Having never really looked at valuations, my ignorant mind can get from Starlink's 10M subscribers to a $380B valuation. If you make $100/mo/user that's 12B/yr and that with a higher 50x P/E ratio is 60B. If you go to 100x, that's $120B.
Starlink's maritime, roving, airplane, and military options are all much more than $100/mo/user. Not sure how much that closes the gap, but it's _something_.
But it's actual revenue was $10b in 2025 on 9m customers, so he's pretty much correct.
The point I have more issue with is that a 60 or 100 PE ratio only makes sense in a high-growth scenario. Telecoms are valued at 9x by comparison. 60 or 100 only makes sense if you expect it to grow by 10x from here, and face no competition and keep prices this high.
And that seems like a bit of a reach. The richest people on the planet live in urban environments in US/EU/Asia, with fast and widespread 5G.
Yes, rich people on boats in the pacific, hiking remote mountains, and researchers in Antartica exist, but they're not a market of 200 million people. And even if you get there, that's still just 120b, not 380b valuation.
Make that two people. I much prefer to slap the rare check on the scanner than fiddle with the phone. My banks "scan the check" part of the app was buggy for a long time, so maybe that jaded me. (~"move closer", ~"move away", ~"increase lighting"...)
Policymakers supposedly work for us/the people and they could have made surveillance ad tech expensive and thereby severely limited it, but
> "Policymakers failed us because cops and spies hate privacy laws and lobby like hell against them. Cops and spies love commercial surveillance, because the private sector's massive surveillance dossiers are an off-the-books trove of warrantless surveillance data that the government can't legally collect."
Doctorow begs questions in the manner typical of self-hosted and/or expatriated journalists, who must be evangelists, but religious work tends to disregard the labor of research as it's hard work that doesn't pay and it might uncover a contradiction of the orthodoxy.
Let religious voices like Doctorow indicate places where we may examine policy and why we should be interested to look there, but sermons aren't vehicles to carry meaningful analysis.
Sermons must have a righteous tone and term "fascist", used correctly by Doctorow, has a long-standing colloquial connotation of teutonic allegiances during WW2, which emotionally overloads his diatribe.
Yet, he's correct to invoke it, even as his rhetoric is misplaced for audiences whose forbearers were sacrificed to the trauma of WW2, and whose generational scar tissues suppress remembrance that the patterns of evil which exploded across the Axis did emerge within our sacred bastions of liberty and freedom, and that these evils are fomenting again right now.
So I appreciate Doctorow's polemics even as I too regard the details of his claims with skepticism.
> What this means for you: Helicone's services will remain live for the foreseeable future in maintenance mode. This means security updates, new models, bug & performance fixes all keep shipping.
> who voted Trump because they believed Harris was not tough enough
No, they voted for Trump because he was their guy then later made up a rational justification. We know that people generally do NOT make decisions by rationally evaluating things, their subconscious makes a decision and their conscious makes plausible rational arguments. (Yes, citation needed.)
reply