How can you have a conflict of interest if they're entirely separate fields? They have different interests, so where's the conflict?

You don't need synergies to justify a merger. They're often used as justification as in paying well above market price. But it has nothing to do with actual justification. You can just have a holding company of businesses

Yeah but who can be hurt by this, these are both private companies? So whose interest is his "conflicting" with? I'm sure the shareholders will raise it with him and/or bring a lawsuit if they aren't happy (they probably are happy).

he is literally going to launch datacenters into space to train ai so they are a little related

edit: these replies aren't going to age well

Oh man, I sure hope he disclosed that

Apparently SpaceX is the ultimate vehicle for buying Elon's shit that no one else wants. They're also buying thousands of Cybertrucks.

https://futurism.com/advanced-transport/spacex-buying-unfath...

Need any solar shingles?

More than 70% of voting shares supported the package, very close to the level of support in the original 2018 vote. This excludes Musks share.

And consider that this is retroactive, meaning it's backpay. They're literally voting to give the guy $50b for work performed. He has a lot of confidence from his investors. And if there were issues, there would be lawsuits. Ironically the only lawsuits that get brought up, like the one about the pay package, are basically trolls, from a guy that had 9 shares.

Besides the parent is the one making a claim that something not above board is going on so burden of proof is on him.

Finally, it's a private company where Musk is the majority shareholder. He's moving money from one pocket into another, and any moves will be reflected in his attempt to raise money with the IPO coming this year.

Why do people online pretend not to understand?

[dead]

Shocked to see SpaceX buy the datacenter in space meme. Where does the power come from? Where does the heat go? Why add (high) launch costs to your buildout capex? Why add radiation as another risk factor to your already-unreliable GPUs? Am I missing something fundamental here...?

Aside from Elon Musk, there are a few other people with a lot of capital aiming to do the same thing. That means, either they are all wrong (possible) or this problem has been solved somehow and the solution itself is not public.

Google and Amazon are doing the same thing. Maybe it is a moonshot (pun intended), but Musk is hardly alone in the push.

https://www.wsj.com/tech/bezos-and-musk-race-to-bring-data-c...

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/01/technology/space-data-cen...

Not to mention the huge issues of cosmic rays. Sure, if the lifespan of the satellite is expected to be low, then maybe tolerable. But even then, how would this be financially viable?

I didn't say it was a good idea, just that if Musk perceives it's a good idea then it makes sense why he would want to combine the two businesses.

Only a person who is high as a kite can think thats a good idea.

Some guy on hacker news argued they could just use radiators.

Indeed. But it's also a hilariously Musky idea! Some moderate technical competence paired with sociopathy and an ego orders of magnitude too big, and voila, you get Cybertrucks, Hyperloops, Neuralinks, Teslabots, datacenters in space, and all the other garbage the man spews.

I cannot wait for him to one day be hit in the face by reality.

Latency isn't an issue with Starlink - the data centers are in low earth orbit, not in GEO

You mean unlike Hyperloops, Cybertrucks, Teslabots, Neuralinks, and all the other insane stuff that moron cooks up?