Because a LOT of people are missing the point:

No, Elon Musk is NOT serious about putting a million data centres into orbit. It can't work: laws of physics say "nope".

But SpaceX is expected to go public this year.

Elon is talking up his company's future prospects in front of gullible investors because he needs a growth narrative beyond Starlink, which is already priced in. Something to justify the Starship proram beyond NASA's lunar ambitions.

So it's salesman's bullshit, lies for fools.

@cstross Bullshit has always been what he excels at.
@cstross it’s interesting how he keeps talking about solar energy, still, while the rest of the right wing mysteriously seem not to. How far off the predictions in your essay about him & space & solar energy collection are we, I wonder. (Did he get lapped by the cost of batteries dropping as they have? It seems likely.)
@dubiousblur Remember he owns massive battery factories. However, China more or less has a monopoly on PV panel manufacturing.
@cstross @dubiousblur I remember reading somewhere that in China BYD makes batteries for Tesla, so they may well be losing their edge there as well.

@cstross with outdated technology because they failed on the 4680 cells, and with now canceled supply contracts:

https://electrek.co/2025/12/29/tesla-4680-battery-supply-chain-collapses-partner-writes-down-dea/

Apparently they are using up surplus 4680s in model ys now:

https://www.autoevolution.com/news/tesla-quietly-starts-building-model-y-with-its-controversial-4680-cells-again-264844.html

@dubiousblur

Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain collapses as partner writes down deal by 99%

A major link in Tesla’s 4680 battery supply chain has just snapped. South Korean battery material supplier L&F Co. announced...

Electrek
@cstross and there is the Kessler syndrome to look forward to.

@cstross the fact they are stupid enough to fall for it is the thing I'm finding infuriating (& I've had enough personal experience of investors, them thinking they are brilliant all the while knowing nothing and constant group think to be pretty bitter about this) - like - this, OBVIOUS, grift - works

the worship of the rich, as though they are somehow more insightful than the rest of us, while watching them exposed as dubious people & marks falling for cheap tricks is depressing.

@cstross Just another reckless person collecting stupid money by selling them snake oil.
@cstross it also provides a fig leaf of justification for a public SpaceX to shovel money to xAI when “because I want to” becomes harder to justify. They’ll need somebody to provide expert design partnership to solve these difficult technical problems. (Or the other way around if required.)
@cstross It was obvious bollocks (just like hyperloop, the boring company etc…), just I didn’t know why he was boosting it as I didn’t realise he was planning an IPO this year. Tosser.
@bjn @cstross and despite being shown to repeatedly over promise and under delivery, the markets will no doubt lap it up anyway.
@cstross I'm pretty sure he also wants his name in the news with stories newer than his email begging Epstein to let him come rape some kids, as if he thinks everyone will forget he's a nonce.
@cstross see also: paypal’s original mission and what it became. overpromise, underdeliver, criticise governments, live off government funding. Musk is a charlatan
@cstross Elon, bullshit? Sir! I request you consider retracting that statement!

@ASprinkleofSage @cstross

Ratshit, then.

@Cadbury_Moose @cstross I mean, once it's rotted down, bullshit is actually useful. Not so sure about ratshit but possibly so. Maybe radioactive waste is more appropriate? it does ruin a good idiom though.
@cstross scam, like always... Just to keep his stock from collapsing.

@cstross

Lying worked for Tesla, so he wants to pull the same thing again.

@cstross it's the 'put it in a box and sell it' paradigm, where neither the box nor what goes in it can exist.

He, like the 🍊, depend on the masses who lack learning. Not education: learning.

In the most Twainish of ways.

@cstross Investors don’t need to be gullible to buy SpaceX shares. They only need to believe that some gullible fools down the line will buy their shares at a higher price.

The problem here is that both Elon and investors (as whole financial sector) is currently trapped in the myth of Eternal Growth. They are so trapped in this world where everything must grow, even growth must grow, that they don't see when they cross the barrier of telling themselves fairytales and having ideas that are physically impossible to realize. I'm not sure if this is gullibilty or if they really believe that the growth will never stop or maybe even fear because if they stop doing this, the REAL wold says "I call" and their world will fall apart...

@cstross

@cstross won't Kessler Syndrome make space launch dead as a business long before that?
@fazalmajid No, because the density of particles in orbit falls off as the inverse cube of their altitude—the volume of space around Earth is vast, and the probability of an impact is a function of the particle density at any given altitude and how long your payload spends there on the way up. Starship could plausibly deliver comsat constellations to altitudes much higher than the overcrowded 200km orbits Starlink is crammed into, where impact probability is far lower.
@cstross thanks for pointing it out that clearly. I went through several articles yesterday to find out why the hell someone would think putting a data center in space would be beneficial.

And the only argument every journalist was citing besides "Sam Altman said it in a podcast" was 24/7 solar power, independent of weather. Which is not true for most lower orbits (earth's shadow), and still doesn't solve cooling, too little power, limited up/down link and maintenance problems.

So that it's just bullshit to sound futuristic to the dumbest of the dumbest makes a lot of sense.

@hermlon @cstross

Or to have it structured, so profits and content are outside the jurisdiction of any country.

Why have your ai create digital pedophile and invastive non consensual images here on earth, where you are subject to laws about such stuff, when you can do whatever you want in space.

@cstross
Elon is a nazi want a be his ties with trump and epstien is why these ppl are not to be supported
@cstross Starlink might be the only thing one of his companies got right. I've been using one for a while now and it's a game changer when living somewhere remote. I wish we had a suitable EU competitor and not have to contribute to this man's lunacy...
@lucien @cstross Nope its still BS. It would have been cheaper to put all that money into running more fiber. Especially the last mile in rural areas. But that is not as sexy as Starlink.

@oldgeek @lucien @cstross
At 1:14:17 in the latest rant by @TechConnectify
https://youtu.be/KtQ9nt2ZeGM?t=1h14m17s

Imagine if government never built power lines to rural areas. They'd probably be singing praises to orbiting space lasers beaming them energy at huge expense or the delivery robot drones dropping off daily fuel shipments for their generators.

You are being misled about renewable energy technology.

YouTube
@oldgeek @lucien Tell me again how running more fibre is going to help internet bandwidth aboard ships at sea or airliners in the sky? (Please do, I'll wait.)
@cstross @oldgeek @lucien
But you only need a tiny fraction of the size of Starlink for maritime & aeronautical mobile and it's garbage compared to fibre.
Fibre is far more sustainable.

@raymaccarthy @oldgeek @lucien The point of starlink is low latency, which means low orbit. Which in turn requires lots of them to ensure there are no gaps in coverage. (And now they're working on satellite-to-satellite high bandwidth laser mesh networking to increase capacity.)

I think you underestimate the scale of aviation and shipping, not to mention railway transport.

@cstross @oldgeek @lucien
No, I don't because I was RF R&D in an ISP with fibre, mobile, Fixed Wireless and Satellite. They also had datacentres.

Railway is better served by Cellular.

Obviously in LEO you need a load to have continuous coverage, but to do the equivalent of rural fibre or cellular for trains you need orders of magnitude more.

Even cellular is being done badly due to too big cells and regulatory capture. I've dealt with the Irish regulator, Comreg.

@cstross
Yes… said it in 5 words: “salesman's bullshit, lies for fools”.
#elonMusk

@cstross Data centers on orbit is the stupidest idea ever.

Perhaps even more stupid than letting a remote LLM control your personal computer 🤦‍♂️

@cstross Did he read Singularity Sky and feel he could make that future happen with more computers everywhere?
@cstross But it's great hype for AI bros and TESCREAL cretins.
@cstross Not to mention it probably arrived as a ketamine induced hallucination.
Or maybe grok predicted it.
He possibly even believes it himself, he's so full of it, it's hard to tell.

Here's a fine blog about what appears to be Musk's latest SpaceX hoax by an actual physics and astronomy professor:

https://www.physicsmatt.com/blog/2025/12/11/the-dumbest-thing-ive-seen-this-week

»The only reason to launch a shitload of GPUs into orbit is to say you did it, because they sure as hell aren’t going to add meaningful capacity to the datacenters on Earth, will cost far more, and would have short usable lifespans. […] So why are a bunch of techbros and their pet journalists hyping this?«

The Dumbest Thing I’ve Seen This Week — physicsmatt

Given that it is 2025, the dumbest thing I’ve seen this week is some stiff competition, but “AI datacenters in space” is some impressive idiocy. I’ve seen a few breathless media reports on how AI companies are planning to launch entire datacenters into space. Some of these articles point t o a si

physicsmatt

Hier ein Blog auf Deutsch, das diesen KI-Satelliten Gigaquatsch sachlich zerlegt.

https://www.bernd-leitenberger.de/blog/2026/01/27/musks-ki-rechenzentren-im-orbit/

»Meiner Ansicht nach macht dieser kuriose Vorschlag nur einen Sinn: Kunden für Starlink und Falcons zu beschaffen. 1 Million Satelliten erfordern weit über 100.000 Falcon 9 Starts […] Es muss schlecht um Starlink stehen, wenn es solche Vorschläge von Musk gibt…«

Musks KI-Rechenzentren im Orbit

Bei meinem regelmäßigen Besuch des Space Reviews stieß ich auf diesen Artikel: SpaceX, orbital data centers, and the journey to Mars. Ich hatte in meiner Nachlese schon erwähnt das Elon Musk, nachd…

Bernd Leitenbergers Blog

@cstross the thing is, the big money knows it's BS or, at least, doesn't care if it's BS. They'll get in early, ride the hype wave and then try to cash out before it all falls apart.

"The stock markets are a way for everyone to participate in owning a company and promote growth." Is nonsense. The markets have become casinos and are disconnected from the economy.

@cstross I remember when he claimed his rocket would be on Mars by 2025 and everyone who doesn't know about Space believed him because he's nothing more than a huckster, selling Science Fiction as fact and Journalism not bothering to look beyond the hype.

This man, who was SO keen to visit the Paedo Island....

#ElonMusk #Space #SpaceX #Hustlers #Grifters #ClanOfPaedophiles

@cstross yup. Tesla is dead, X is basically dead. He needs to create more hype, so here comes the physics breaking con to take more investors money.

@bellegraylane @cstross
Musk merged Xitter with xAI to justify its high valuation to investors as an AI company now.
The same crap with Tesla being rebranded an AI robotaxi and humanoid robot company.

So makes sense to pull the same trick with SpaceX to gullible investors. That it's really an AI company so that SpaceX can afford to bail out Tesla when it buys all those unsold Cybertrucks.

Won't be surprised when Neuralink is touted as an AI company next

@bornach @bellegraylane @cstross just waiting for The Boring Company to pivot to AI…
@dnorman @bornach @cstross AI tunnels should be interesting. Hallucinating into bedrock sounds expensive.

@cstross

"laws of physics say "nope""
But there is a way, figured it out. If "elon" wants the secret then it will cost him the trillion the "board of directors" (doge) .. paid him. 300,000,000 would get a tax refund of $3,333.33

Seriously, it's been figured out, it's possible, but not for mainstream science. The science Tesla spoke of, if you want to find the secrets, think in terms of energy, frequency, vibration. You know, all the new tech, Lidar, MRI, GPR which can be greatly improved upon, lasers, plasma...

@cstross I'd be interested in finding out if Scott Manley got anything wrong here.

His take, as I understand it, is basically (1) the physics makes it complicated but not non-doable, and (2) can't be profitable now but may well be so within the foreseeable future -- making it likely that whoever gets there first, even before it's profitable, stands to make the usual absurd amounts of money (especially if orbital access is never properly regulated) once it does become cheap enough for it to be profitable.

Why Everyone Is Talking About Data Centers In Space

YouTube

@woozle Libertarian orbital CSAM storage and generation is not a great argument in a bad idea’s favor.

@cstross

@jb I don't approve of capitalism occupying Earth orbit; my point was that (at least according to Manley, and what I do understand of physics and orbital mechanics) it's not implausible that what the Muskrat is doing here is actually sensible from a capitalist standpoint.

His whole existence is a grift, and he needs to be stopped, but this particular part of it seems far less of a con than (e.g.) the "cybertruck".

@cstross

@woozle @jb Tough luck: all we've got in orbit today is capitalism, plus a couple of government-funded puppet shows showcasing "space science" while paying huge back-handers to corporations.

This is the reason we can't have nice things. (I prefer the term "crapitalism" to "enshittification", but you get the picture either way.)

@cstross Indeed, I know -- it's where we are now.

Perhaps not too late to stop it from metastasizing, but it's going to be a hard battle.

@jb

@woozle @jb

Capitalism is a self-limiting problem.

(Whether it limits *us* at the same time is an open question for the time being.)

@cstross ...as with any cancer or parasite... @jb

@woozle

Space is a little more hostile than the deepest parts of the ocean. Except in one way: there's no atmosphere to block the nastiest bits of radiation out there.

Computers really do not like radiation. They like it less than DNA does, and are more sensitive to it. And the smaller the fab size of the chip is, the more sensitive it'll be to ionizing radiation.

@cstross

@woozle

So, if you put a bunch of computers in orbit, ignoring the hard problems like heat, cooling, moving heat away from sensitive components, per KG fuel costs to get it in orbit, fitting the shit in to geostationary, or other high orbit.

You still have "how do you deal with equipment failures and loss of components" and "get enough up there to ensure redundancy".

I don't know if you've built a datacenter, but that's a bunch of mass to move.
@cstross