It is standard practice for companies to have some of their businesses subsidize other parts of the overall business. Not sure why people are so fixated on this case. It is also not unique to technology at all.

▲

ambicapter 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

X is less of an "other part of the overall business [SpaceX]" and more of a bolted-on, completely unrelated part merged together b/c of financial difficulties.

	▲	andsoitis an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Who cares?

▲

shigawire an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Because the sky high IPO valuable was mostly based on SpaceX being an AI company that has a huge TAM. Things that have nothing to do with space (please don't say space data centers).

▲

andsoitis an hour ago | parent [-]

> > Not sure why people are so fixated on this case.

> Because the sky high IPO valuable was mostly based on SpaceX being an AI company that has a huge TAM

OK, but why do you care so much about that? Are you disadvantaged or harmed in some way? I'm truly trying to understand because it seems to me many of these arguments are not really oriented around deepening understanding or changing minds, but rather about the boring business of standing one's ground and repeating the same arguments (and I'm thinking both of FOR and AGAINST positions). It is just so dull.

	▲	FireBeyond 28 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Yes, because this position is being leveraged into things that significant public funds are being put into - SpaceX is on the receiving end of huge tax breaks, notable government contracts, extensive environmental impact waivers and so on and on. Yeah, I can be annoyed that a non-zero part of this is a shell game that is likely to leave taxpayers holding the bag when its considered "essential infrastructure" because of the all too cosy Trump-Musk relationship.

▲

Geezus_42 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Because Twitter has nothing to do with the actual functioning of SpaceX.

▲

andsoitis an hour ago | parent [-]

Geezus_42, why do you and others care so much about that?

Is it because you are a SpaceX shareholder and you feel your interests as a shareholder are undermined? If you have not vested interest in SpaceX, why would you care that it supports some shitty venture like Twitter/X?

I don't understand.

▲

jacquesm 24 minutes ago | parent [-]

You seem to care more than they do with this many comments saying people shouldn't care.

	▲	andsoitis 13 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I'd say I care about two things in this case: a) to understand why people are so worked up about this man and his antics. I think it is very interesting because it can also reveal something about myself. b) interesting, novel conversation that broadens understanding I don't care about the man or his antics or predictable conversations that are boring. But I think you've hit on something true: I should just move on and let people churn on this stuff and don't get entangled myself. Thanks for pointing it out.