Just put the cpu by all the ports?

Ugh, that is bonkers.

The future is where ram is now a scarce item and everything comes with a easy pop in/out external ram slot and people are expected to move ram between devices.

It’d be like a SD card reader on laptop on all new hardware, but for ram.

There goes my hope that they had some rock solid contracts for many years of ram in place before prices were stupid.

I’m not a lawyer either, but I think you’re missing some aspect of intent that would be required to make it against the law.

Rivian for example was (is?) selling their cars at a negative gross margin because they couldn’t sell them for a profit for years. If you can’t sell something at a loss, so many businesses would be breaking the law when they start out, maybe legitimately almost every single business. (edit: your stance would make Rivian be forced to sell cars for prices no one would pay)

If the intent was to destroy another company by doing it, then that could fall under anti-competitive laws. In this case, the intent isn’t to destroy other hardware, it would be to help stabalize the ridiculous increase in prices knowing they could make it up in game sales.

Selling hardware at a loss when you make it up in subscriptions or sales in that ecosystem is incredibly common.

Sony is a prime example of doing this in the same market, they’ve sold generations of Playstations at an initial loss knowing games sale and subscriptions would make it up, and then eventually they start making a profit on the hardware as well.

That’s a really interesting idea to give preference to existing steam users with a legitimate history.

When they find my “old electronics” drawer, it’ll be a goldmine of ddr2/3 ram

I can’t imagine they would announce/launch something without having at least a couple years locked in.

Isn’t that what BigScreen mode essentially is? Never actually seen the actual OS.

BigScreen mode even lets you sleep the computer from within it, and when you turn it back on, you’re already in it.

Well it’s one thing if you don’t want to trust information that comes out on something like Reuters or when Glenn Shotwell said it was entering into profitability, but it’s another to continue to claim something otherwise like Starlink isn’t sustainable and is burning VC money.

At this point, it would be best to either stay out of the conversation, or state something more like an opinion than come across as factual.

Edit: Just as an example in the future you could say something like, “I don’t think Starlink would be sustainable without the current government Starlink contracts”. I don’t believe we have any information that would tell us if that’s the case one way or another yet and could be true. Or "I don’t trust the information available, so I don’t think its actually sustainable or profitable’

Edit: Just to clarify sorry for extra edits - we do know for sure that Starlink is their largest revenue source though, and that retail / business customers make up the majority of their customers. I wouldn’t doubt that the government starlink contracts have much better margins though and can skew profitability into uncertainty without them.

Lets be real here… Factorio probably has more time played than all the others combined right? lol

For sure. I don’t doubt they’ll get it functional and getting payloads to space, but the entire premise is on full rapid reuseability, including same day relaunch of starship. That is still a very very very big if.

If they can’t get to that point, it’s not worth anywhere near what it is being predicted to be worth.

Starlink has been profitable for over a year.

They are burning money trying to get starship working now.

edit: https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/spacex-generated-about-8-billion-profit-last-year-ahead-ipo-sources-say-2026-01-30/

That agreement should have said excluding any acquisitions or mergers.

Salt water is a bitch.

The point of these being in space is there is no maintenance.

Like they aren’t doing maintenance on any starlink satellite.

Government contracts used to be their biggest revenue source, but it’s Starlink now.

They still need the profits from government contracts though to help fund the capital expenditures to try and get starship working, but they aren’t reliant on them like they used to be.

I’m not really convinced SpaceX was over valued IF Starship succeeds, but every single part of xAi was.

The world is made for general purpose humans including vast amounts of factory space. There will always be things for a general purpose robot to do that’ll be cheaper than designing and manufacturing a low volume bespoke robot.

Like Amazon is trying and building robots to do a lot of picking, but they can’t even fully automate that.

It’s more a question of can they solve it (huge if) and even if they do, how many can they actually sell.

If they work, it’s going to be other corporations for factory work.

It’s going to be a long long time before any bot is good enough and cheap enough to be used at the consumer level in our homes.