NEWSMAX

A 30 meter wingspan solar panel and then we'll have very, very sophisticated optical and connectivity options on there. So customers including DoD and other satellites will be able to send us raw imagery. We process it on the edge and then we just downlink the insight. That's the roadmap. How, how far are you. Like there's a launch that's happening very soon and then there's the renders which are like, it looks like sci fi Star wars, like oh yes, there's like 25 shipping containers that are descending. Like what's the delta there? And what was the decision between kind of showing more of a Vision document? Because I think that's what triggered a lot of people was like you were showing an amount of mass in orbit that feels like beyond the iss. Like it felt. It looks huge. Oh yeah, right, yeah. To, to be fair, it's extremely difficult to imagine what's about to come down the line with starship. So like the launch, launch cost might come down by between 10 and 100x. Launch capacity is set to go up by a thousand X or more. And the reason is if you build a new starship every day for a year, which is like a very conservative estimate for what they're trying to do, at the end of the year you have 365 starships, has 5 times payload capacity, you can launch 10 times as frequently. So we're really talking about a thousand times like more tonnage per year that we can get space. So and that's coming like three to five years, which is really not that far away. So the idea of the render like you can launch the whole ISS in two starship launches. So the render is to show, look, there is going to be a lot more mass in space. But yeah, I almost feel like you should have done the anduril thing where it's like anime, if it's like sci fi, where the vision's going and then it's like render for what you're actually sending. Because the render that I saw of like the multiple shipping containers putting together, like that's not what's actually launching next week. So I think that's where like a lot of the cognitive dissonance is coming from. Right. But yeah, I mean you'll iterate all this, it's fine. Yeah, I recently saw Palmer talking about that and I was like, man, that's actually pretty cool. Yeah, yeah, it's nice to have because there is a value for like the Vision document. Like what do you, where do you want to go in 10 years? But it just hits different when it's like the official Nvidia account is sharing this render and it's like, okay, like that feels like it's happening soon. It's not like they don't do their research. Like they have a whole team of like PhDs that go and look at this shit and like they have, they have a board that approves that this can get shown that it's like feasibly possible. Yes. Talk about, like, yeah, I guess. Talk about. So this first launch is meant to be like a demo basically. Like correct me if I'm wrong, but effectively a science project to start to show capabilities in space, to start to prove that you guys can actually put GPUs in space that can run workloads. Like what is the actual timeline? So and then it sounds like maybe defense is like an early place where there might be some commercial applications. But then what is, what's your timeline on? On when, if or when, you know, I would be, you know, prompting a model like ChatGPT or Gemini or whatever and it's like open running network, just. Cheaper to do it in space. Because that's the long term vision. Right. Is like it's just cheaper. It's not anything special or like oh, we need to be there for some geopolitical or defense reasons. Just like the energy is free and the heat dissipation is free. So it's just cheaper. So that's where you go even though the launch costs are expensive. Yes. Yeah. So maybe I'll start with the second part. So when will it be cheaper? That's coming with Starship. And so we're looking at the first commercial launches of Starship in 18 months. But we're probably going to be seeing, you know, mass volume production of Starship on a three to three to five year time frame. Yeah. So yeah, the roadmap is next year in October we're launching our second satellite. That's the one is about a 10 times the computer of the first one, but much more, much more capable in terms of continuous power generation and solar panels. That one is the first commercial service that will produce more cash than it costs to design, build and launch.

Think through. You should be ready to step into the boardroom, be a boardroom general. So the, the obvious, the thing that feels most obvious, and I'm sure there's some potential negative externalities to something like this, but if you just make it so that if, if I generate a song that's like an AI Gunna song that we just listened to, if every person, like if you can figure out a revenue split that basically takes care of the people that created that, the track that inspired it. Yep. In that case, it's extremely obvious because it's an existing Ghana song that's converted into. Into a new song. Yep. If you're just paying out effectively the same amount to the producer and the writers and all that stuff, that feels like an easy solution. Now the problem is if you're just generating entirely net new music, which is like the prompt would be like, make me a funk song, then you're still eating into the potential earnings of real artists on the platform. And I don't know how you solve that. I mean, it's potentially a bull case for Spotify because they can take out. Why did Spotify lean so heavily into podcasts? One, because people wanted to listen to podcasts. And two, because they didn't have the same dynamic where they're paying out at such a large amount of their revenue to artists on the platform. So they could go out and pay to acquire, you know, Joe Rogan or whatever. It was originally for like a year or two years because you were acquiring users that would presumably listen to podcasts and you're not paying out the record label and the artists and all the underlying. That is a good point. Yeah. But yeah, the monetization has to be wildly different between. Yeah. So if I'm an artist, if I'm gonna. And somebody's generating AI gonna. I'm cool with that. If you're getting paid. If I'm getting paid, like, that's a normal song. Yes. But it starts to get really complicated when it's like generate a Gunna song that. That sounds like this and there's no underlying song. So how do the. How do the royalties work on just like a generic Gunna song? Yes. I don't know. I have a rebuttal, but first let me tell you about graphite.dev code review for the age of AI. Graphite helps teams on GitHub ship higher quality software faster. So I know exactly how you do it. Tyler, you know how you do it. You take the song and. And you do the algorithm backwards and you basically reverse engineer the prompt from the final MP3. And so if someone went to one of these AI music generators and said, I want Taylor Swift singing a gunna song and then it generates that music, you can use basically the same system to reverse engineer and just say, based on what this MP3 sounds like, what do you think the prompt was? And if you can figure out the correlation between the prompt and the actual output, you can figure out how to do attribution. And I think in general Spotify, I would come out and say, hey, look, we are not going to get into the game of generating audio directly, but we are happy to let our creators use any tool that they want to generate music and come on our platform. Whether that's a microphone and an acoustic guitar or Ableton with a bunch of digital drums or an AI music generator like Suno. You're welcome on Spotify. But we're going to take 50% basically because we take our cut, our take rate, whatever, whatever the take rate is. YouTube's around 45, 55%. And then how are we going to, how are we going to actually parcel out the royalty? Well, we're going to look at what does our AI system tell us about what the prompt was and if it's gonna singing Taylor Swift or Taylor Swift singing gonna. Well, then they're both getting 50% of that new generation. A bunch of ideas from the chat. Taylor says the future is exclusive listening party, zero streaming presence. So artists just.

There's all these different permutations, and you can go collect all the badges, but it's not meaningful. Like, it's, like, five feet taller over you. I have two ideas for you. Please. So, one, we talked about this a little bit last week, which is just raising the stakes, Right. I think even as a kid, I understood that statistically, even though the roller coaster was going really fast and it was really high, and then it was going to go really low, and then it was going to go upside down, statistically, I knew the odds were in my favor. Right? Yes. The odds that I was going to make it to the end in one piece, maybe a little sick to my stomach, whatever, but I knew I was going to get to the end. Just. Just. I had a good feeling, you know, statistically. So raise the stakes. Right. If it was like one out of a thousand rides just comes to, like, a devastating halt. Right, okay. Like, upside down. And so you just don't know. Am I. Am I. I do. Am I in that batch? Yeah. So that. That would be exhilarating. Right. And we saw there was. There could be a mandatory chili eating contest. No, no, no. That's my next. That's my next idea. America loves to gamble, Right? And so what if they required every ride? You had to eat a bowl of chili before going on it. And then there was, like, a DraftKings betting booth nearby, so you could see the people walking onto the ride, and you could bet every seat, go long or short on if they were gonna hurl at any point on the ride. I like it. So you could be. They could eat the bowl of chili. Yes. They're walking out. They go on. You know, there's maybe, like, glass separating something like that, but you could see them walking out, and you're like, oh, that guy. That doesn't look too good. Oh, that chili's not. Not sitting well, because especially throughout the day, people have had more and more chili because every time they have to do a ride, they have to eat a bullet. And so you'd have a huge new influx of guests that aren't there to do the rides. They're just there to gamble on. Will people make it to the end? And so by the end of the day, it's just. It is just a mess out there. People are in hazmat suits. You're walking around, you know, goggles and everything, because they're just. The whole park is just grow up. Going everywhere. I'm a firm believer in adding variable rewards to Six Flags. Generally, I would be very interested in when you get on the ride, there's a 1% chance that it goes 1% the speed. And so you get on and you're like, yeah, you got unlucky. And you're going to be on this for two hours now and it's just going to be clinking along just one inch at a time. And you're just like, yeah, I caught the raw end of the stick, I got the short stick. So another one like lottery upsells for every ride. So. So we're basically just, I'm just trying. To, just trying to juice their margin. Okay. Yeah. You got people going, how do we get more dollars out of every guest? Yes. And so I think, you know, if you have an option, you know, you're waiting in these long lines, right. If you have an option to buy, people walk around with an iPad and say like, would you like to do digital slots? Would you like to buy a lottery ticket and kind of have fast feedback loops so that, you know, they can say like, somebody in the crowd right now is going to win $1,000. You can do the numbers, you can run the numbers. There's only a few hundred people in line. Yep. You got a good. You got a. Not a decent chance, but you got a chance. Yeah. And so I think it's just about getting that incremental dollar. I have a different idea. I think you're getting a little degen. Let's, let's go to Tyler. But first let me tell you about Turbo Puffer search. Every byte serverless vector and full text search built from first principles and Object storage. Fast 10x cheaper and extremely scalable. Tyler, what's your idea? I think I like the weather, the line, doing stuff. So I think data labeling would be good. That's actually great. Yes. Go this kind of scale AI route. I would take it a step further. You know those like big like massive LAN parties with just tons of monitors like the JP Morgan. I would make the JP Morgan experience with a bunch of quad monitors and you could go to Six Flags and you just lock in and they just have Google AI studio cooking on every monitor and you just go to the, you get in the line to go vibe code, you chat with models, you vibe code, you monitor usage. I think that bringing in the corporate big tech dollars, either through branded integrations, rides so you can ride the Google AI Studio coaster, that could be a. Way to upgrade another opportunity. Wellness has been booming, right. While theme parks have been in relative decline. How do you get wellness? And so, so the obvious thing is people have been promoting the intravenous use of ketamine. Right. So if you had ketamine. Mental health stations throughout the. What about facelifts? Did you see this article in the Wall Street Journal why Tech Bros are Getting Facelifts now? Yeah. So it needs to turn into.

That feels like beyond the iss. It looks huge, right? Yeah. To be fair, it's extremely difficult to imagine what's about to come down the line with starship. So the launch cost might come down by between 10 and 100x. Launch capacity is set to go up by 1000x or more. And the reason is if you build a new starship every day for a year, which is a very conservative estimate for what they're trying to do, at the end of the year you have 365 starships, has 5 times payload capacity, you can launch 10 times as frequently. So we're really talking about 1000 times more tonnage per year that we can get to space. And that's coming like three to five years, which is really not that far away. The idea of the render, you can launch the whole ISS in two starship launches. So the render is to show, look, there is going to be a lot more mass in space. But yeah, I almost feel like you should have done the anduril thing where it's like anime, if it's sci fi, where the vision's going and then it's like render for what you're actually sending. Because like the render that I saw of like the multiple shipping containers putting together, like that's not what's actually launching next week. So I think that's where like a lot of the cognitive dissonance is coming from. Right. But yeah, I mean you'll iterate all this. It's fine. Yeah, I recently saw Palmer talking about that and I was like, man, that's actually pretty cool. Yeah, yeah, it's nice to have because there is a, there is a value for like the vision document. Like what do you, where do you want to go into.

How do you think about some of the. I think we'd asked Dylan Patel at one point about GPUs in space and I don't think he mentioned the challenges around heat and heat dissipation, but he was talking about how sometimes you just need to unplug the server and plug it back in again or switch out individual GPUs. But like, what's the solve on that long term? Are you thinking about these being like fully robotic systems that allow you to make changes on the fly? What's the solution there? Yeah, I think probably two points on that. I mean the first is for these massive data centers where you've got like a kilometer long or a mile long row of racks. When the people I speak to now are saying, look, if an H100 breaks in that, you just leave it in there. Nobody's going down there and unplugging and putting that back in. They're just writing software around it and they'll just leave it, basically. So that's number one. But secondly, for the first few iterations of the satellite, it will be exactly like Starlink and we won't be able to touch it. And so we'll have to have redundancy on the critical systems. And then we over provision things like solar panels and radiators which degrade over time. Over time the whole industry is, well, space industry in general is moving towards robotic maintenance, but also terrestrial data center industry is moving towards robotic maintenance. And that's where on a sort of five year time frame, you know, some of the people we speak to in data centers are saying we are fully expecting data centers to be maintained by humanoid robots in a five year time frame. And you know, this is where it starts to sound a little bit wacky and sci fi. But I mean humanoid robots do not require too much modification to work in space. In the sense that a human spacesuit would take care of radiation and thermals. You would need to retrain it slightly, but you know, that's maybe sounds a little bit wacky, but robotic. Yeah, it doesn't have to be a humanoid, right? Like there's a bunch of other forms. It could be any form factor, but humanoids will be mass produced. So probably the, probably, probably the cheapest. That's interesting. I want you to react to Andrew McCallop's vibe.

But you've obviously focused on this case specifically. So what was your reaction when you saw his sort of comedic breakdown? Yeah, I mean I like the post and I mean I'm a fan of Andrew. I've been following his stuff and he's a great engineer. Same with Gallium by the way. I'm very impressive what they're doing. Yeah, totally, yeah. So I mean on the other thermals the criticism usually is in order to dissipate that heat you need a large surface area and they think for some reason that that's super impractical. I mean my co founder ezra has a PhD in engineering, spent 10 years designing and building large deployable structures, solar panels and radiators and I mean you just have to build a large surface area and that's what we're doing. So half our engineering team is building a very large, low cost and low mass deployable radiator. So that is the core IP of our company. Is that so? That's number one on the launch cost side of things. So sometimes people say if there's no competitor to Starship, which it doesn't look like there'll be for at least five years, then will there be an incentive for starship to, for SpaceX to drop the pricing? Now I have a bit of a different opinion than most people. Most people say well no, they'll just keep it high, I don't think so. And it's the same reason that they keep the Tesla is sold under the price. They could potentially sell Tesla at a higher price, but in order to reach a much larger market you need to sell at a lower price. So for example, they're going to have all of these starships sitting there. They can only launch them two years, once every two years to Mars. Their marginal cost of launch on each Starship is two or three million dollars. Now either they can leave it there because there's no Demand at the $200 million for a launch price, or they can say to people like us, hey, you can launch it for 20 or 30 million dollars. They still make shitloads of money. That's still very profitable for us. And so it's like a win win. So my expectation is that actually the launch price will come down even if they don't have a huge number of competitors. Yeah, yeah, like the elasticity of demand there, like they might just be able to sell more volume at lower prices. So they might wind the cost.