Scooby
914 posts
@JonathanKimXD
The hallmark of life is purpose
It's wild that every time you run a Codex code review from Claude Code, it finds critical issues. Not 95% of the times, 100%.
It’s easy to dunk on Geoffrey Hinton for his 2016 declaration that it was “completely obvious” that radiologists would have no jobs within 5 years, while in fact, the number of radiologists has grown. But this prediction was more than a simple mistake. It’s a synedoche for the entire discourse of AI timelines and doom.
Turns out private investors are really bad at math, particular those investing with Elon. @X global sales ere expected to be $2.2B in 2026, downtown from $4.5B before Elon bought it. Meanwhile, @xai only had $0.5B in sales in 2025, and hopes to get to $2B in 2026, but is burning $10 billion in expenses. And they are making no headway against @AnthropicAI , @OpenAI , @GeminiApp or other AI models. They are in last place, and that doesn’t appear poised to change anytime soon. So the combined entity has less revenues than when Elon bought it for $44 Billion, and is burning $10 billion a year in negative cash flow while making no headway in the AI race; Yet @SpaceX paid $250 billion for xAI? That is 100x trailing sales, for a company with no hopes of breaking even in any forecast period. Essentially, SpaceX shareholders got massively swindled, bailing out Elon for an incomprehensible valuation and no synergistic benefits. I mean what does this platform have anything to do with launching rockets (bitcoin memes excluded)? Now turning to SpaceX, they had $16B of revenues in 2025 split by $10B for @Starlink and $5B for rocket launches. For 2026, revenues are expected to be ~$20B representing just 25% annualized growth. Thanks to Starlink the company generates $8 billion in profits. The obvious question is how do these numbers support a $1 trillion valuation? Easy answer is the don’t. Moreover when you combine SpaceX and xAI revenue we’re $20 billion with zero profits in 2025 with an expected future growth rate of 25%. Now Elon gets to find out if public institutional investors are quite as gullible as he is asking $1.75 trillion valuation on those numbers. That’s 80x sales for an unprofitable company growing the top line 25%. Elon knows this is stupid and is already aiming to allocate IPO shares to “retail investors”, because institutional investors are going to take one look at the S-1 and instantly have WeWork flashbacks, and they are going to balk. As an aside, I wonder if Jeffrey Epstein shows up in the company risk section. Anyway, the real move here is not an IPO anyway, it’s a merger with @Tesla. A SpaceX/Tesla combination would finally give Elon on a controlling stake as he would be able to convince his Tesla shareholders that SpaceX would have been valued at $1.75T and issue stock in the deal. This would also trigger Elon’s goat new pay package, giving him even more shares and pushing him above 50% ownership of the combined entity. This is the real Endgame here. Elon just saw his private SpaceX shareholders will do whatever he wants and now he’s going to try the same magic on his Tesla shareholders, who all evidence shows are a zealous cult that has no problem believing Elon can deliver FSD, Robotaxis, and robots; none of which he has been able to do despite years of claims that breakthroughs were right around the corner. The risk is that it will quickly become clear that the combined entity can’t justify a $2T valuation, let alone a $200 billion valuation, and with no other big shiny objects on the horizon, the house of cards will likely collapse and Elon will be exposed as the clothes less emperor. $TSLA $TSLAQ $SATS @BradMunchen
Silicon Valley thinks AI agents are a $20/mo self-serve subscription. Main Street is paying local agencies $10,000 just to turn them on. Everyone assumes AI will be bought primarily online like Slack or Zoom. I think they are wrong. Some of the biggest winners in the AI boom won't be the software vendors. It will be the humans installing it. Here is the reality of SMBs right now: • 54% lack internal AI expertise. • 41% have data quality too poor for AI to even work. • 41% already prefer buying AI through a local IT provider. You cannot "1-click install" a genius AI into a messy CRM or a 15-year-old server. It will just execute the wrong tasks at the speed of light. The AI software will be cheap and a lot will absolutely be bought online. Making it actually work for a messy, real-world business will be expensive. Very bullish on the "Do It For Me" economy being back.
I just left @xai It was not an easy decision. The past three months were an absolute blast - I've been in many trenches in my life and can say this was by far one of the most intense warzones. I love fighting. Especially being in the trenches with my friends, working on problems that will actually advance humanity. But the current environment wasn't serving my growth. And that's a really hard thing to admit - I've always looked up to Elon, and I genuinely believe xAI will win. I still do. One thing I'll say: don't stay somewhere just because of the name. If you're unhappy, and you know you can't grow 100x where you are - it's the right call to leave. What's next? Get some sleep back. Then find the next trench worth fighting in. I'll always be meeting exceptional people - that was never because of a recruiting title. I just love finding smart people and helping however I can. Many more side quests to come!!!
Plot twist already. I was told that I was getting fired next Friday. My project manager said they didn't hear of any change of plans and asked where I heard that from. I said the Director of SWE (if you have been following along, you know that's bad) COO is calling me today.
