1132
S&P 500 rejects SpaceX, also blocking entry for OpenAI and Anthropic
(arstechnica.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2026
1132 points (99.5% liked)
Technology
85245 readers
5807 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Lol, they got told to fuck off for not being profitable.
ngl if AI dies i hope we get more ethical models, open-weight models (mostly) solve this, but it would be cool if it was trained only on public domain.
Unless the AI is going to give us a cure for cancer or something I'm not really bothered. Seriously the environmental cost is ridiculous I don't care how open weight they are they still practically need a fusion reactor in order to operate and increase the temperature of the local environment by 12°
That's not AI dying. That's just ethical AI... Which should absolutely happen. Same for GMOs
IMHO I'm kinda glad it was trained on all the forum posts I made during what turned out to be the golden age of training data. Now the LLMs sound a little bit like me.
Except you can be sure they downranked the influence of the left.
And I for one don't want some clanker pretending to be me online.
While I love the sentiment; I'm reading this decision by S&P as just about not bending their rules. AI is not thriving fast/convincingly enough to break tradition of big finance; I don't think that makes S&P an ally. And I suspect this means they'll just be joining a bit later.
'A bit later' is really all the is required to meet the standard. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/21/tesla-isnt-a-gurantee-for-the-sp-500-even-with-year-of-profits.html
S&P Dow Jones has a history of making companies earn it, including previous Elmo ventures.
I'm not bullish on any of it, and I'm desperately trying to exit AI holdings as swiftly as I'm able, but I am deeply comforted by major indexes requiring companies demonstrate profitability or at least meaningful actual revenue beyond the self-dealing that we've seen between the IPO hopefuls.
This stock is more fitted to nasdaq anyway, and I think they said they would bend overbackwards for them and change their rules.
Not making criteria at the start doesn't mean AI is dying.
The fact that they tried to get the rules changed so they could get listed on index’s as soon as they IPOd means they’re out of willing creditors and out of cash. They were attempting to dump equity on to 401Ks to pay out the private bag-holders who have been funding them to sell model access at massively discounted rates.
Even if people host models them selves, the era of constant slop deluge is over simply because all the players giving away access for essentially free are about to go belly up or pivot away from it to other business models.
They’re not out of cash or creditors, they just want to build faster. Slowing down is fine, but respecting a speed limit doesn't mean you're about to stop.
The data center builders and operators are running behind on basically every data center project, massive amounts of Blackwell are just sitting in warehouses right now because they loose money the moment they’re plugged in. New IT load for the operators isn’t even a third of the capacity of the chips sold to these companies. Most of the companies that got switched over to token billing by the model providers are pulling back and freaking out over a yearly “AI budget” annihilated in a quarter. The model providers wouldn’t have swapped to token based billing for enterprise clients if they didn’t have to. They’ve been pumping demand with hype and by selling at a fraction of operational costs. Reporting non-gap EBITA to hide what a mess the financials are.
The SpaceX S1 alone shows how insanely cash incinerating it all is. Can’t wait to see Anthropic and OpeAIs S1s. It’s gonna be hilarious.
I'm gonna go look it up now, but for those who follow behind me: can you explain what an S1 is?
To clarify why the S1s are so important here. There are a ton of laws that prevent companies that have their shares bought and sold on public stock markets from outright lying about the state of their business to the public. This is to ensure that companies can’t just lie to push up share prices.
Since the most important model providers are currently private, they have not been bound by these laws and have basically been allowed to say what ever they want. With them going public, and the release of the S1s, they need to publicly display accurate financials, not just vague and un verifiable numbers.
The question of “is this just a fad or is this a revolutionary technology that will reshape the economy” is easily answered if we have accurate accounting of the costs to run these business.
Thank you for the detail!
Interesting. You actually have a real answer and explanation. I mean, that's amazing. My goodness, something actually worth double-checking. 👏
This stuff has been there. Just not much reporting or investigation has been done on it, instead a lot of news outlets focused on interviews with the heads of these companies and thoughtlessly reiterated press releases. Those who have criticized it have mainly just done so in ways that play in to the narrative convenient for the industry “but what if it’s TOO good?”.
The failure of tech journalism on this topic has been frankly catastrophic.