A "fully and rapidly reusable" Starship would bring the cost of launch down orders of magnitude, perhaps to a level where it makes sense to send up satellites to repair/refuel other satellites.

This is a question that analysts don't even ask on earnings calls for companies with lowly earthbound datacenters full of the same GPUs.

The stock moves based on the same promise that's already unchecked without this new "in space" suffix:

We'll build datacenters using money we don't have yet, fill them with GPUs we haven't secured or even sourced, power them with infrastructure that can't be built in the promised time, and profit on their inference time over an ever-increasing (on paper) lifespan.

> the useful lifespan of the gpus in 4-6 years. Sooo what happens when you need to upgrade or repair?

Average life of starlink satellite is around 4-5 years

With zero energy cost it will run until it stops working or runs out of fuel, which I'm guessing is between 5-7 years.

> Sooo what happens when you need to upgrade or repair?

The satellite deorbits and you launch the next one.

not to mention that radiation hardening of chips has a big impact on cost and performance