4 ms·
“If we fail to deliver access to the committed amount of GPUs by September 30, 2026, then following a one-month grace period, Google may immediately terminate t
by devops000 4mo ago
“If we fail to deliver access to the committed amount of GPUs by September 30, 2026, then following a one-month grace period, Google may immediately terminate the agreement or accept the number of GPUs provided, with a corresponding pro rata reduction in the monthly fees. After December 31, 2026, the agreement may be terminated by either party upon 90 days' notice.”
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1181412/000162828026041150/spacexagreementfwp.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1181412/000162828026...
It’s only to boost the IPO price. The agreement will last only a few months on paper. I doubt it is a real transaction.
- ta988 4mo agoDidn't Anthropic pull the same in both ways? you pull me up I pull you up kind of deal? Sounds like SpaceX bought themselves some time up to Q4, which is not the case of Anthropic and even worse for OpenAI. Not counting that none of them got their S&P500 fast-track ticket.
- merlindru 4mo agowhy would Google help a competitor like that, though?
- somewhatgoated 4mo agoHow is Google competing with SpaceX?
- an0malous 4mo agoThey’re both AI companies
- klodolph 4mo agoOne of which has more capacity and wants even more, one of which has less capacity and is renting it out.
- wiether 4mo agoOne is an ad company the other a lifestyle venture?
- sumeno 4mo agoIn the way that Michael Jordan and myself are both basketball players
- prymitive 4mo agoAll companies are now AI companies. Just like a while ago all companies were suddenly Ads companies. The entire tech sector is one big FOMO - once you reach certain scale you do exactly the same thing as everyone else.
- mcintyre1994 4mo agoI get what you mean but SpaceX owns xAI, which is objectively a company that trains models and has massive distribution by owning X. I don’t think their models are competitive with Google, and Google obviously has the best distribution imaginable, but they definitely are a competitor.
- nutjob2 4mo agoIn the sense that if you want to sell anything whatsoever today it must an AI story.
- jnewton_dev 4mo ago[flagged]
- Forgeties79 4mo agois there a reason you didn’t give the explanation…?
- sublimefire 4mo agoIf you look at the IPO filings you’ll see that Spacex as we know it is just a small part of the expected revenue generator. It is supposedly Grok and AI, hence Google competitor.
- Forgeties79 4mo agoI can’t believe serious people use Grok. It has to be propped up by Twitter usage/Musk fans right? It really strikes me as the worst one.
- pqtyw 4mo agoWell you or me also can publish a statement claiming we are Google's competitors. That doesn't mean they'll take it seriously.
- hirako2000 4mo agoThe article mentions Google is heavily invested in it.
- devops000 4mo agoMaybe common investors want to sell stocks to retail
- sorenjan 4mo agoGoogle (Alphabet) owns 6% of SpaceX which they bought for $12B in 2015. They want to maximize the value of their investment.
- YetAnotherNick 4mo agoThey are not. The amount of conspiracy in high ranked HN comments for AI companies is insane.
- venkyvb 4mo agoGoogle is safeguarding it's investment in SpaceX.
- fauigerzigerk 4mo agoEither that or SpaceX is permanently turning xAI's assets into a neocloud because xAI itself has no traction. The whole thing looks rather desperate. I wonder what SpaceX's margins are on these contracts.
- ACCount37 4mo agoSpaceX has recently started pitching itself as an orbital datacenter company. If you buy into that business model (or pretend to), it makes sense for SpaceX to start selling compute early. Their "earthside compute" clients of today are "skyside compute" clients of tomorrow. A part of Musk's old pitch for Starlink was: space-based solar makes perfect sense for powering space assets, and no sense whatsoever for powering Earth assets. So you have to find a way to use that power in space to do something economically useful. Comms were the only scalable way to do that, so Starlink it was. I can see how space-based datacenters would follow the same logic. If SpaceX can make them economical, that is. There's no guarantees of that - but if anyone at all can make space-based datacenters economical, it's SpaceX.
- H8crilA 4mo agoWhy would it ever be more economical to put datacenters in orbit, rather than on some dirt cheap land?
- readthenotes1 4mo agoBecause dirt cheap land usually does not have dirt, cheap water or dirt cheap electricity.
- Mistletoe 4mo agoFeels like these IPOs are thankfully the top coming before the AI crash and we get back to the real world.
- b40d-48b2-979e 4mo agoOne can hope, but that sentiment is quite unpopular on HN.
- Rover222 4mo agoEverything is a conspiracy now. Of course this is a real deal. Compute is the most valuable resource in the world for these companies at the moment.
- AtNightWeCode 4mo agoThe same terms Anthropic have today I believe.