News
SpaceX’s Starlink internet constellation deemed ‘a license to print money’
According to a draft paper written by networking researcher and professor Mark Handley, SpaceX’s Starlink internet satellite constellation has the potential to significantly disrupt the global networking economy and infrastructure and do so with as little as a third of the initial proposal’s 4425 satellites in orbit.
A step or so further, Dr. Handley (according to a University College London colleague) suspects that a network like that proposed by SpaceX could rapidly become “a license to print money” thanks to the tangible benefits it would provide financial institutions and banks – as of today, shaving mere milliseconds off of communications latency can be a serious competitive advantage for traders.
The three LEO constellation planes (not including the seven thousand VLEO in the latest filing) pic.twitter.com/btX0pLQAzc
— Andrew Moore (@awm22) September 25, 2018
Asked to condense his argument into a few sentences, Dr. Handley’s colleague (Reddit /u/davoloid) described his excitement as such.
A Professor in Computer Science [Mark Handley] who specializes in how networks work has done a simulation of Starlink based on the available information. It will make long distance links very fast, as in, a short delay in sending a message, which we call latency. That’s very important to banks and similar companies, who always want to have the fastest information. They pay a lot of money to create networks, often private ones rather than through regular commercial providers. Even with the first phase of 1600 satellites, there will be big revenues for SpaceX.” – Reddit /u/davoloid, 11/2/18
-
- SpaceX’s first two Starlink prototype satellites are pictured here before their inaugural launch, showing off a thoroughly utilitarian bus and several advanced components. (SpaceX)
-
- A beautiful string of Iridium NEXT satellites deployed into the sunrise. (SpaceX)
Judging from the recent past of a practice known as High-Frequency Trading (HFT), where algorithms take over trading in financial markets and operate at speeds on the order of trades per millisecond, the highly volatile industry has already reached its conclusion. This is to say that HFT went from a wildly disruptive and lucrative technological advantage to a fundamental part of the world’s ever-changing financial infrastructure in just a few decades.
“The story about [HFT] is done. It’s a mature industry now, as much an embedded feature of our society as mutual funds or the income tax.” – Tim Worstall, 2017
“HFTs are still involved in the speed race and sometimes even race to pick off their market maker brethren. While it may be more expensive and more competitive today for HFT to pick off the slow traders, make no mistake, they have not gone away.” – Themis Trading, 2018
Much like electricity, the internet, and railroads went from kings of profit to marginal and tedious enterprises, it seems that HFT has gone from a nascent and fickle technology to a basic component of global infrastructure. As such, it is in no way, shape, or form “dead”. Just like step-change advancements in technology have forced service-based companies to upgrade or die, it seems that the availability of Starlink (or any comparable interconnected internet constellation) will create a massive imbalance between financial institutions that adopt early and those that do not or cannot.
If that ends up being the case, there will undoubtedly be an extraordinary surge in competitive financial infrastructure investment, with institutions desperately pursuing new ways to remain competitive (leveling the playing field vs. a shortcut to the front). Dr. Handley’s draft paper, accompanying video, and colleague’s clear excitement about the possibilities demonstrate (at least theoretically) that even just the first third (37%) of SpaceX’s preliminary 4425 satellite Starlink constellation would exhibit dramatic latency improvements between most conceivable access points.
The first step’s first step
With all 4425 satellites in place, the benefits approach or even surpass theoretical best-case statistics for literal straight-line fiber optic cables. Of course, SpaceX’s true proposal includes yet another 7520 very low Earth orbit (VLEO) Starlink satellites (~350 km) that would more than double the bandwidth available while potentially cutting another huge chunk out of the already unsurpassable latency performance of LEO Starlink (~1100-1300 km).
Of course, a massive amount of work remains before SpaceX before any of the above futures can or are even technically able to come to fruition. Aside from regulatory difficulties and concerns about space debris from a potential ~12,000+ new satellites, SpaceX will have to go one or even two magnitudes beyond what the status quo of satellite manufacturing believes is achievable, mass producing and launching satellites in volumes that will dwarf anything undertaken in the history of spaceflight. Still, if anyone is going to accomplish such an extraordinary feat, one would be hard-pressed to find a better bet than SpaceX.
Watch an animation of Starlink created by Dr. Mark Handley here.
For prompt updates, on-the-ground perspectives, and unique glimpses of SpaceX’s rocket recovery fleet check out our brand new LaunchPad and LandingZone newsletters!
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
