[ben_w]

> At least there's a real aerospace company in there. The companies pivoting will have no value when the market corrects, but affordable aerospace launches will keep on keeping on.

Perhaps, but the size of the launch market is still unknown at any given price point. Space hotels? Really expensive point-to-point 45 minute deliveries in a vehicle hard to distinguish from an ICBM on an early warning radar? High-value-low-volume free-fall manufacturing? All comes down to what the price tag is.

(And right now, don't even look at Starship until that actually delivers, look at Falcon 9: SpaceX has had so little confidence in the Starship hardware that despite 13 launches it has yet to be given a circularised orbit, this suggests development is much slower and more difficult than Falcon was).

> If anything, the anti-datacenter NIMBYism that the AI craze is generating will far outlast the AI craze, and NIMBYism is the only thing that would make launching datacenters into space cost effective, so Space X may get a long-term boost out of the whole ordeal, whether or not they have internal success in the AI market.

Could be, but space is hard even compared to otherwise hard options like the middle of the Sahara, and solutions to cooling in space also work in the Sahara.