Gizmodo58%

xAI Is Dead. Long Live SpaceXAI 74%

By Mike Pearl73%

7/6/2026, 11:45:05 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 29 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Negativity Bias, and Unattributed Quote, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 65% saturation with 325 hits. Analysis detected 1,676 faulty-reasoning hits from 500 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 66% and a BS Rank of 74% (5,617 of 21,203 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 73.50% of the article peer group.

In an effort to save tech bloggers from a lot of annoying typing, xAI has finally been rebranded: 
I’m elated. 
Do you have any idea how much I’ve dreaded writing about “xAI,” with its leading lowercase letter? 
How much I loathed explaining that the Elon Musk-owned operator of the Grok chatbot was acquired by Elon Musk-owned SpaceX back in February, before SpaceX became publicly-traded last month? 
The animation in SpaceXAI’s X post (did I forget to mention that SpaceXAI owns X?) 
is, sure, embarrassing, aesthetically speaking. 
Watch in awe as the xAI logo, which looked like it was made ten minutes before it was due in graphic design class, contorts into the famously gorgeous and beloved styling of the SpaceX logo—a breathtaking metamorphosis. 
Now you haveட்ரோ have to squint to even see the AI part. 
But, logo aside, it’s a massive win for clarity. 
It’s SpaceX… AI. 
SpaceXAI. 
I no longer have to explain anything. 
In March, Elon Musk said SpaceXAI’s signature product, Grok, was so flawed that it needed to be “rebuilt from the foundations up.” 
SpaceX then began the process of buying Cursor, an AI coding tool. 
Since then, Musk has claimed that Grok is progressing toward a “major improvement.” 
Last year, the company then called xAI reportedly spent $6.4 billion—twice its revenue. 
However, the AI division of SpaceX is absolutely critical to Elon Musk’s narrative about SpaceX’s future as a world-historically massive company with a “total addressable market” of $28.5 trillion. 
In this story, space infrastructure and space exploration are meant to be inextricably linked to AI. 
The SpaceX prospectus puts it in these terms: 
We believe AI infrastructure in space can utilize the virtually limitless power of the Sun and thereby enable the use of AI as a transformative force for understanding the universe and improving the daily lives of all humans. 
Elon Musk has also rattled off a version of this concept in oratory form, as he did during an all-hands meeting of xAI workers in February. 
That version contained, um, fanciful embellishments like this: 
So the—the next step beyond Earth data centers are Earth orbital data centers, and we’ll be launching, with SpaceX, orbital data centers at the 100 to 200 gigawatt per year level. 
Not cumulative. 
I mean per year. 
And ultimately, we see a path to maybe launching as much as a terawatt per year of compute from Earth. 
But what if you want to go beyond a mere terawatt per year? 
In order to do that you have to go to the moon. 
Anyway, good luck to the folks at SpaceXAI who theoretically have to accomplish all of this while their parent company continues to seep into our equity markets despite the company’s governance structure making it impossible to fire Musk, no matter what happens. 
Goofy or not, this man’s harebrained ideas now have so much buy-in from our wealth-holding class, they sort of have to be true now, or we might all be screwed. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 7.6%Mike Pearl: 4.5%Gizmodo: 4.1%Confirmation Bias7.6%This article: 5.8%Mike Pearl: 2.5%Gizmodo: 1.4%Anchoring Bias5.8%This article: 3.4%Mike Pearl: 4.0%Gizmodo: 3.0%Availability Heuristic3.4%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.7%Gizmodo: 1.5%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 1.0%Gizmodo: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 3.1%Gizmodo: 2.2%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 3.8%Mike Pearl: 11.6%Gizmodo: 5.6%Framing Effect3.8%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.9%Gizmodo: 0.5%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.4%Gizmodo: 0.4%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 17.0%Mike Pearl: 6.0%Gizmodo: 3.9%Optimism Bias17.0%This article: 8.4%Mike Pearl: 5.5%Gizmodo: 2.2%Pessimism Bias8.4%This article: 25.2%Mike Pearl: 12.4%Gizmodo: 7.6%Negativity Bias25.2%This article: 1.4%Mike Pearl: 0.9%Gizmodo: 0.8%Self-Serving Bias1.4%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.9%Gizmodo: 1.1%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.3%Gizmodo: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 1.3%Gizmodo: 0.9%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.4%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 7.4%Mike Pearl: 1.0%Gizmodo: 2.8%Halo Effect7.4%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.4%Gizmodo: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 4.0%Mike Pearl: 2.8%Gizmodo: 1.6%Recency Bias4.0%This article: 1.6%Mike Pearl: 0.3%Gizmodo: 0.4%Primacy Effect1.6%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 6.8%Mike Pearl: 1.6%Gizmodo: 1.1%Ad Hominem6.8%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.6%Gizmodo: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 8.6%Mike Pearl: 5.0%Gizmodo: 4.1%Appeal to Authority8.6%This article: 9.2%Mike Pearl: 3.2%Gizmodo: 1.4%False Dilemma9.2%This article: 14.8%Mike Pearl: 1.8%Gizmodo: 0.6%Slippery Slope14.8%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 8.0%Mike Pearl: 5.4%Gizmodo: 5.4%Hasty Generalization8.0%This article: 3.0%Mike Pearl: 0.7%Gizmodo: 0.3%Red Herring3.0%This article: 6.0%Mike Pearl: 1.9%Gizmodo: 0.9%Bandwagon6.0%This article: 38.0%Mike Pearl: 7.5%Gizmodo: 4.9%Appeal to Emotion38.0%This article: 7.6%Mike Pearl: 1.8%Gizmodo: 1.0%Begging the Question7.6%This article: 5.8%Mike Pearl: 2.9%Gizmodo: 3.3%Post Hoc (False Cause)5.8%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.5%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 6.2%Mike Pearl: 3.6%Gizmodo: 2.0%Anecdotal6.2%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 8.2%Mike Pearl: 5.1%Gizmodo: 2.3%Ambiguity (Equivocation)8.2%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 8.4%Mike Pearl: 0.4%Gizmodo: 0.1%Special Pleading8.4%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 23.0%Mike Pearl: 4.9%Gizmodo: 4.7%Unattributed Quote23.0%This article: 9.0%Mike Pearl: 1.8%Gizmodo: 1.2%Quote-first Misdirection9.0%This article: 65.0%Mike Pearl: 23.8%Gizmodo: 13.6%Biased Writer Voice65.0%This article: 7.6%Mike Pearl: 1.0%Gizmodo: 1.6%Indoctrination7.6%This article: 14.4%Mike Pearl: 0.9%Gizmodo: 1.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias14.4%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 0.0%Gizmodo: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Mike Pearl: 1.3%Gizmodo: 3.4%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

500 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers23%attributed speech384writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 18 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 17 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 5 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 100.0% coverageElon Musk • 22 words • 100.0% coverageSpaceX • 12 words • 0.0% coverageElon Musk • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 29 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageSpaceX • 38 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 26 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 8 words • 100.0% coverageElon Musk • 31 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 4 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 12 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 42 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 30 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

SpaceX

76%flagged-word coverage
50 attributed words43% of attributed speech98% writer coverage
0%42.5%85.0%Biased Writer Voice-84.6 ptsWriter: 84.6%SpaceX: 0.0%0.0%Indoctrination+76.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%SpaceX: 76.0%76.0%Politically Left Leaning B-18.8 ptsWriter: 18.8%SpaceX: 0.0%0.0%Unattributed Quote-12.8 ptsWriter: 12.8%SpaceX: 0.0%0.0%Quote-first Misdirection-11.7 ptsWriter: 11.7%SpaceX: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.