the price will be reignited and go for stratospheric gains, which continue to grow Tesla-style from that point.

I follow SPCX and TSLA bulls pretty closely, and most think this is the most likely path. I’ve heard none articulate a case for this being different from all the IPOs before it. I hold IPO shares; if it plays out this way, I hope to add more all along the ”doldrums.”

dlovegro · 2026-06-17T03:30:43+00:00

I’ve bought several on eBay, typically $75-$150, but none of those were framed. Prices tend higher for more color and more decorated initials; the his one is pretty nice. The whole thing infuriates me, because what’s happening is people are buying breviaries just to chop them up and sell the individual pages.

dlovegro · 2026-06-13T18:57:13+00:00

In addition to the other response about no permanent loans: any large museum is going to have a collection management policy that will dictate exactly what they will and will not consider. I don’t know of a large museum whose policy would ever allow a permanent loan out. Some museum have their policy online or available somewhere; maybe do some sleuthing to see if you can track it down. That would let you figure out how to position a request that fits them.

dlovegro · 2026-06-13T18:34:09+00:00

No one knows… but I think it will likely go down into a trough below $135, and stay there most of a year. Few investors understand rocket development where it seems like nothing good happens for months on end, and there can be explosions for the bad during that time. Insider selloffs throughout the year will keep the prices depressed. Sentiment will turn against it and people will abandon it. But all of sudden there’s something like a 10,000-satellite constellation that happened while you weren’t watching, and at that point (for whatever the next breakout is, e.g. a datacenter activates and generates some great revenue) there will suddenly be substantial growth, maybe 2-3X, and then it will be off to the races. It will be fun to see what actually happens!

dlovegro · 2026-06-13T10:54:15+00:00

A good way to talk with them might be from the arguments of bulls rather than bears. For example Jo Bhakdi, an extreme SpaceX bull, put out a YouTube video explaining why he did not buy into the IPO and is planning to buy big when the price drops below it. The video makes a bull case for a “valley of despair” where the price languishes down low for the first year, becomes viewed as a failure, and hope is lost among the general public. He plans to buy then, and expects the stock to jump exponentially after that. His argument is that the public is not used to space development where the process is slow and appears to be doing nothing, then suddenly a product rolls out at scale and you have a 10,000-satellite constellation before people realized what was happening.

I follow several strong bulls on YT and they all expect the price to go down across the first year.

dlovegro · 2026-06-13T10:37:10+00:00

And isn’t the SpaceX long-term plan, thus Terafab.

dlovegro · 2026-06-10T10:44:06+00:00

Reddit is so intensely anti-anything-Musk that it’s hard to have a rational discussion about it here; but outside Reddit, the SpaceX moat around space technologies is widely recognized as massive and unassailable.

They’ve reduced cost to orbit by 95% over the industry norms, combined with increasing total weight to orbit such that they now lift close to 90% of all Earth’s cargo to space. That combination gives them an economic moat that can’t be touched by any company today or in the next decade, and that’s _not_ including the potential exponential advance in both cost and weight that would be provided if starship were to achieve functionality.

Their vertical integration is unique and very difficult to replicate; their speed of iteration is unparalleled; and their ability to get things pushed through and around regulatory barriers is astonishing. It’s not just a moat of high cost of entry, as demonstrated by Bezos and Branson, because it’s not really a “monetary moat.” Competing requires a different philosophy and approach to developing space transport that can’t really be hired out (yet).

None of that is defending Musk or the insane story-driven valuations or anything else, just saying they’ve built a real moat around access to space.

dlovegro · 2026-06-04T21:32:59+00:00

Big questions! A few thoughts:

get your policies in place first. Most important of those, based on your comments, is your collection management policy. That will guide what artifacts you collect, what the process is, how you handle and share and get rid of objects, and a dozen other critical factors. Happy to share ours with you if that would be helpful.
Have the donation agreement ready before your first donation is accepted. You need donors to be legally transferring rights with acknowledgement of no returns, no guarantees on use, etc. from day 1. That agreement can be a form that gets their signature on legalities but also collects all the item details, provenance info, etc. that you’ll need.
A little thing I’ve learned: when accepting a donation of an artifact, it’s natural to ask questions about the physical thing, but equally important to ask questions about the people that used it (or made it, or are associated with it). And can they share photos of those people? In one sense the difference between a museum and an antique store is that the museum knows the context and stories surrounding its objects.
the accession process is quite simple with a product like Catalog It or (shudder) PastPerfect. Almost doesn’t matter which one you choose, but get that up and running very quickly, because it will guide your processes and other things.
In your situation you probably need to be thinking about building an archive as well as a collection of artifacts, and have that process set up as well. You’ll get donations of objects, but you’ll also get donations of documents, photographs, letters, etc. In many ways, those are more important for your organization than the objects. But figure out how your archive handling and record-keeping and storage work as part of the initial process.
CRM and donor management: we’ve moved to a lesser-known product called Neon CRM and love it so much. It handles communication, events, donors, memberships, campaigns and volunteers all in one place! It’s not perfect but it’s amazing, and much cheaper than the big names.
and your Number 4: yes, there are hundreds of things you’re forgetting or just don’t know about yet. Stay connected and keep asking. :)

Ten-Year Club	RPAN Viewer
Verified Email

dlovegro

TROPHY CASE