• Verizon's CEO says he assumes SpaceX will flawlessly execute its US ambitions — but he's not worried.
• In order for Starlink to compete, it will still need a lot of land-based infrastructure.
• That building could require SpaceX to spend a half trillion dollars over up to eight years, he said.

In business, as in war, the safest bet is often to avoid underestimating your competitors, even when the odds appear to be in your favor.

Verizon CEO Dan Schulman says he's a student of that philosophy when it comes to Elon Musk's ambitions to develop SpaceX's Starlink into a significant US network player.

"Clearly, the tech and the wireless landscape is rapidly evolving, and we need to rapidly evolve along with that," he said during the company's third-quarter earnings call Monday. "I also operate under the assumption that everything SpaceX says they will do, they will do, and that they will execute flawlessly."

Setting aside Musk's track record of delivering on his eyebrow-raising promises, Schulman said there are significant technical and financial hurdles that Starlink would have to clear to meaningfully compete with established networks like Verizon. But it is possible.

"If they build a terrestrial network, it will basically look and feel like every other network," he said. "I think we should take it quite seriously."

News earlier this month that Starlink had acquired a batch of mobile-friendly low-band spectrum sent the share prices of the major US mobile carriers falling by approximately 10%. Verizon is the only one of the three to partially recover from the drop.

"Their service just can't compete with a terrestrial network in suburban and urban areas, where like 98% of our revenues are," he said of the satellite-based system. "We're somewhere between 100 to 1000 times more efficient than they are."

Building a competitive US network, especially for mobile, would require building as many as 80,000 large cell towers on Earth linked with some combination of satellites and fiber optics, Schulman said.

Schulman estimates that project would cost up to a half trillion dollars over six to eight years, with a minimum of four to six years to actually build out the network.

"Then they need to build retail customer service, back office systems, et cetera., and all of that gets them basically the same network and same capabilities and same cost structure as what we have today," Schulman said.

After the call, Musk responded to the forecast with a post on X: "Will take 2 or 3 years."

The Verizon chief's remarks come less than a week after his AT&T counterpart, John Stankey, brushed off concerns that Starlink's mobile network could pose a threat to his business.

"I wouldn't over-rotate on what I would call one carrier of low band spectrum," he said.

• Public investors are finally getting a chance to invest in Anthropic.
• But unlike other public companies, Anthropic doesn't want the public's input when it comes to major decisions.
• Instead, Anthropic will be effectively controlled by CEO Dario Amodei and a group of other insiders.

In the next few weeks, public investors will get their chance to buy a piece of Anthropic.

But regular investors will never have a chance to steer the AI giant's decisions: Even though Anthropic is going public, it will essentially remain a private company, controlled by a handful of people with outsized power.

That's not unusual for giant tech companies launched in the past few decades (Larry Page and Sergey Brin have effective control of Google; Mark Zuckerberg has the same at Meta, as does Elon Musk at SpaceX.) It's also something you see at some prominent media companies (Rupert Murdoch and his son Lachlan have effective control of his two public companies; Larry and David Ellison have the same at Skydance.)

Anthropic's twist on the idea is that control is split between two different groups of insiders. There's a clique of seven founders, including CEO Dario Amodei and his sister, Daniela, who control 50.1% of shareholder voting power. And there's also a trust with the power to appoint four of the company's seven directors.

Put those two together, and you get a corporate constitution designed to keep public investors outside the real decisions. The founders control the outcome of any shareholder vote; the trust controls the board.

In theory, those two groups could end up in conflict on major issues. The trust-appointed directors might, say, vote to replace Amodei with a new CEO. Or the founder group could veto a sale approved by the board.

In reality, there's a lot of overlap between the two groups. For starters, Anthropic created and funds the trust. And Anthropic itself says it has made sure the trust is staffed with people who see the world the same way its executives do: "In practice to date, the Trustees and company executives have collaborated closely on sourcing, interviewing, and selecting Trustees," the company notes in its S-1 filing.

The main takeaway is that there's no way for an individual shareholder, or even institutional shareholders who own significant chunks of Anthropic's equity, to force it to move one way or another.

The upside of arrangements like this are pretty clear, from a founder's perspective: They insulate their founders and managers from investors who might only care about short-term goals.

The downside: These structures insulate founders and managers from investors who might have very good reasons to want the company to change.

A good counter-example to the trend is Twitter, which went public in 2013 without founder control — which is why Elon Musk was able to buy it nearly a decade later.

In Anthropic's case, that aversion to giving public investors a real voice is synced directly to the company's founding thesis — that the AI it is developing is so consequential and potentially dangerous, that it must be controlled by people who care about more than Anthropic's share price.

And for many investors clamoring to get in on Anthropic's IPO, that lack of control — disclosed up front — won't matter. They just want their shares to be worth more over time. Musk's ironclad control of SpaceX didn't put dampen demand for the biggest IPO in history.

But if investors ever want to force Anthropic to do something the Amodeis and their cofounders — or the Anthropic-created trust — don't want it to do, they'll be out of luck. Buyer beware.

SpaceX ha raccolto 40 miliardi di dollari in prestiti destinati all’acquisto di nuovi chip per l’intelligenza artificiale. Lo ha annunciato Elon Musk attraverso un messaggio pubblicato sul suo social X, spiegando che le risorse serviranno principalmente a finanziare l’acquisto di GPU, le unità di elaborazione grafica fondamentali per lo sviluppo dei sistemi di intelligenza artificiale, la cui consegna è prevista tra il primo e il secondo trimestre del 2027. “Si tratta principalmente del rimborso del debito contratto per l’acquisto di GPU che arriveranno nel primo e nel secondo trimestre”, ha scritto Musk rispondendo a un investitore, senza precisare né la scadenza né il tasso di interesse del finanziamento.

La notizia arriva dopo che il gruppo, presentando i risultati finanziari martedì scorso, aveva annunciato investimenti compresi tra 35 e 40 miliardi di dollari nell’ultimo trimestre dell’anno, una cifra doppia rispetto a quella del trimestre precedente. I nuovi fondi, attesi all’inizio del 2027, confermano la volontà di mantenere elevato il ritmo degli investimenti nel settore dell’intelligenza artificiale.

Dopo la fusione con xAI all’inizio dell’anno, SpaceX, con sede a Starbase, in Texas, ha rafforzato la propria presenza nel comparto dell’intelligenza artificiale. Nel terzo trimestre, secondo quanto riportato, il gruppo ha registrato il primo utile netto della sua storia, grazie soprattutto ai ricavi derivanti dall’affitto della capacità dei propri data center a clienti esterni, tra cui Anthropic.

Prosegue intanto l’ampliamento del data center Colossus II, al confine tra Mississippi e Tennessee, mentre Musk punta a trasformare SpaceX in un conglomerato tecnologico, valutando anche l’acquisizione di Tesla, l’altra grande azienda da lui guidata.

L'articolo SpaceX, Elon Musk scommette forte sull’IA: annunciato un finanziamento da 40 miliardi per l’acquisto di chip proviene da Affaritaliani.it.

• Elon Musk has accused Ukrainian forces of using commercial Starlink in drone strikes.
• But two Ukrainian drone figures say the claim is impossible because of limits imposed on the terminals.
• It comes after Ukraine was hit by a 10-day slowdown on Starshield, the military version of Starlink.

Ukraine said its access to Starshield was restored this weekend, but Elon Musk isn't finished with Kyiv yet.

In an X post on Sunday, Musk accused Ukrainian forces of breaching Starlink's terms of service by using the civilian platform in drone attacks.

"Ukraine military violated Starlink terms of service and used it for offensive drone strikes to kill people. That loophole was closed last week," wrote the SpaceX owner.

"Using Starlink, a civilian commercial service, for offensive drone strikes to kill people has never been allowed, nor should it be," he added.

Musk made it clear he was talking about the commercial platform and not Starshield, the military version of the satellite communications service owned and controlled by the US government.

"Were Starlink to be turned off, the Ukrainian front line would collapse immediately. This is NOT a threat, it is simply a statement of fact," Musk added.

Ukrainian drone advisors hit back

Two prominent Ukrainian drone figures, however, disputed Musk's statement, saying that it was technically impossible for any of Kyiv's troops to have independently used Starlink in drone strikes.

"As someone who was inside the process at the Ministry of Defense, I can say for sure that this is not true," wrote Serhii Sternenko, a former advisor for drones to Ukraine's defense ministry, on his Telegram channel.

"It is very strange that Elon Musk does not know about the restrictions on Starlink operation in Ukraine," wrote Serhii "Flash" Beskrestnov, another former advisor.

Both worked in the ministry in early 2026, when it negotiated with SpaceX to prevent Russia from using black-market Starlink terminals in the war. SpaceX agreed in February to block Starlink over Ukraine and Russia, allowing access only to whitelisted Ukrainian terminals.

Sternenko said that Ukrainian civilians and troops could register their terminals on the whitelist, but that these would only work while subject to a speed requirement.

For one to connect while moving, it would have to be put on a special list that uses Starshield instead, he said.

"That is, it was technically impossible to use civilian Starlink to perform missions on drones. All drone missions that required satellite communication could only be carried out using Starshield," Sternenko added.

Beskrestnov said the Ukrainian Starlink terminals were subject to a speed limit of 90 kmph, or about 55 mph. The civilian service is also completely cut off over Russia, he added.

"Thus, we physically cannot use commercial Starlink for deep strikes and middle strikes," Beskrestnov wrote.

Starshield vs Starlink

Tactical drones operating on the Ukrainian battlefield at speeds below 55 mph, such as first-person-view attack drones, typically use radio-frequency signals rather than satellite communication to maintain contact with an operator. These are also often too small and lack enough onboard power to reliably carry even a Starlink Mini terminal.

What Ukraine usually uses satellite internet for — hence its reliance on Starshield — is mid-range and deep strikes on Russia's rear or Russian territory, with larger, more powerful drones that fly much faster.

Kyiv also relies on satellite communications for its small interceptor drones, which fly at up to 265 mph to catch incoming attack drones.

Musk followed up on his Sunday X post with a screenshot of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy writing on social media in mid-October that Kyiv's forces "also use Starlink for mid-range strikes" against Russian targets.

However, Zelenskyy's post was describing Ukraine's recent troubles with Starshield, and he repeatedly used the term "Starlink" to refer broadly to the military satellite service instead.

Musk and SpaceX did not respond to requests for comment sent outside regular business hours by Business Insider.

Earlier this month, Ukraine raised the alarm that its access to Starshield was being throttled at high speeds, reducing its ability to conduct deeper strikes and to control interceptor drones.

The crisis lasted 10 days and came as President Donald Trump and Musk openly criticized Ukraine for targeting Russian oil facilities at a time when the White House was trying to ease fuel prices.

The Wall Street Journal reported, citing unnamed US officials and sources, that Musk had personally ordered the speed cap. Musk and Trump have separately said they were not responsible for the slowdown.

On Saturday, Zelenskyy said Starshield services were running normally again.