1/ $SPCX is kinda sick the more I read about it. Yeah valuation is nuts and the share class sucks. I get it. But massive connectivity TAM where launch economics getting better can accelerate share gains due to better pricing. Telcos fucked. V3 constellation via Starship big deal

Let me guess. Everybody is gonna freak out and trade down into midterms….positioning going to get too negative….midterms will be better than feared and ANT will re-accelerate NNARR in Q4 given less META churn, less distillation headwind, and Opus 5.5 gaining share back. We rip

OPENAI'S ANNUALIZED REVENUE NEARS $50B, BELOW EARLIER $70B REPORTS: FT OpenAI recently told investors its annualized revenue was approaching $50B at the end of September, roughly $20B below the figure widely reported last month. The discrepancy reportedly stems from differences in how OpenAI and Anthropic calculate revenue. Anthropic includes sales through cloud partners such as AWS and Google Cloud, while OpenAI does not. Investors had attempted to adjust OpenAI's figures to make them comparable with Anthropic's, contributing to the previously reported $70B estimate. OpenAI declined to comment. Source: Financial Times.

$META & MICROSOFT ARE CUTTING INTERNAL CLAUDE USE AS THEY PUSH THEIR OWN AI TOOLS Meta and $MSFT, two major Anthropic customers, are reducing employee use of Claude, according to The Information. Microsoft had been on pace to spend at least $1B annually on internal Anthropic usage earlier this year, but has since cut that level by more than one-third. At Meta, Claude Code users have roughly halved to ~30,000 from ~60,000 earlier this year. Meanwhile: MetaCode users: 30,000+ Muse Code users: 6,000+ Meta still spent more than $105M on Claude Code over a recent 28-day period. Source: The Information

it's SOOO early that this conversation is asinine. That's about the same as shorting PANW today because every lab and DBRX and SNOW etc will have NG SIEM in 2035.

Overly loaded

Last month I wrote about how we can build a positive and safe future for everyone: meta.com/thefutureisforevery… Every lab has the responsibility and incentive to move at the pace required to train its models safely, and the ability to take its own actions to ensure that happens. The reality is: - People won't want to use agents that are misaligned with them and that don't do what they ask, so labs have a strong natural incentive to make their models more aligned. There is a lot of debate about slowing progress on capabilities until alignment catches up. My view is that trust and alignment are quickly becoming the most important capabilities that will differentiate agents and models. Any lab that doesn't focus on alignment will fall behind. - Labs face significant liability if their models cause harm, so they have a strong incentive to prevent this as well. Meta delayed shipping Muse for several months to focus on safety and security. We didn't call for everyone else to do this before we would. We just did it as part of our day-to-day work because it was clearly the right thing for people and for us. I'm proud of the security foundations we've built. - Engaging independent evaluators and advisors is industry best practice. MSL already does this today in several areas because it helps produce better work. Other labs can just do this too. In general, it would be helpful for there to be a larger and more diverse ecosystem of evaluators. - Committing the significant majority of compute towards serving people rather than racing towards recursive self-improvement is one of the best ways to ensure we develop this technology safely. Meta has made this commitment and other labs can do this as well. I believe the key to building a positive future for everyone is maintaining the right balance of power. This is within our power to do.

I think AI momentum returns post Labor Day. Idk how it lasts though tbh