frontpage.
newsnewestaskshowjobs

Made with ♥ by @iamnishanth

Open Source @Github

fp.

An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in discrete geometry

https://openai.com/index/model-disproves-discrete-geometry-conjecture/
504•tedsanders•3h ago•329 comments

Google Declaring War on the Web

https://tante.cc/2026/05/20/on-google-declaring-war-on-the-web/
84•cdrnsf•48m ago•20 comments

GitHub confirms breach of 3,800 repos via malicious VSCode extension

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/news/security/github-confirms-breach-of-3-800-repos-via-maliciou...
324•Timofeibu•8h ago•107 comments

Starship's Twelfth Flight Test

https://www.spacex.com/launches/starship-flight-12
29•pantalaimon•39m ago•16 comments

Flipper One Tech Specs

https://docs.flipper.net/one/general/tech-specs
161•gregsadetsky•3h ago•59 comments

Not alive, but not dead: disembodied human brains used for drug testing

https://www.science.org/content/article/not-alive-not-dead-disembodied-human-brains-used-drug-tes...
85•Timofeibu•2h ago•56 comments

How fast is N tokens per second really?

https://mikeveerman.github.io/tokenspeed/
237•hexagr•2d ago•60 comments

Qwen3.7-Max: The Agent Frontier

https://qwen.ai/blog?id=qwen3.7
563•kevinsimper•11h ago•222 comments

PopuLoRA: Co-Evolving LLM Populations for Reasoning Self- Play

https://vmax.ai/team/populora-co-evolving-llm-populations-for-reasoning-self-play
19•AMavorParker•1h ago•2 comments

Why is Inkwell stuck in review

https://www.manton.org/2026/05/19/why-is-inkwell-stuck-in.html
73•speckx•4h ago•24 comments

SBCL: the ultimate assembly code breadboard (2014)

https://pvk.ca/Blog/2014/03/15/sbcl-the-ultimate-assembly-code-breadboard/
113•yacin•6h ago•6 comments

Saying Goodbye to Asm.js

https://spidermonkey.dev/blog/2026/05/20/saying-goodbye-to-asmjs.html
280•eqrion•10h ago•121 comments

Map of Metal

https://mapofmetal.com/
378•robin_reala•11h ago•134 comments

Qian Xuesen: The missile genius America lost and China gained (2025)

https://www.usni.org/magazines/naval-history/2025/december/missile-genius-america-lost-and-china-...
70•thnaks•4h ago•45 comments

Sharla Boehm, the programmer whose code underpins the Internet

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-programmer-whose-code-underpins-the-internet/
72•dxs•2d ago•24 comments

Google's AI is being manipulated. The search giant is quietly fighting back

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20260519-google-tackles-attempts-to-hack-its-ai-results
231•tigerlily•11h ago•166 comments

Incident Report: May 19, 2026 – GCP Account Suspension

https://blog.railway.com/p/incident-report-may-19-2026-gcp-account-outage
351•0xedb•13h ago•211 comments

Meta blocks human rights accounts from reaching audiences in Saudi Arabia, UAE

https://www.alqst.org/ar/posts/1190
873•giuliomagnifico•9h ago•370 comments

LoRA and Weight Decay (2023)

https://irhum.github.io/blog/lorawd/
23•jxmorris12•1d ago•0 comments

Archaeologists find Egyptian mummy buried with the 'Iliad'

https://www.openculture.com/2026/05/archaeologists-discover-ancient-egyptian-mummy-buried-with-pa...
11•diodorus•4d ago•0 comments

Étienne Ghys: The Shape of Letters: From Leonardo da Vinci to Donald Knuth

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OIxzewWilc
47•tzury•2d ago•5 comments

Formal Verification Gates for AI Coding Loops

https://reubenbrooks.dev/blog/structural-backpressure-beats-smarter-agents/
90•pyrex41•6h ago•20 comments

Tracking Starbucks' 'widely recyclable' cups: none ended up at recycling

https://www.beyondplastics.org/press-releases/starbucks-cups-recyclable-report
158•theanonymousone•3h ago•123 comments

SpaceX S-1

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1181412/000162828026036936/spaceexplorationtechnologi.htm
101•cachecow•1h ago•54 comments

Node.js 26.0.0 (Now with Temporal)

https://nodejs.org/en/blog/release/v26.0.0
99•aarestad•3h ago•30 comments

Show HN: Dari-docs – Optimize your docs using parallel coding agents

https://github.com/mupt-ai/dari-docs
9•byhong03•5h ago•3 comments

Testing distributed systems with AI agents

https://github.com/shenli/distributed-system-testing
71•shenli3514•7h ago•10 comments

Handling the great code forge fragmentation

https://www.alexselimov.com/posts/forge_fragmentation/
37•mooreds•3d ago•20 comments

Apparently Google hates us now

https://twitter.com/pokemoncentral/status/2057123807404638250
389•zeitg3ist•5h ago•201 comments

GitHub's take on age assurance for developers

https://github.blog/news-insights/policy-news-and-insights/why-age-assurance-laws-matter-for-deve...
5•hanifbbz•1h ago•0 comments
Open in hackernews

SpaceX S-1

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1181412/000162828026036936/spaceexplorationtechnologi.htm
100•cachecow•1h ago

Comments

Geeek•1h ago
Their stated TAM is bonkers. A total of $28.5 trillion: $370B Space, $1.6T Connectivity, $26.5T in AI. With AI becoming more and more commoditized, the AI number is insane.
tonyhart7•54m ago
well if they talking future when US gov print money at unbelievable rate then this is very plausible (especially if they can work on space mining)
seattle_spring•34m ago
That number is grossly inflated for every S-1. It's about as close to meaningless as you could possibly get.

For example, I used to work for an insurance-related tech company. They claimed their TAM was $9T-- the value of the entire global insurance market.

LarsDu88•31m ago
With these kind of made up numbers, they might as well have simply used the fucking Kardeshev scale.

Just compute the energy output of the Sun and claim they'll build a Dyson sphere around it.

Can charge a nice hefty subscription fee for using the Sun, just like Netflix.

Eldodi•1h ago
Crazy this company will IPO for >1B with such bad financials! That said, Starlink seems to be a real cash machine, not as good as ads but enough to support AI bets.

2025:

- Revenue: $18.7B, up from $14.0B in 2024

- Operating loss: -$2.6B

- Net loss: -$4.9B

- Adjusted EBITDA: $6.6B

- Operating cash flow: $6.8B

- Capex: $20.7B

Segment breakdown:

- Starlink / Connectivity: $11.4B revenue, $4.4B operating income, $7.2B adj. EBITDA

- Space / launch: $4.1B revenue, -$657M operating loss

- AI / xAI / X: $3.2B revenue, -$6.4B operating loss

Starlink metrics:

- Subscribers: 8.9M at end-2025, 10.3M by Mar 31 2026

- ARPU: $99/month in 2023, $81 in 2025, $66 in Q1 2026

Balance sheet as of Mar 31 2026:

- Cash: $15.9B

- Marketable securities: $7.8B

- Total assets: $102.1B

- Total liabilities: $60.5B

- Debt / finance leases: about $30.3B

runako•1h ago
The numbers overall are worse than I expected. I can't believe Serious People are talking about putting this in the market at a trilly.

> Starlink seems to be a real cash machine

It has been said more than once that Starlink financials cannot be analyzed apart from SpaceX financials. Very easy to move the launch costs from one entity to the other depending on whether it is more beneficial to show more revenue for SpaceX or more profit for Starlink.

maipen•1h ago
As if any of the marketcaps actualy reflect a company's true value. It's never just about financials.
Analemma_•43m ago
I can't believe that my index funds are going to be looted to pay for this turd.
moralestapia•51m ago
Typo: I'm sure you meant >1T.

>ARPU: $99/month in 2023, $81 in 2025, $66 in Q1 2026

Oof, are they already on diminishing returns phase?

While I don't think the financials are bad, I agree, this is definitely not a 1T company (but the market can stay irrational ...).

boelboel•31m ago
They've been upping the subscription prices recently past few months.
tristanj•24m ago
Starlink is giving away the satellite dishes for free to grow customers. These dishes are expensive to manufacture and cost the company hundreds of dollars each.
fragmede•13m ago
Which is a fine thing to say, but CAC vs LTV (customer acquisition cost vs lifetime value of the customer) is the underlying equation. If it costs them $150 to give away a dish, but they get, say, $300 before the user churns, they still come out ahead.
wmf•6m ago
That shouldn't be included in ARPU.
alopha•44m ago
Starlink is a cash machine because the costs are externalised to the rest of the company, all in it's a money pit.
porphyra•41m ago
It's pretty much expected that a rapidly growing high tech company is gonna have a lot of losses and debt right? They're just spending huge amounts of money on capex. Not doing so would be like floating minerals in Starcraft: symptomatic of bad macro.
jfengel•41m ago
That's kind of the whole point of a stock market. If you already had a solid revenue stream, you wouldn't need investment.

These numbers would be kind of typical for a software play, since the great thing about software is that you write it once and then sell it many times. They're making a similar assertion for hardware: "fund rocket ship design, and sell it many times (i.e. lots of launches)".

The weird looking part to he is cramming xAI into it. It's a completely different business with little overlap that I can see, in a crowded market that they are far from leading.

jpkw•31m ago
Depreciation should be quite substantial - I recall reading that the starlink sats have a 5 year life expectancy?
TheAlchemist•1h ago
Finally ! Can we end the debate about how mind blowingly profitable this company is ?

Mind you, those numbers don't take into account YET the Twitter debt / xAI merger burden - which will run into tens of billions per year.

I just can't, can't wait until this whole Musk fugazzi finally blows up.

vardump•1h ago
> I just can't, can't wait until this whole Musk fugazzi finally blows up.

Be careful what you wish for. The collateral damage would be mind boggling.

TheAlchemist•56m ago
So be it. What's the alternative ? Continue a bubble ? Ride on the 'FSD by the end of the year' or 'thousands of Optimus next year' for the next 10 years ?

The guys is openly lying and clearly a drug addict at this point and people think he's not cooking the books ?

Musk empire will end up being a much bigger scandal than Enron ever was. It's just a matter of time until it unfolds.

aipatselarom•44m ago
SpaceX and Tesla are different companies, fyi.
TheAlchemist•36m ago
I know. They are very closely collaborating and are part of the same 'empire'. They will also go down together.
moralestapia•46m ago
>The collateral damage would be mind boggling.

Nah.

Nothing critical is running on top of any of SpaceXAI's offerings.

oskarkk•34m ago
NASA mostly runs on SpaceX, so it depends if you consider ISS to be critical. But I wouldn't say it would be mind boggling.
bigbuppo•54m ago
So, a significant amount of self-dealing, and Elon Musk has an 85.1% voting share in the company. That sounds like a really great thing. There is no sarcasm in that previous statement. None at all.
randallsquared•44m ago
One of the major reasons for fans of space exploration to be concerned about all this was the dilution of control that seemed inherent in an IPO, but since that seems to be fixed, I don't hate the idea any more.
datadrivenangel•52m ago
So this confirms that SpaceX was making a lot of cash and plowing it back into R&D, and that the X/Twitter/xAI merger is concrete shoes on the good parts.
impulser_•44m ago
"in May 2026, we entered into Cloud Services Agreements with Anthropic PBC (“Anthropic”), an AI research and development public benefit corporation, with respect to access to compute capacity across COLOSSUS and COLOSSUS II. Pursuant to these agreements, the customer has agreed to pay us $1.25 billion per month through May 2029, with capacity ramping in May and June 2026 at a reduced fee"

Anthropic is paying them 1.25 billion per month to serve Claude in their data centers. That's more revenue than Starlink. In fact that's their largest revenue stream lol.

gjsman-1000•37m ago
$45 billion for a 3 year rental.
thetrb•35m ago
how much did SpaceX / xAI pay for these GPUs? After 3 years they'll probably be mostly deprecated.
TheAlchemist•33m ago
What would be interesting to know how much did it cost xAI to build it ? Ai says between $18-$40 billion to just build, without running cost, but no idea how close to reality this is.
pbmango•26m ago
Anthropic is getting capacity from Colossus 1 not Colossus 2 it sounded like. The initial colossus capex was under $5B, making that an even more astounding payoff.

Edit: S1 states both are being leased so the 20-25B initial investment probably more relevant

gjsman-1000•25m ago
... and a sign Anthropic couldn't find enough compute anywhere else, so they had to bite the bullet. Interesting.
TheAlchemist•24m ago
The S-1 states that it gets capacity from both Colossus 1 and Colossus 2.
btian•22m ago
Closer to 18b than 40. Running costs are 1-2b a year.
jsnell•11m ago
The AI row of the capex table in the S-1 should be a pretty close approximation.
LarsDu88•37m ago
Wow! 3 years is an eternity at this level.
baron816•28m ago
Everyone laughed at Allbirds getting into the business of selling compute.
neosat•25m ago
has anyone done the math on: 1. cost to build out and run the data centers 2. cost of compute (hardware and energy) 3. depreciation of legacy GPU and thus value at the end of 3 years.

And then compare the $45B revenue from Anthropic to see if it's mostly break even or if one of Anthropic/SpaceX came out ahead on the contract.

impulser_•10m ago
Well Colossus 1 has 230k GPUs, including 30k GB200s and Colossus 2 has 550k GB200s & GB300s.

So my guess on costs would be like ~$10B for Colossus 1, and Colossus 2 would be like ~20b.

ykl•24m ago
At the time of the announcement IIRC the deal was only for Colossus 1. Is Anthropic also leasing Colossus 2 new?

At the time the consensus narrative was that SpaceX no longer needed Colossus 1 for Grok and that was why it could be leased to Anthropic while Colossus 2 would handle Grok training and inference. Does Anthropic also leasing Colossus 2 change this?

impulser_•21m ago
They are. This is from their "Chief Compute Officer".

https://x.com/nottombrown/status/2057194829986300375

pu_pe•44m ago
148 mentions of "rocket". 773 mentions of " AI ".
SimianSci•41m ago
They make some incredibly outlandish claims over their total addressable market, one can only wonder where $26 trillion dollars in expected AI revenue would even come from, with 22T of that being from "enterprise" when they have no real products yet.

The whole thing looks to be proped up by Starlink which seems to be a genuinely solid business. xAI looks to be costing twice as much as it produces, and we dont even have good numbers for this yet since the deal is so new. This feels like WeWork but if WeWork also owned a successful coffee shop.

einrealist•37m ago
"We do not anticipate declaring or paying any cash dividends to holders of our common stock in the foreseeable future."

Sounds like 'never' to me.

neosat•28m ago
No way, shocking! /s
wmf•3m ago
Because dividends are considered failure for tech companies.
throw0101c•32m ago
Now that the paperwork is out, can anyone confirm this earlier report "Report: SpaceX IPO gives Musk unchecked power and forbids investor lawsuits":

* https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2026/05/report-spacex-ip...

throw0101c•30m ago
Perhaps related:

* "SpaceX IPO Scandal": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47388640

* "SpaceX and OpenAI: The Mega IPO Grift": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47648226

arthurofbabylon•24m ago
It’s surprising just how low the revenue is for SpaceX. There are some 700+ companies with larger revenue figures, and yet just a small handful exceed SpaceX’s proposed valuation.

In 2026 one gets the impression that SpaceX is a huge company, among the largest in the world. It’s wild to see that its business volume is smaller than Northrop, smaller than Apple’s peripherals alone, smaller than Avnet (heard of ‘em?).

nemothekid•22m ago
Am I reading this right?

SpaceX TAM - "Enterprise AI Applications" is 6T. The other 22T enterprise AI. This is a rocket company pretending it's a frontier AI lab.

Jabbles•17m ago
If any company can put profitable data centers in space, it will be SpaceX. But I doubt that any company can. The difficulties of the physics and engineering of cooling seem like they will always outweigh the advantages of keeping your data center on Earth.

I am annoyed by the insistence that the value of this company comes from something that no one has been able to show is possible yet without multiplying it by the obvious risk factor. And they seem to have got other companies like Alphabet[1] and Anthropic to publicize the idea, to give it more credibility.

I do not want my pension to automatically buy shares at $1T, but it looks like it will have no choice.

[1] https://www.reuters.com/science/google-spacex-talks-explore-...

[2] https://spacenews.com/anthropic-to-consider-using-spacex-orb...

fragmede•6m ago
How do you price regulatory restrictions? The laws governing space are more lax than those governing how much chromium Tesla can dump into their waste water. By building in space, they get to completely sidestep any regulatory issues on Earth, like not being allowed to build what they want, wherever they want, how they want. It's annoying getting permits to do whatever on my house, but for businesses, it's a real problem.
kentm•11m ago
SpaceX is incredibly exciting, but I was skeptical when XAI and Twitter were rolled into it. The S-1 here makes it even more disappointing.

I did want a piece of SpaceX but the valuation here is pretty eye watering compared to the fundamentals. I don't think I can put my money into this, although I suspect it will still do gangbusters based on hype and momentum.

Its also a real shame that SpaceX's competitors have not been able to get the same level of momentum. I know Starship has been delayed but its still hard to argue with total mass to orbit they're achieving right now.