与「1→」相关的搜索结果

❤️✨❤️Brightest Melody❤️✨❤️ 💕　津島善子　😈 　 ─ ヨハネ、堕天降臨✨　─ photo 1→もちさん（@photophoto3305 ） 2、3→Sharaさん（@sugasugamomiage ） #虹の向こうへ1201# #コスプレ#

Grok Bot Summary of SpaceX CFO Bret Johnsen at Goldman Sachs Communacopia today. Vertical integration Vertical integration is the company’s core operating model, not a side strategy. - Rockets: own metal → engines → avionics → software - Starlink: own launch, satellites, and the end customer - AI: build facilities and power themselves, run their own models, sell to consumer and enterprise, and soon orbital compute Starship and launch Starship is the foundation for every other business. - Flight 13: big learning flight. Delivered demo V3 payloads, relit a Raptor, and got a soft, precise second-stage splashdown. Recovery team towed the stage back so engineers could study the heat shield. - Those learnings feed straight into Flight 14 and beyond. - Flight 14 (later this month): first revenue-generating Starship flight, flying production V3 Starlink satellites. - Later this year: aim to recover both first and second stages. Orbital compute Most of the AI industry agrees orbital compute is the future. Almost everyone else thinks it’s many years away. SpaceX disagrees because they control the stack. - Target: first orbital compute satellites next year - Scale: big compute in space into 2028 - Hardware approach: same V3 bus as Starlink, swap the payload, add larger solar arrays Why orbital can beat terrestrial on cost The crossover is about Starship reusability. - Falcon 9: first-stage reuse since Dec 2015; 500+ booster reflights - Starship: first stage already recovered/reflown; second-stage recovery progressing - Goal: reflight of both stages as soon as next year, which drops deployment cost sharply Terrestrial compute is getting more expensive (power, cooling, buildings, real estate). Orbital rides the opposite curve: cheaper rockets + better/cheaper satellites + scale. Johnsen said cost parity could come as soon as next year. Terrestrial compute and the $100B ARR goal - End of this year: on track for ~$100B ARR (annualizing the December number) - New update: another hosting deal closed earlier this month → about $1.1B/month starting Dec 1 → roughly +$13B ARR - Capacity: end this year well over 2 GW; next year 5–10 GW deployed - Confidence comes from line of sight to power, facilities, and permitting, plus being NVIDIA-exclusive for allocation - They stand compute up fast for themselves and for industry partners, which strengthens the NVIDIA relationship How they monetize compute Most hosting deals are short: ~90 days with a 90-day out (~6-month commits), including the newest deal. Why keep them short? - High conviction in their own products (Grok, Grok Bot, Cursor team after closing that deal) - Don’t want to lock forever capacity they may need internally - Internal bar: don’t let internal monetization fall below external hosting Earnings framing for next year: roughly $30–$50 per watt monetization range; they said they’re at the high end. Hosting customers appear to monetize even higher, which is why demand stays strong. Payback is under one year on new compute capex, so residual GPU value and financing options look attractive. “Not all CapEx is the same” — GPUs with <1-year payback are different from a launch tower built for decades. AI products and M&A Historically SpaceX was almost all organic growth. This year they did M&A because the AI product cycle rewards speed to frontier. - Closed Cursor deal weeks ago; product cycles already accelerating (called out Grok Bot) - Grok 4.6 improved on 4.5; 4.7 coming soon - Pitch: best infrastructure + competitive model + lower token cost = best position for customers - Market mood shift: months ago people bought the infra story but doubted the products; ~90 days later that skepticism is fading Starlink broadband Started as “better than nothing” (~2020–21). Now enterprise-grade with strong uptime/SLAs. - Resiliency pitch: boards will ask why Starlink wasn’t in the network if you go down - Mobility: aircraft backlog is large and production is ramping; cruise ships, yachts, trains too - Awareness, especially outside the US, is still a growth unlock - Longer-term: physical AI (robots, cars, aircraft) will need always-on connectivity terrestrial networks can’t fully cover Mobile / direct-to-cell Not a distraction. Same V3 bus, different payload. - Fly direct-to-device satellites through next year - Target service turn-on: first half of 2028 - V1 today (e.g. T-Mobile / T-SAT): text / light voice, great for emergencies and dead zones - Next gen: full 5G-quality from space - US: mid-band spectrum from EchoStar, FCC path for space + terrestrial - Go-to-market: flexible — own terrestrial build, or partner with carriers - International: same regulator-by-regulator playbook as broadband (Starlink now in 170+ countries) Near-term priorities: 1. Starship (enables everything else) 2. Terrestrial compute (funds growth and teaches them how to do orbital) Bottom line in one line Own the full stack, make Starship reusable at scale, use terrestrial AI compute as a cash engine now, and use the same satellite bus + Starship cadence to win broadband, mobile, and orbital AI.

Interesting split in @okx X-Perp activity: Crypto is still highly concentrated: • BTC: 55.6% • ETH: 14.3% • SOL: 5.1% → Top 3 = 75% of crypto volume Equities are much more diversified: • SNDK: 22.8% • SPCX: 18.7% • BEAT: 15.1% → Top 3 = 56.6% Meanwhile, gold dominates metals at 70.7%, while CL accounts for 69.4% of commodity volume. Nice to see OKX evolving into more than just a crypto venue. Try it via my affiliate link:

$skhy 买美股记得上 @MSX_CN （ SK海力士今早发财报：市场预期单季营业利润约60万亿韩元，同比+556%，营业利润率逼近77%——比台积电还高。 而它的股价，距6月高点最大回撤了44%。 一家赚着人类半导体史上最高利润率的公司，一个半月差点腰斩。到底是为什么？？？ 第一重利空，先看国家层面韩国干了什么。5月27日，监管放行16只单股2倍杠杆ETF——允许散户用两倍杠杆赌"一只股票"。50天，散户净买入14万亿韩元，杠杆ETF规模冲到49万亿峰值。仅3只海力士杠杆ETF的规模，就超过其日均成交额的2.5倍。是名副其实的韩国全国都梭哈了2倍杠杆。 这意味着什么？ETF每日再平衡机制：跌1%→强制卖出正股→正股再跌→再卖。下跌卖出不再是情绪行为，是机制上的机械指令。仅7月13日海力士单日-15%，二十年最大跌幅。KOSPI三天三次熔断。 第二利空：纳斯达克。7月10日海力士ADR上市，149美元/股、募资265亿美元——超越阿里，史上最大外资赴美IPO。12个交易日，破发。两地价差无法自由套利抹平，一个公司，两台绞肉机。 第三大利空是最致命的：叙事。7月初Meta宣布出租过剩算力，"算力绝对稀缺"的信仰第一次裂开。上周末英伟达又抛出超7500亿美元合作协议——市场反问的却是：你投钱给客户，客户拿钱买你的芯片，这是不是有人造需求的嫌疑呢？2000年互联网泡沫，朗讯和北电也是这么玩的。FTX暴雷也是这么玩的 于是7月28日连锁反应：费半-6%两个月新低，闪迪-16%、美光-9%；KOSPI年内第8次熔断，三星-13.4%、海力士-14.7%。同日，长鑫科技A股上市首日+465%——旧霸权被杠杆绞杀时，新玩家被千亿资金追捧。 韩国的问题在于把整个国家押在这只股票上：三星+海力士占KOSPI市值一半以上，每3个成年人就有1个股民，给婴儿开户炒股。外资今年净卖出124万亿韩元，散户净买入79万亿、杠杆资金超60万亿——并不是带着韩国人民收割全世界，相反是韩国全民加杠杆，去给外资接盘！ 讽刺的是产业基本面依旧完美：HBM4订单海力士拿下英伟达Vera Rubin约70%份额，美光出局；崔泰源说存储短缺可能持续到2030年；谷歌刚把资本开支上调到2000亿美元。需求是实打实的，只是资本市场被塞了太多杠杆和信仰不得不收割。所以这场暴跌的本质：一家基本面处于历史巅峰的公司，被三层放大器——散户杠杆ETF、跨市场ADR、循环融资叙事——改造成了波动率资产。它不是被人有预谋做空的，而是看多的杠杆上的太高，不得不被频繁收割。 近期的财报就是审判日。60万亿营业利润如果兑现，证明的是：价值没有消失，消失的仅仅是高杠杆玩家。

Anthropic Engineer Andrej Karpathy: "The biggest mistake in AI right now: people are forcing agents to work instead of mastering the model first. We made that mistake in 2016 at OpenAI. It cost us 5 years." What Karpathy actually means: step 1 → stop forcing your agent to do everything. Understand the model underneath first. step 2 → demos are easy; products take a decade. Self-driving proved it. If you skip the foundation, everything breaks. step 3 → the agent is not the product. The foundation is. Build that—and agents emerge on their own. "You're building agents right now. You're at the forefront. Not OpenAI. Not DeepMind. You." watch - bookmark

特朗普："美伊停火结束了" → 油价+5% 伊朗军方："美军在中东所有基地都是合法打击目标" → 纳指期货-1.5% 韩国KOSPI：熔断 → "经济不好" 美国十年期国债收益率：4.565% → "钱变贵了" 黄金：-1.2% → "避险个屁，撤资！" BTC：-2.1% → "我跟Nasdaq是连体婴还有人不知道？" Crypto Twitter分析师："BTC跟黄金一样是避险资产。" → 黄金跌1.2%的时候BTC跌2.1%，这避险避得比风险资产还快。 今日最佳反指：某分析师上午9点发推"美伊停火是BTC突破$65,000的催化剂"。下午5点BTC报$61,757。催化的方向没搞错——只是箭头反了。

很多同学说想来深圳面基，一个一个聊太慢了 干脆组了个局：「天策局 vol.1」 7月12日（周六）深圳线下，下午两点 聊AI创业、聊怎么用轻资产跑通一个项目 我自己会拆从0到月营收百万的完整路径 线上不方便讲的，这次线下讲 还请了几位很猛的00后： → 鼠鼠@LeslieLi92210｜05年，Web3 BD圈的No.1 → 牛肉粉老师@beefnoode｜04年，AI创业+Web3金融 → meme老师@oooodjdjd｜求职博主，专治"不知道干嘛" （还有几位在确认中） 门票299/人，附赠：成长团二群名额 提供专属长期交流群，名额不多，报满关门 想来的可以扫描二维码，备注：面基

One underrated reason Anthropic and OpenAI are pulling ahead: release velocity. Look at this timeline (data as of May 30, 2026). Major model updates from these two now land every 1-2 months on average. OpenAI sits at ~51.8 days between releases. Anthropic at ~59.8 days. Google? A slower ~75.8 days, with a painful 154-day stretch in 2025. This isn’t incremental. It’s structural. OpenAI cadence: •GPT-5 → 5.1 (97 days) •5.1 → 5.2 (29 days) •Then steady 28–56 day jumps into GPT-5.5 Anthropic cadence: •Claude 4 → Opus 4.1 (75 days) •Then 42–73 day cycles, with tight Opus/Sonnet 4.6 updates and a fresh Opus 4.8 just two days before the chart cutoff. Google’s Gemini line shows bigger gaps and more “preview” placeholders. The result: OpenAI and Anthropic are compounding improvements faster, architecture tweaks, post-training, tool use, reasoning, efficiency while competitors play catch-up. In AI, shipping fast is becoming a defensible moat. Why? •Data flywheel acceleration: More frequent releases → more real-world usage → richer feedback loops → better next model. •Talent and iteration muscle: Teams that ship every 4–8 weeks build operational tempo the slower players can’t match. •Developer mindshare: Builders bet on the platform that evolves visibly week after week. •Defensibility against open-source: Rapid closed-model progress raises the bar before weights can be effectively replicated or fine-tuned. •Enterprise lock-in: Customers embed the latest capabilities into workflows and don’t want to rip them out when a laggard finally catches up six months later. Past cycles were 6–12+ months between meaningful jumps. That world is dead. The new winners treat frontier models like software: continuous delivery at scale. Google has the compute, distribution, and research depth to close this gap, if they choose to. But right now the velocity gap is real and widening. Anthropic and OpenAI are not just ahead on benchmarks; they’re ahead on tempo. Velocity compounds. Slow is the new vulnerable. What do you think, will Google match this pace by end of 2026, or does the duopoly widen?