Urbit looks like some strange combination of rent seeking, land grab, and absurdist comedy. I keep waiting for the whole thing to come out as having been a joke.
1) "We have to destroy it in order to save it" syndrome. Urbit's central thesis is "the internet is broken because Google and Facebook" but Google and Facebook didn't exploit flaws in the internet itself, just flaws in the incentive structure of our society.
2) Like Mencius Moldbug, Urbit is an intellectual shellgame Yarvin is playing to obfuscate what he's really up to. In Moldbug's case it's the return of kings as legitimate absolute rulers. For Urbit, it's getting people to sign on to being serfs in his digital kingdom.
Urbit's system creates an elite: the galaxy owners. They will, of course, use their positions to seek rent and grab "land" (control over territory, where territory is just planets and the like).
Somebody's got to own the resources, because they come from the physical world. That will be either power users who know enough about ownership, community groups, or commercial groups. Unless you have a fully distributed system with no centralised nodes, that's what you get.
Urbit doesn't seem to tie the ownership to physical scarcity of computing resources, though. They just invented some "land" to seek rents from, or sell to those who would seek rents. I'm all for spending money to bring physical computing resources to the system, including reselling access to those resources to others for profit, but the whole "stars / planets" false scarcity model ruins Urbit for me.