site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of June 15, 2026

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

2
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The spacex IPO has happened and made Elon Musk a Trillionaire.

There are probably hundreds of potential topics from this story, feel free to go off on your own tangents.

What I am interested in is that this is a company that is building real world things, and not fake internet shit. It feels like a lot of new wealth and investment in America comes from and is directed to the internet. I think one of the main reasons has been that large investors are generally play-it-safe followers. They see which companies are newly striking it rich: Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, Google, Apple, etc. And they are happy to invest in copy-cats.

I'm hoping the spacex IPO has a similar effect. That investors start chasing new copy cats. But this time copy-cats of spacex rather than copy cats of facebook or google.

Unfortunately, most of SpaceX's valuation is from their investments in datacenters (renting compute to Anthropic and others) rather than in their rocket and satellite internet business. It would have been a no-brainer buy for me if the bulk of their valuation was still coming from rockets and Starlink.

If this is going to inspire copycats, it will sadly inspire a bunch of datacenter REIT copycats as opposed to space and satellite copycats.

most of SpaceX's valuation is from its investments in datacenters (renting compute to Anthropic and others) rather than from its rocket and satellite internet business

Source? Numbers from the prospectus:

SegmentRevenue (G$/a)
Space (SpaceX proper)4.1
Connectivity (Starlink)11.4
AI (xAI)3.2
Total18.7
Item of property, plant, and equipmentValue (G$)
Servers and networking equipment22.7
Satellites11.9
Machinery and equipment6.3
Data-center infrastructure3.0
Launch sites2.4
Land, buildings, and improvements1.9
Flight-vehicle hardware1.7
Leasehold improvements0.8
Construction in progress4.6
Subtotal55.3
Depreciation−12.7
Total42.6

@MartianNight

Based on a market cap of 2.5 trillion and 18.7 billion/year revenue, SpaceX has an EV/R of around 135. (For reference, an EV/R of 3.57 is typical for aerospace companies according to the first source I could find.)

Clearly the valuation is almost entirely speculative rather than based on current fundamentals. Of the three segments, it seems like the AI branch has the highest growth potential.

Here's another random article: Top analyst: 71% of SpaceX’s $2 trillion value rests on AI.. Of course, that's also just an (expert) opinion, but the fundamental argument seems sound.

Why would you pay >100x revenue for the space company when they already cornered half the market? Starlink already has over 10 million users; how much bigger can that number realistically get when most people will only use satellite internet as a last resort, when fixed and mobile networks aren't available? The only part that doesn't have an obvious ceiling like that is xAI.

I think you aren’t being imaginative enough re Starlink.

  1. First you have airlines, remote worksites, cruises, and other uses. Those prices can increase over time once customers get used to and thus demand the good.

  2. You have areas without broadbrand. In the U.S., this is rural areas. But worldwide, it is a lot larger. Sure this market may not be the most lucrative but with a large enough vol becoming the ISP for the entire third world could be valuable.