Elon

Even Elon Musk surrenders to the open Chinese AI model Kimi K3. It is not for less

by

It’s good, it’s pretty and it’s (quite) cheap. We met him a few days ago, but Kimi K3the new open AI model from the Chinese startup Moonshot AI, is causing a sensation. So much, so much, that they have had to pause new subscriptions because they cannot handle so much demand. Another turning point for Chinese AI. Kimi K3 is the largest open weights AI model ever published, with numbers that probably rival those of the frontier models from Anthropic and OpenAI, which do not provide information on the size of their models. Those 2.8 billion parameters make a difference and are a good part of the reason why this model represents a real leap in quality according to all the benchmarks that are being published. “Awesome”. Elon Musk himself published a single “Impresionante” on his X/Twitter account as answer to the very complete analysis Artificial Analysis performance. Its agentic behavior surpasses that of Opus 4.8 and only Fable 5 surpasses it, but in a specific benchmark it goes even further and is the best of all the models evaluated by this firm, including those from OpenAI and Anthropic. Source: Artificial Analysis. More tests. In programming it is better than Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5, but inferior to Fable 5 or GPT-5.6, and all the independent tests validate these results: we are facing a model that at least on paper competes directly with the best that both Anthropic and OpenAI had until now. No Chinese model had come so close until now: GLM-5.2, although notable, competed more with GPT-5.5 and Sonnet 5 than with the US frontier models. Source: Artificial Analysis Gigantic… and not so cheap. DeepSeek showed that it was possible to access really capable models at a very affordable price, and recently GLM-5.2 proposed exactly the same: it is possible to achieve 90% capacity of frontier models such as Opus 4.8, but at 20% of the cost. The curious thing is that with Kimi K3 the trend changes: it is a more affordable model than Fable 5 or GPT-5.6, but not as much as one might expect: the cost per million input/output tokens is 3/15 dollars, while in Fable 5 it costs 10/50, Opus 4.8 costs 5/25 and GPT-5.6 Sol costs 5/30. Tokens everywhere. One of the factors that probably influences that quality/price ratio is the large number of tokens that Kimi K3 seems to use when answering. It is a model that “thinks a lot”, and that, although it undoubtedly improves the precision and capacity of the model, also causes it to generate higher bills for the user. Artificial Analysis’ own report goes further: the cost per task in its test battery is $0.95, at the level of GPT-5.6 Sol’s $1.04 and certainly cheaper than Fable 5 ($2.75), but also much more expensive than Grok 4.5 ($0.31) or GLM-5.2 ($0.47). The pelican test. Analyst Simon Willinson was able to test the model to perform a test to evaluate the behavior of all these developments: having the model generate an SVG image of a pelican on a bicycle. In their tests the image was of very good quality, but it generated almost 17,000 tokens for the response with a task cost of 25 cents. It is not that this test is too conclusive, but it does reveal that for a simple task, the result, although outstanding, is not especially efficient in token consumption. Cybersecurity, the unknown. Unlike the latest models from Anthropic or OpenAI, Moonshot AI does not seem interested at the moment in its use in the field of cybersecurity. There is no mention of those potential capabilities in the notes of launch, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t deliver. Vercel’s CTO, Malte Ubl, explained Although it is not the most advanced of AI models in this area, after running several tests it seemed like a model that can be very useful when finding and correcting vulnerabilities. Demand, through the roof. The expectation generated by this model has been such that the company has announced that pause new subscriptions. This will allow them to be able to deal with all requests to use it without harming the experience for both old and new users. A striking decision that seems to make a reality clear: they cannot cope. In Xataka | The gigantic Qwen 3.8 is another worrying sign for the US: its AI advantage is evaporating

Elon Musk’s two companies merge because Wall Street loves simplicity

by

SpaceX is no longer SpaceX and xAI is no longer xAI. Instead, the company has decided to merge both names, and from now on it will be called SpaceXAI. That new name makes one thing very clear: the company is selling itself to Wall Street as an AI company that also launches rockets, not the other way around. A fusion that was sung. SpaceX bought xAI —and with it, both the Grok AI model and the social network X— in early February. He did so in a 100% stock move that valued SpaceX at $1 trillion and xAI at $250 billion. The name change is above all a marketing “punchline” about that de facto merger. The strategy has as one of its probable arguments a simplification that will undoubtedly be liked on Wall Street: Musk has created many companies that seemed to operate independently, so consolidating them gives that vision of a unified purpose and objective. This is not just about image. After the merger that occurred in February there was a clear reason: the dream of orbital data centers. Musk has been talking for some time about how ground infrastructure can’t meet AI’s global electrical demand, and SpaceX has already asked the FCC for permission to deploy up to a million satellites that work like computing nodes in low orbit. Therefore, having SpaceX and xAI completely merged also by their name simplifies this entire ecosystem. Going public helps. The decision comes shortly after SpaceX debuted on the stock market in June with the largest IPO in history. It raised $75 billion and earned a valuation of $1.77 trillion. The milkmaid’s tale? Before going public, SpaceX spoke of the “Total Addressable Market” (TAM), an estimate of the total size of the business they could access if they captured 100% of the demand and the figure is colossal: 28.5 billion dollarsof which 26.5 billion would correspond to AI, 1.6 billion in connectivity (Starlink) and only 370,000 to the space segment. Part of the animation of the “fusion” between both names showed this aspect. Grok and Cursor as pieces of the future. Grok continues and will continue to operate under the SpaceXAI umbrella, and of course the infrastructure agreements already signed are also maintained. The most important, the one that Anthropic recently signed and for which will pay 1,250 million dollars monthly to SpaceXAI for access to computing in the Colossus data centers. Google will pay 920 million monthly for the same. The other piece of the future is Cursor, the AI ​​agent for programming which is key so that the company can infiltrate companies. And Tesla, what? Since the merger with SpaceX was closed, there has been speculation on Wall Street with a plausible future: that Tesla will be the next to disappear as an independent company. SpaceX’s own president, Gwynne Shotwell, recognized the day of the IPO that there is a clear “convergence” between both companies, although he avoided talking about dates. Both are already collaborating on projects such as the ambitious Terafab, and Tesla maintains an investment of $2 billion in SpaceX which, after the merger with xAI, has already generated a capital gain on paper of around 64% due to the rise in the value of SpaceX shares. A very strong option. This “merger” with Tesla seems certainly likely. Wedbush consulting analyst Dan Ives esteem that there is an 80% probability that the movement will occur, and the Kalshi betting platform handles in these moments a 51% chance of that move arriving before May 2027. Some of the groundwork is already done in practice: both companies share engineers and both face bottlenecks in the form of power supply and cooling for their AI systems. In Xataka | “The idea of ​​making a cell phone makes me want to die,” said Musk. Two years later, it is very deep with its prototype of a mobile phone with AI

After Germany did not rate Uwe Boll’s new film by age, Elon Musk decided to premiere it himself on X

by

The German FSK, the German age ratings body (private, self-regulated by the film industry, not related to the government) has been denying age ratings to films of extreme violence for decades. This time a controversial decision with the latest film by one of the most disastrous directors of all time has ended up resulting in the richest man in the world publishing it on his social network as an act of resistance against state censorship. Let’s see who is right in all this hubbub. But who…? Uwe Boll is a German director and producer known primarily for his film adaptations of video games. Terrible adaptations: ‘BloodRayne’, ‘Alone in the Dark’, ‘In the name of the king’ (based on ‘Dungeon Siege’) or ‘Postal’ are some of them. Despite some occasional successes (‘House of the Dead’ has a very nice trotting edge), Boll has deservedly earned the fame of being one of the worst directors in history, a fame only surpassed by his ingenuity when it comes to organizing publicity stunts, such as sketching evenings against his critics. What is it about? A former American military man based in Europe inherits his father’s real estate business. After witnessing the murder of a mother at the hands of migrant criminals, he decides to take justice into his own hands and begins a violent campaign against criminals and corrupt judges that turns him into a viral phenomenon: celebrated by many, and also persecuted by law enforcement and powerful enemies. Citizen Vigilante. His new film, written, produced and directed by Boll himself, was released on June 19 in a few theaters in the United States and on digital through Quiver Distribution. The protagonist is Armie Hammer, a detail of the casting that adds murky layers to the film: it is Hammer’s most relevant role since his career sank following allegations of sexual assault and emotional abuse in 2021 (with unspeakable overtones of cannibalism), although the investigation concluded without charges. Hammer recognized that ‘Citizen Vigilante’ was his first job offer in five years, and that when Boll called him, he burst into tears. Boll, very cunning, chose Hammer deliberately. As explained“I hired him because he is a great actor and also because he had been canceled and wanted to work. They didn’t accuse him of anything, there was no lawsuit. He was just a famous guy who had behaved badly.” It is an important detail: the casting is already a political statement, as it could not be otherwise, anti-woke. The role of the FSK. The FSK denied the film an age rating in two successive rounds. And although Boll calls it state censorship, it is not. The FSK is an entity serving the film industry itself, not a government body. The State only intervenes when a work violates current criminal laws, so Boll could have released his film without going through the FSK. Of course, there are commercial consequences: without the rating, the film cannot be shown in multiplexes or sold on DVD in large stores, and platforms such as Netflix in Germany do not include it in their catalog. But of course: Boll himself welcomes this decision by the FSK: without this extra publicity, ‘Citizen Vigilante’ would have gone unnoticed. The scandal is part of the film’s dissemination campaign. Enter Musk. Since December 2025, X has been in open conflict with the European institutions. That month the European Commission imposed a fine of 140 million dollars to X for failure to comply with the Digital Services Act, the law that forces platforms to combat misinformation and illegal content. In February 2026, X filed an appeal with the General Court of the European Union, alleging serious procedural errors and bias in the investigation. The publication of ‘Citizen Vigilante’ in Musk’s TL It fits perfectly with that narrative: Europe censors, X is a territory of freedom. Of coursethe reactions of those close to Musk (Libs of TikTok, Alex Jones, Milo Yiannopoulos) were immediate. But we have already seen the reality of the matter: no one has censored ‘Citizen Vigilante’, which has simply been rejected at a private ratings board. To watch. As is usual in cases of films used as throwing weapons between political factions, opinions are dispersed: audience score of the 93% on Rotten Tomatoesbut only three critic reviews, all negative. Variety He said the film is “so astonishingly bad that it almost seems like Boll is deliberately sabotaging his protagonist, whose return can only be harmed by this project.” But thanks to Musk’s push, he is in the 31st place on IMDB. For now, until tomorrow the film will be able to be seen on X, on Musk’s own account. The movie is possibly horrible. But not everyone can boast of having Elon Musk as an enthusiastic distribution partner. In Xataka | Elon Musk is going to turn 4,000 workers into millionaires and himself into a billionaire thanks to one thing: SpaceX

Elon Musk is going to turn 4,000 workers into millionaires and himself into a billionaire thanks to one thing: SpaceX

by

Trevor Hise was 22 years old when he graduated and, as is often the case, his parents begged him to accept a stable, well-paying position at General Electric. However, led by the passion of youth and curiosity, he preferred to dedicate the next 12 years of his professional career to the madness of launch rockets into space and catch them in flight again on their return to earth. The company was called SpaceX and Hise no longer works there. However, as how did he count The New York TimesHise has discovered that the Space The story of this former employee of Elon Musk could seem like one of those caroms that life sometimes gives. But, broadly speaking, it is the story of thousands of people who are going to wake up tomorrow with a fortune in your stock portfolio after Space X’s IPO. The largest IPO in history. Friday, June 12, 2026 has been marked in red on the calendars of thousands of investors for months: SpaceX debuts on the Nasdaq under the symbol SPCX. The company’s maneuvers in the months prior to its listing on the stock market make its figures be the most ambitious ever recorded in a stock market IPO: a fixed price of $135 per share and 555.6 million securities placed to raise $75 billion. It is almost three times higher than the previous record held Saudi Aramco since 2019. The expectation it has raised is no wonder, since the company founded by Elon Musk stands on three of the legs with the greatest growth projection: artificial intelligence with xAI integrationspace race as the main activity of Space X and communications deployment via satellite with Starlink. The total valuation of the company before its IPO reaches 1.77 trillion dollarsa figure that places it above JPMorgan, Berkshire Hathaway, Meta and Tesla itself. Only six S&P 500 companies are valued above Space NVIDIA in the lead with 5.2 billion. More than 4,000 people about to become millionaires. According to published Fortunemore than 4,400 Space X employees and former employees will become millionaires thanks to the company’s stock market debut. Of that group, some 400 employees and managers will earn more than $100 million or more from the operation. The fact of turning its employees into millionaires is another of the peculiarities of this IPO since, as Andrew Benson, executive director of the platform, recognized Hill.com investments to the American media, “you usually only see founders become billionaires.” The company included participations in the compensation packages of welders, cooks and facility technicians who agreed to collect part of their salary on paper. It was a risky bet on their part because those shares could have remained a dead letter, but trust in the company will bring them a juicy reward. Gavin Petit joined in 2012 as a launch engineer with a salary of $80,000 and received shares valued at $13.80 each at the time. The engineer agreed to collect his bonuses in more shares year after year, something considered risky in a company whose rockets were still failing. Now more than 50,000 shares, which are equivalent to about 6.75 million dollars. Those who endured Among the great beneficiaries of this Initial Public Offering is Gwynne Shotwellpresident and chief operating officer of SpaceX. She was employee number 11 when she joined the company in 2002, leaving a stable job to bet on a startup that then had everything to prove. The board accumulates almost 12.6 million shares, according to the documents presented before the SEC, which at IPO price represents a fortune of about 1.7 billion dollars. Shotwell herself recognized to CNBC that for years it was not clear that they would go public: “Now seems like the right time.” As and as you remember Expansionthe IPO will also generously reward those investors who have provided financial support to the company since its inception, as is the case with Peter Thiel o Luke Nosek, co-founders of PayPal and members of the group known as “PayPal Mafia“. The first billionaire in history. According to official data According to the US Securities and Exchange Commission, Elon Musk owns approximately 42% of SpaceX shares. That’s about 4.8 billion shares, plus hundreds of millions of additional stock options. At the IPO price, that stake alone is around $688 billion. Adding that figure to his stake in Tesla and the rest of his businesses, Forbes esteem and his fortune at $982.3 billion before the stock market debut, which leaves him just a breath away from crossing $1 trillion, a milestone that no one has reached before. To gauge the magnitude of this figure, his personal fortune already exceeds the capitalization of ExxonMobil and rivals that of Berkshire Hathaway. Although, as Musk himself has pointed out on more than one occasion, almost all of that money They are stocks, not cash.. A number on a screen that goes up and down according to the market. In Xataka | The who’s who of SpaceX’s competitors: which other companies are making a big splash in space Image | Flickr (Gage Skidmore), SpaceX

Elon Musk not only wants to reach the Moon, he also wants to turn it into a factory for satellites launched with catapults

by

What do they have in common ChinaSpaceX, Auriga Space and Electromagnetic Launch? Well, possibly several things, but one of them is that they have expressed interest in using mass cannons to launch from the Moon. Said to very roughlywant to use electromagnetic catapults loaded with satellites or construction materials to other points in space. Today, existing technologies are not optimized to launch large loads, but with so much power involved it would not be strange if it were finally achieved. The ethical implications would be many even if they only focused on science and communications. However, it could be even worse; Well, according to the analysis recently published by an expert, the arrival of the military applications It would only be a matter of time. From moon rocks to nuclear warheads. The idea of ​​the lunar mass cannon He initially proposed it a scientist named Gerard O’Neill in the 70s. His idea was to use them to extract minerals from the Moon and launch them into space to build space colonies with them. Over time, many space agencies, public and private, have become interested in its use. For this reason, the independent analyst specialized in cislunar security Andre Sonntag just published a report in which he recounts the risks that these catapults would entail. If the necessary technology is optimized to launch large payloads, they could be used to launch probes aimed at destroying satellites, inert projectiles and even ships loaded with nuclear warheads. Furthermore, if launches are made from the Moon they may be more difficult to detect by conventional early warning systems, so many attacks would go unnoticed. An ingenious design. Mass cannons are actually very interesting systems for space launch. They consist on a track in which one electromagnet is placed after another. A metal cart is circulated above and is attracted by said magnets. Each of these electromagnets is activated just when the car passes over it, giving it a new impulse, so that it accelerates more and more. The goal is to reach 2.4 kilometers per second, since this is the speed necessary to escape from the Moon. When this is achieved, the cargo on board the car is launched into space. In short, it is possible to catapult what is inside the car without having to consume propellant. Better on the Moon. This system has historically been proposed for use on the Moon for two reasons. To begin with, unlike what happens with a conventional rocketa very high speed is reached very quickly. If the process were done on Earth, the rocket would reach the atmosphere so quickly that it would catch fire due to friction when crossing it. On the other hand, there is no classical atmosphere on the Moon. On the other hand, since gravity on the Moon is much lower, a lower speed is needed than what would be needed to escape through this system on Earth. The case of Elon Musk. In his report, Sonntag has not mentioned any company or agency. However, it is well known that Elon Musk speak of the use of these mass cannons last February. He has been expressing his interest for a long time establish data centers in space and manufacture AI satellites directly on the Moon. This would avoid the energy, thermal management and launch logistics limitations that Earth poses for its ambitious plan. The vacuum of space would serve as a coolant and solar energy could be used to obtain electricity. The release waiting listIn addition, it would be much clearer than on Earth. In order not to have to carry large amounts of fuel to the Moon, their idea is to launch these satellites directly from our satellite. That is why he has already mentioned electromagnetic catapults on several occasions. There is legislation, but it is difficult to ensure. The United Nations Outer Space Treaty strictly prohibits the construction of military installations on celestial bodies. It also prohibits nuclear launches from space. However, Sonntag points out in his report that it would be quite difficult to verify. Therefore, he is concerned if these types of systems advance, given the interest of tycoons like Elon Musk. The payloads that could be launched with current technologies are minuscule. In fact, launching functional satellites directly with one of these cannons is science fiction. However, technology will advance. By then, we must be prepared, because those who have no scruples on Earth will not have them in space either. Image | SpaceX/xAI In Xataka | We knew there was water on the Moon, but not why some craters were empty. Finally we have the answer

what Elon Musk asks for it to work

by

The scene took place relatively recently, when several Ukrainian naval drones were left temporarily unusable during an operation in the Black Sea following connectivity problems linked to Starlink. The episode left an uncomfortable conclusion For many Western strategists: some of the most modern weapons on the planet depend on a private network controlled by a single company. The “cheap” war that began to be expensive. The United States has been pursuing an obsessive idea for years: replacing part of its very expensive precision missiles with a copy of the Iranian and Russian weapon par excellence: swarms of kamikaze drones that are much cheaper, mass-produced and capable of saturating enemy defenses. He LUCAS drone was born precisely for that. Each unit costs just a fraction of a Tomahawk and can be launched in large quantities against distant targets. On paper it seemed like the perfect formula for modern warfare. The problem appeared when those drones began to used massively against Iran and Washington discovered something uncomfortable: the weapon does not depend only on the explosive or the fuselage, but of the satellite connection that guides her. And that connection has an owner. SpaceX then decided that the Pentagon was paying too little to use Starlink and Starshield in real combat operations. Elon Musk controls a critical piece. The dispute that has been revealed in Reuters exclusive reveals the extent to which the US military has become dependent on SpaceX. LUCAS drones use Starshield terminals to communicate, coordinate attacks and operate over enormous distances. Without that space network, much of the system’s advanced capabilities simply disappear. The Pentagon argued that drones only used the connection for minutes or hours and that paying $25,000 per terminal was absurd for a relatively cheap kamikaze device. SpaceX responded that actual military use was more like a premium aeronautical service than a conventional land connection. The result was surreal: the cost of connectivity almost doubled the operating price of some drones designed precisely to be cheap. The paradox of autonomous war. The case exposes a huge contradiction in the current military revolution. Armies want cheap, massive autonomous weapons, but those platforms increasingly depend on extremely complex and concentrated infrastructures in few private hands. New American drone swarms need to transmit data, share targets, coordinate and receive orders in real time over thousands of miles. This requires the use of gigantic orbital networks capable of maintaining permanent global coverage. Today no company offers anything comparable to Starlink. SpaceX controls more than 60% of all operational satellites on the planet and has become in a critical layer of Western military communications. The Pentagon is beginning to discover that the true strategic advantage is not just in making cheap drones, but in who owns the sky that connects those machines. Ukraine and danger. The Ukrainian War I had been warning for a long time about this problem. Starlink became there an essential element for Ukrainian and Russian operations, and also a constant source of political and military tensions. At times, restrictions imposed by SpaceX affected specific operations and made clear something uncomfortable for Washington: a private company could alter the operation of military systems in the middle of a war. Now the scenario is repeated with Iran, but in an even more delicate way because the Pentagon itself directly negotiate rates while developing weapons that depend entirely on that orbital infrastructure. Even US naval tests they were paralyzed previously following global Starlink blackouts that left maritime drones floating offline. The new military industry. They remembered on TWZ that, for decades, American military power depended mainly on classic defense giants such as Lockheed Martin, Boeing or Raytheon. SpaceX has completely changed that balance. The company not only launches rockets or manufactures satellites, it controls global communication networksorbital infrastructures, data systems and technologies that are beginning to be essential for autonomous warfare. This gives it an unprecedented position of strength vis-à-vis the US government. Unlike traditional contractors, SpaceX also has a huge independent commercial business and does not depend exclusively on the Pentagon. In fact, some analysts already describe the situation crudely: the United States has SpaceX “by the throat” because there is no comparable alternative today capable of offering similar global coverage at reasonable costs. War happens through space. The important thing is possibly that the discussion has only just begun. The LUCAS drones They are just an initial piece of a much deeper military transformation where autonomous swarms, orbital systems and artificial intelligence networks will function as a single connected ecosystem. The Pentagon wants future drones to be able to cooperate with each other, automatically adapt to combat and attack targets with minimal human supervision. But the more sophisticated those systems become, the more they will depend of permanent connections high capacity. And that makes the space the authentic center of gravity of modern warfare. The great irony is that the United States designed cheap drones to avoid spending millions on each missile and has ended up discovering that the most important strategic cost may not be in the weapon, but who gets paid for keeping her connected. Image | CENTCOM, Official SpaceX Photos In Xataka | The US has remembered what it did in World War II and has presented LUCAS: a copy of the most lethal Russian weapon In Xataka | Iran has been manufacturing the most effective and destructive kamikaze drones in the world for years. The US has plagiarized them to bomb him

Neither Robotaxi nor Cybercab. Elon Musk is having a hard time naming his autonomous taxi, and now it’s French sparkling water to blame

by

It will soon be a year since Tesla’s first autonomous taxis began to roll And to this day the creature still does not have an official name. AND not because Elon Musk hasn’t tried. First it ran into the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and now it has been a French sparkling water company. rookie mistake. Tesla may have the technology of the future rolling on the streets, but when it held the ‘We, Robot’ event in 2024 in which it presented the Cybercab, it forgot a small detail: it announced the name without having officially registered the brand. This is where Unibev comes into play, a French beverage company, which saw the perfect opportunity to troll the richest man in the world. The patent troll. What Unibev did is a clear case of patent thief (or troll, as they would say in ‘Silicon Valley’). Taking advantage of Tesla’s oversight, six days after the announcement, the company registered the name Cybercab and it doesn’t seem like it’s because they want to call their sparkling water that way, but rather to simply be annoying. The company already had a history of trolling Musk and in addition to Cybercab they also registered Cybertaxi, Robocab Systems, XCab, Cyber ​​Diner, Teslaquila, Teslaquila Hard Seltzer and With a Touch of Musk. Some horny ones. The answer. The USPTO suspended Tesla’s application because Unibev had beaten them to it, but Tesla did not sit idly by and filed a lawsuit of more than 150 pages in which they accuse Unibev of bad faith and having acted as a patent thief. Having registered before is not synonymous with victory, since simply proving that Unibev does not manufacture vehicles the authority should rule in favor of Tesla. In their application, Unibev said they could use the name for “a car, a ship or a plane.” It seems easy enough to dismantle, the problem is that the litigation could extend until 2027. If Unibev wins the dispute, Tesla could be forced to negotiate the use of the name outside the US and even have to use another name in certain markets. And ‘robotaxi’?. Tesla too tried to register the trademark ‘Robotaxi’but the USPTO told them that nanai. The reason had nothing to do with any patent thief, but because it is “used to describe similar products and services of other companies. (…) This expression appears to be generic in the context of the applicant’s products and/or services.” The USTPO comes to say that it is too standard a name, it would be like registering the ‘taxi’ trademark. There is still more. The organizational chaos does not end with taxis, the same thing also happened with its autonomous minibus, presented with great fanfare as “Robovan.” The problem is that Tesla announced it without first having verified that the brand was already registered by an Estonian delivery company. Tesla has had to look for less attractive alternatives such as “Robobus”, “Robus” or “Cyberbus”. About launching autonomous vehicles with super-advanced technology, well, that’s all the paperwork. Image | tesla In Xataka | Tesla robotaxis are autonomous, except when driven by a man from Texas

Anthropic has just left behind Claude’s biggest burden. He has achieved this after sealing an alliance with Elon Musk’s SpaceX

by

There are few things more frustrating than finding a tool that fits almost exactly what we need and discovering, just as we’re starting to get the most out of it, that we can’t keep using it at the same rate. Claude It has earned a prominent place among those who use artificial intelligence to program, analyze documents or work with demanding tasks, but it has also drawn a very specific complaint: its limits of use. We are not talking about a minor annoyance, but rather a friction capable of breaking the workflow. Anthropic has decided to attack the problem. The company led by Dario Amodei announced a rise of the limits of Claude Code and the Claude API, relying on a new alliance with SpaceXAI. The pact will give it access to Colossus 1, an infrastructure that Anthropic presents as a way to directly improve the experience of its most intensive users. The promise, for now, is clear: more room to use Claude without demand taking its toll so quickly. The tension with limits. The adjustment that helps understand this news came a few weeks earlier. Anthropic recently modified their time limits to better manage demand during peak hours. In practice, this meant that five-hour sessions could be consumed before those actual five hours had passed if the use occurred during peak periods. The change especially affected those who made more intense use of Claude. More room to use Claude. Anthropic specifies the improvement in three changes that, according to the company, take effect immediately. The first is the doubling of Claude Code’s five-hour limits for Pro, Max, Team, and Enterprise plans per seat. The second is the removal of the peak limit reduction for Claude Code on Pro and Max accounts. The third affects the API: Anthropic says it has considerably raised the usage limits for Claude Opus models, although the exact scope depends on the limits table published by the company itself. Colossus muscle 1. The agreement with SpaceXAI is the most striking piece of the announcement because Anthropic ensures that it will be able to use all the computing capacity of the Colossus 1 data center. According to the company, that means more than 300 megawatts of new capacity and more than 220,000 NVIDIA GPUs that will be available within a month. SpaceXAI also details that the cluster includes deployments of H100, H200 and GB200 accelerators. The transformation continues. SpaceXAI does not appear in this agreement as simply a new label within the SpaceX ecosystem. The context, Elon Musk noted that “xAI will be dissolved as an independent company” and that its artificial intelligence products will be integrated under SpaceXAI. The phrase helps understand why Anthropic is talking about this brand when explaining its new access to computing power. Of course, to avoid confusion, what Anthropic announced is not a purchase or a merger, but rather an agreement to use AI infrastructure. It is not an isolated agreement. Anthropic also wanted to frame the alliance with SpaceXAI within a much broader capability strategy. The company recalls an agreement of up to 5 GW with Amazon, which includes almost 1 GW of new capacity by the end of 2026, and another 5 GW pact with Google and Broadcom that will begin to come into operation in 2027. To this it adds a strategic alliance with Microsoft and NVIDIA, with $30 billion of capacity in Azure, and an investment of $50 billion in AI infrastructure in the United States with Fluidstack. The most futuristic part. The agreement also includes a much more speculative derivative. Anthropic says that as part of the pact, it has expressed interest in collaborating with SpaceXAI to develop several gigawatts of orbital computing capacity. SpaceXAI presents it as a possible answer to the pressure that AI is putting on energy, land and cooling on the ground, but for now we are far from something tangible. Of course, this route would only make sense if important engineering challenges are overcome first. The real challenge. Anthropic has put on the table a direct answer to one of the big complaints surrounding Claude, although the most important part is still missing: checking how it feels in real use. SpaceXAI’s new limits and additional capacity seem to point in the right direction for those who work intensively with these services. The improvement, therefore, opens a new phase: that of checking if Claude can offer more margin without its users encountering the same wall again too soon. Images | Xataka with Nano Banana In Xataka | The “token economy” is broken: flat AI programming fees are mathematically unsustainable

Elon Musk’s AI does not have its own Claude Code, but they already have a solution for that: buy Cursor

by

SpaceX, Elon Musk’s aerospace company, Indian on Wednesday that he had reached an agreement with AI startup Cursor. According to this agreement, this company could be acquired for 60,000 million dollars. If everything is confirmed, xAI will finally have a programming AI agent with which to compete. Claude Code, Codex or Gemini AI. Restructuring. Elon Musk posted a message on X in March in which claimed that “xAI was not created the right way initially, so it’s rebuilding from the ground up.” The company’s trajectory has been erratic and most of its original founders ended up leaving the company in recent months, but for that restructuring Musk hired Andrew Milich and Jason Ginsberg, two of the co-founders of Cursor. And that has been the trigger for this agreement. Cursor’s rating skyrocketed. By November 2025, Cursor was the undisputed leader in the programming AI agent segment, with $3.4 billion in funding and a fantastic reputation among developers. It had reached $100 million in annual recurring revenue in less than two years, a figure that few startups of its generation can aspire to. The Claude Code earthquake. The arrival of Claude Code changed everything thanks to his extraordinary behavior and its integration with Anthropic models, and while OpenAI also promoted Codex and the era of vibe-coding made all these tools gain more strength than ever. However, for Cursor these launches were problematic because its competitors could work directly with companies because they had something that Cursor did not: computing capacity. Cursor needed an ally. In the statement of the agreement, those responsible for Cursor they explain that the lack of access to computing power to train their own AI models had been a major bottleneck for its growth. Both Anthropic and OpenAI have access to several present and future GW of compute thanks to their agreements with hyperscalers (Amazon, Google, Microsoft). But no matter how good Cursor was, it was competing with giants with many more resources. The agreement with SpaceX gives it access to xAI’s AI supercomputer, which is precisely perfect for training LLMs and which according to its managers allows them to “drastically scale the intelligence of our models”: But xAI too. On the other side of the agreement there is also another winner. xAI have their Colossus supercomputing cluster, access to SpaceX resources (of which it is part) and a significant base of users (and their data) thanks to Grok. What it does not have is a product that competes with Claude Code or Codex, and attempts to develop it have been unsuccessful. Buying Cursor solves that problem at once: instead of working on building a product for years while its competitors continue to advance, xAI directly integrates the team that already had that product and also adds the users who were already using Cursor. Will it be enough? The question this agreement must answer is whether it is enough to put xAI on the real map of artificial intelligence. The company has a minor presence in this market despite the efforts of Elon Musk, and although it will now have a product respected and valued by users, it will be interesting if that is enough to compete with its rivals in this area. The IPO as a contextual framework. SpaceX has been preparing to go public for months, and it is expected that this will be one of the largest Public Sale Offers (IPO) of history. Acquiring Cursor before or after that deal has clear financial implications because SpaceX has two options. You can buy Cursor for $60 billion, or simply pay $10 billion for a close collaboration agreement that does not include the acquisition. SpaceX will make that decision before the end of the year, but this agreement seems to suit both it and Cursor very well. Image | Gage Skidmore In Xataka | Elon Musk knows that TSMC is overwhelmed: Terafab is his idea to completely change the global chip industry

A bakery accepted an order for 2,000 cakes for Tesla. Elon Musk had to mediate to avoid bankruptcy

by

Large companies are not only a pole of job creation or direct wealth for those who work in them, but, indirectly, they are also a driver of indirect development for other companies in the area. Sometimes, they can also be your downfall. In early 2024, a small artisan bakery in San Jose, California, nearly went bankrupt when it tried to fill a huge order for cakes for Tesla’s offices. A last-minute change of heart left the small business on the brink of bankruptcy and in debt. As and how they counted in The Guardian, Elon Musk had to intervene. Laura’s sweet request Voahangy Rasetarinera, owner of the Giving Pies bakery, was challenged to handle an order of 2,000 mini pies for a Tesla employee event. This request represented a great economic opportunity for small businessbut it also represented a significant logistical challenge given its magnitude and the bakery’s limited resources. Rasetarinera consulted his staff and they agreed to accept the order by sending the invoice to Tesla. Delivery dates would be Tuesday and Thursday of the following week. Elon Musk’s company diverted payment for the cakes to a third-party supplier called City Flavor, which did not respond to payment requests after delivering the first round of cakes. “I remained optimistic as I waited for the payment on Thursday. However, when it didn’t materialize, I became concerned.” That same day, Laura, Rasetarinera’s contact at Tesla, called the bakery to apologize for the delay in payment for the first round, citing the inexperience of the suppliers. On that same call, Laura requested to double the cake order. In total, the bill already amounted to $16,000 for 4,000 cupcakes that Giving Pies was to deliver. The bakery was forced to redouble its efforts paying overtime to staff, purchasing more ingredients that he had not yet charged for, and, most importantly, rejecting other orders to meet Tesla’s enormous demand. After consulting with the employees again, everyone agreed to go ahead, so Rasetarinera sent a new expanded invoice to Tesla with the new amount and they got into trouble with the new shipment, but not before sending a message to Laura, to demand payment for the first batch of cakes. “I’m sorry to bother you again, but I’m a small business. I don’t have the luxury of infinite resources, so I really need to get paid to insure my staff,” the businesswoman wrote to Tesla, as published the local media Kron4. Tap on the image to go to the original message However, the joy was short-lived. Just a week before the delivery date, Tesla canceled the order without notice. Just like Rasetarinera explained on the bakery’s Instagram account, “we received an email saying they were canceling the order. There was no explanation. Just a message saying, ‘Hey, I’m so sorry, I don’t think we’re going to need this order anymore.’” Unpaid bills and 2,000 cupcakes in the oven The cancellation of the order had serious consequences for Giving Pies. The pastry shop He had already invested in ingredients, increased his staff and rejected other orders in order to fulfill Tesla’s order. What was shaping up to be a great opportunity to work with a great company had turned into a nightmare of unpaid bills. Rasetarinera explained on his social networks that “we had to buy additional ingredients, hire extra staff and schedule overtime.” All of this represented a considerable expense for a small business. “I had invested time, resources and effort based on Tesla’s guarantees, only to be left in the lurch,” declared the owner to Guardian. The news spread quickly on social networks and local media that echoed the bad trick that Tesla had done to this small merchant, generating outrage among users due to Tesla’s lack of consideration for a local business. The word spread through social networks, even reaching the ears of Elon Musk himself. Elon Musk and the unexpected solution When Elon Musk found out about the situation, he decided to take matters into his own hands. From your X accountMusk apologized for what happened to the bakery and promised to resolve the problem. “I just found out about this. We are fixing it immediately,” the billionaire wrote. Tap on the image to go to the original message Musk’s solution was simple but effective: Tesla would buy all the pies Giving Pies could produce, and he also invited the owner on a tour of the factory. “People should always be able to count on Tesla to do its best,” Elon Musk wrote in his X message. A Tesla representative would later confirm to KGO-TV that there had been a communication problem and that Laura did not have the capacity to authorize payments. For Giving Pies, this experience ended up being positive. Not only did they overcome the financial hardship due to the investment made in the order, but they also gained publicity and support from the community. As shown on your websitetoday, Giving Pies sweetens the holidays for some of Silicon Valley’s biggest tech companies. In Xataka | An Englishman named his restaurant “Tesla.” He was immediately left without a name and with a fine of 14,000 euros thanks to Musk In Xataka | Tesla has been suing buyers and journalists for criticizing its cars in China for some time. And he’s winning Image | DVIDS (Justin Pacheco), Giving Pie A version of this article was published in February 2025

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.