Aggregator

SpaceX IPO Lifts Off As Data Center Race Moves From Ashburn To Abilene To Space

Zero Rss
4 days 5 hours ago
SpaceX IPO Lifts Off As Data Center Race Moves From Ashburn To Abilene To Space

SpaceX surged 19% on Friday in its Nasdaq debut following the world's largest IPO, closing near $161 after opening at $150 and valuing the company north of $2 trillion.

J.P. Morgan + SpaceX= Largest IPO

Congratulations to the @spaceX team on this milestone, we were proud to serve as a lead bookrunner on the transaction. pic.twitter.com/axxob266QP

— J.P. Morgan (@jpmorgan) June 12, 2026

Investor excitement over the potential commercialization of the Starship mega-rocket is certaintly a major driver, but also markets are beginning to view SpaceX as one of the most pivotal players in the emerging orbital data-center race, where launch dominance, Starlink infrastructure, satellite manufacturing scale, and plunging access-to-orbit costs could position Elon Musk's rocket company at the center of the next frontier in AI compute.

Nearly six months ago, we read the tea leaves and told readers how to position ahead of the SpaceX IPO and the coming space-and-data center buildout race in low Earth orbit. That thesis is moving from speculative to investable, after SpaceX's public-market debut yesterday and Starship commercialization story nears (read report).

Starship is a very big rocket https://t.co/0RyGe3CPzS

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 13, 2026

A continuation of the space-based data center theme and how to profit comes from Barclays analyst Brendan Lynch in a new report titled "Ashburn, then Abilene, then space."

Lynch sees the story of space-based data centers gaining ground as territorial deployment woes materialize amid intensifying constraints on power, land, and grid.

This year alone, hyperscalers plan $800 billion in capex to build out data centers. There is growing resistance to the buildout, which has already derailed nearly half of the nation's planned 16-gigawatt capacity, with only 5 gigawatts currently under construction.

The good news for terrestrial-based data centers is that Lynch and his team don't see orbital data centers as a likely threat over the next decade, citing launch costs, radiation-resistant hardware needs, thermal-management limits, bandwidth constraints, and regulatory uncertainty.

The big attraction in space is unlimited solar power and no permitting. Orbital data centers could use near-continuous solar energy without relying on local utilities, grid interconnection waits, land availability, zoning approvals, or water-intensive cooling systems. Lynch noted that solar panels in orbit can generate up to eight times more power than terrestrial solar panels because of constant sunlight and the absence of atmospheric interference.

However, the analyst noted that the economics of orbital data centers remain a major roadblock. He estimated that orbital data centers cost roughly $51 billion per gigawatt to build and operate over five years, compared with about $16 billion per gigawatt for terrestrial data centers.

Lynch said, "However, there is still a long way to go before the economics and engineering make orbital data centers feasible at scale. Currently, orbital capacity is ~3x more expensive per MW than terrestrial, primarily due to high launch costs. Additionally, further progress must be made on engineering challenges, such as radiation-resistant hardware, thermal management, and connectivity."

Google estimates launch costs would need to fall below $200 per kilogram by 2035 for its orbital-compute vision to work, while SpaceX's Falcon Heavy is currently around $1,500 per kilogram.

Given these constraints, Lynch does not see orbital data centers as a "threat to our coverage with data center exposure (DLR, EQIX, IRM, AMT) in the next 10 years."

Now he added, "Beyond 10 years, it is harder to handicap the impact, but if space-based DCs come to fruition, it will likely be complementary to traditional deployments."

"That said, as technology advances and costs come down, we anticipate orbital capacity will gain momentum," the analyst noted.

The moment when launch costs plummet will likely hinge on the Starship commercialization timeline, which could see full-scale commercialization around 2027-28 and, really, at the end of the decade.

Starship is still transitioning from test vehicle to commercial platform. The first monetization wave is likely internal SpaceX demand, mainly Starlink deployment, larger satellites, orbital AI-compute demos, and NASA-linked lunar spacecraft.

Reuters reported SpaceX is aiming to begin orbital AI-computing demonstration missions by late 2027, a key validation point for the orbital data center.

Lynch added more color about the orbital data centers:

How data centers in space operate

Power

  • Most orbital data center plans involve many satellites in low earth orbit operating collectively to form the "data center" in space, similar to how terrestrial data centers are comprised of many server racks. Clusters of satellites are often called constellations.
  • Large solar panels supply near-continuous power. Satellites can be placed in sun-synchronous orbits (e.g., "terminator" orbits) to maximize solar exposure. Batteries are also required to store energy for eclipse periods when satellites pass into earth's shadow.

Communication network

  • Optical laser links connect satellites so that they can share data. They are a high-speed method of transmitting data through laser beams. This is the same technology that some satellite operators use to provide broadband capacity on earth.
  • Satellites transmit data to ground stations, which serve as the "middleman" between the data center and users. Constellations will likely require thousands of ground stations because low earth orbit satellites only pass in range of each ground station for a few minutes per orbit. Ground stations have large antennas to communicate with satellites either through radio waves or optical laser links. Radio waves provide reliable, regulated, lower-bandwidth connectivity, while optical links enable high-capacity, high-efficiency data transfer but require precise alignment and are sensitive to atmospheric conditions. Ground stations will also have fiber optic cables to connect with users.

Compute and cooling

  • Advanced computing in space requires radiation-tolerant or radiation-hardened chips. Several semiconductor companies, including NVDA (covered by Tom O'Malley), are exploring specialized space-based computing infrastructure.
  • Liquid cooling removes heat from chips, and then radiators dissipate heat as infrared radiation into deep space. Traditional air cooling methods don't work  due to the lack of atmosphere. Compute density per satellite is primarily limited by the rate at which heat can be radiated into space.

Operations Satellites

  • Satellites are launched into space via rockets designed for heavy loads, similar to how traditional satellites are launched, but conceivably at much larger scale.
  • Physical maintenance will likely be limited, but software updates are possible. Satellites will likely have redundant components and built-in work-arounds in case of hardware failure.
  • Most business models assume no servicing or upgrades. Instead, satellites that reach the end of their operating life will be replaced by new ones carrying the latest technology. Most satellites are expected to have a 5-year useful life. At the end of life, satellites are typically de-orbited into the atmosphere to burn up.

Why data centers in space are attractive

Power

  • Space provides less constrained access to solar power with fewer bottlenecks to scale vs. terrestrial power grids. Developers are not reliant on utility companies to provide power infrastructure.
  • Power is generated and consumed in the same location, avoiding transmission losses and grid interconnection constraints.
  • Solar panels in orbit can generate up to 8x higher output due to constant sun exposure and lack of atmospheric interference (molecules in the atmosphere absorb, scatter, and reflect sunlight, reducing the solar energy that reaches terrestrial solar panels). Solar power in space is also more stable than earth because there are no clouds or weather issues.

Land

  • Suitable land sites with sufficient power are increasingly scarce in key data center markets globally. Space offers a solution to land constraints.
  • Orbital data centers avoid many challenges faced by terrestrial development, including community opposition, environmental remedies, zoning restrictions, etc.

Resilience

  • Infrastructure in space is less exposed to disruption from natural disasters, grid failures, and geopolitical events.
  • Constellations of satellites offer high resiliency because workloads can be shifted between satellites if one goes down.

Design

  • The modular design enables a more efficient capacity build out, where infrastructure is scaled via incremental satellite launches rather than large upfront development projects. Over time, this could reduce capital intensity and development risk.
  • Water usage is one of the most common critiques of terrestrial data centers, particularly as AI increases compute density and cooling needs. Orbital data centers do not require evaporative water cooling

Challenges to near-term deployment

Physical

  • Satellites will require very large solar panels to generate sufficient power for AI workloads. Satellites that support compute functions (instead of communications) might need to be ~10x larger to achieve attractive economies of scale.
  • Space requires specialized IT hardware due to radiation which can corrupt data unpredictably and degrade equipment. Traditional space hardware uses radiation hardened chips that are more than 100x less powerful than chips in terrestrial data centers and very expensive.
  • Thermal management limits compute density per satellite. There is no medium for heat transfer in space (i.e. no air), so satellites require a combination of liquid cooling to remove heat from the chips and radiators to remove heat from the satellite. Heat is emitted into deep space via infrared radiation. The radiators requires a lot of surface area in addition to the large solar panels because radiative heat transfer is relatively inefficient vs. air cooling.
  • Orbital data centers face networking and bandwidth limitations. Inter-satellite connectivity (generally via optical laser links) requires complex, precise alignment. Space-to-earth communication via radio waves (most common currently) is heavily regulated and has relatively low bandwidth. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) coordinates global spectrum allocation, and operators require authorization in each jurisdiction where they transmit signals to/from the ground. Optical laser links (emerging technology) are higher bandwidth and higher efficiency but face atmospheric interference due to clouds and weather and require precise alignment. Additionally, space-to-earth connectivity requires sufficient ground stations to receive/transmit data.
  • Orbital systems have high failure rates vs. terrestrial infrastructure. When equipment fails in orbital data centers, it can't be replaced. As a result, orbital data centers must be highly redundant and have failover measures. If the satellite fails, it must be entirely replaced.
  • Launch capacity is the primary constraint on scaling infrastructure due to the limited frequency of rockets launches. Size and weight are pertinent considerations for satellite design due to constraints of the rocket. Many orbital data center business plans are dependent on improvements to the launch process. In 2025, there were 330 launches globally. Each rocket can carry about 40-100 traditional satellites. However, orbital data centers could eventually exceed the size of the largest rockets that are available, highlighting the need for improved launch capabilities.

Regulatory

  • A primary concern is overcrowding in earth's orbit, which increases the likelihood of collisions and long-term debris accumulation. The FCC requires that low earth orbit satellites are de-orbitted within five years of end-of-life, and companies must file orbital debris mitigation plans with regulators. There are currently ~16,000 satellites orbiting earth, but several companies have filed plans with the FCC to collectively increase this by 10x with build-outs in the late 2020s and 2030s.
  • There will likely be future challenges due to regulatory and jurisdiction uncertainty given the lack of standards for orbital data centers. For example, spectrum allocation and licensing is currently handled by individual countries. Broader AI regulations and data sovereignty requirements will likely also be factors.

Economic

  • Orbital data centers are estimated to cost up to ~$50m/MW, more than triple the cost of terrestrial data centers, at present.
  • The biggest financial challenge is launch costs. Google estimates that launch costs would need to fall below $200/kg by 2035 for its vision to be economically viable. SpaceX's current launch vehicle, Falcon Heavy, is the cheapest available at $1,500/kg.
  • In addition to the higher build cost, the useful life of orbital data centers is only ~5 years due to limited maintenance and upgrade capabilities and the harsh environment in space (e.g. radiation, extreme temperatures). This compares to decades of useful life for terrestrial data centers which can be maintained and upgraded more easily.'

And now to the part readers care about most: how to profit from the buildout.

Axiom Space (private, not covered)

  • The company has been testing cloud computing capabilities on the International Space Station (ISS) since 2022 and launched its first two orbital data center nodes in January 2026. Its nodes are modular units located on the space station.
  • Axiom is also building a commercial space station which it plans to launch ahead of the ISS's retirement in 2030.

Blue Origin (private, not covered)

  • The company announced Project Sunrise with a target of deploying up to 51,600 satellites for AI workloads. It filed plans with the FCC in March 2026, but faces an objection from NASA regarding the proposed orbit altitude (which overlaps with critical human spaceflight paths) and risk of space debris.
  • The company also has plans to launch a 5,000 satellite constellation for global high-speed communications infrastructure, called TerraWave. It aims to begin deploying TerraWave satellites in late 2027. TerraWave satellites are designed for networking while Project Sunrise satellites are designed to enable high-density compute.

Cowboy Space (private, not covered)

  • The company filed plans with the FCC to deploy 20,000 orbital data center units in a constellation called Stampede in May 2026. Each unit would repurpose the the upper stage of the rocket as a high-density compute platform. Cowboy Space aims to launch its first rockets in 2028.
  • The company is also working on a separate constellation that would send solar power back to earth.

Planet Labs (public, not covered)

  • The company partnered with Google (covered by Ross Sandler) for project Suncatcher which has a demonstration mission planned for early 2027 to test Google's TPUs (specialized AI chips designed to accelerate machine learning and inferencing workloads) in space.
  • Planet Labs already operates 600+ satellites that form an imaging constellation for geospatial intelligence.

SpaceX (public, not covered)

  • The company filed plans with the FCC to launch a million data center satellites for ~100GW of compute capacity in January 2026.
  • SpaceX currently operates ~10,00 Starlink satellites and controls ~65% of active satellites globally. Starlink satellites primarily enable communication vs. data center satellites which are designed for high-density compute.

Starcloud (private, not covered)

  • The company deployed a ~1kW satellite with a single GPU in November 2025 as proof-of-concept. It plans to launch its next-gen satellite which is 10kW in 2027 and then launch a ~200kW satellite in 2028.
  • Its ultimate goal is to deploy 88,000 satellites totaling ~20GW of compute primarily for inference workloads, reaching ~5GW by 2035. Starcloud filed plans with the FCC in March 2026.

Professional subscribers can read much more on SpaceX and the space economy at our new Marketdesk.ai portal. 

Tyler Durden Sun, 06/14/2026 - 22:45
Tyler Durden

Exxon Weighs Woodside Deal As LNG Becomes Strategic Priority

Zero Rss
4 days 6 hours ago
Exxon Weighs Woodside Deal As LNG Becomes Strategic Priority

Exxon Mobil is assessing a range of options to expand its global gas business, with Woodside Energy reportedly among the companies being reviewed as potential acquisition candidates, according to Bloomberg.

No formal approach has been made, and internal evaluations remain preliminary. Both companies have declined to comment.

Bloomberg writes that Woodside offers several strategic advantages for Exxon. As a leading LNG producer with established relationships across key Asian markets, the Australian company would provide immediate scale in a sector where Exxon has historically been less dominant than some of its European peers. Its growth pipeline includes the Louisiana LNG project in the US and major Australian developments such as Scarborough and Browse.

Interest in LNG assets has intensified amid ongoing concerns about global supply security, particularly following disruptions to Middle Eastern export routes. This has increased the value of producers with diversified supply bases and long-term customer contracts in Asia.

For Exxon, any transaction would follow its 2024 acquisition of Pioneer Natural Resources and further broaden its energy portfolio beyond North America. Woodside’s existing partnership with Exxon in the Bass Strait venture could also provide a degree of operational familiarity.

While Woodside is not the only company under review, it stands out as one of the few sizeable LNG-focused businesses available globally. Any potential bid would likely attract significant market attention and serve as an early challenge for new Woodside CEO Liz Westcott.

More broadly, the operating environment for oil and gas producers has improved under the Trump administration. Since returning to office in 2025, President Trump has prioritized domestic energy development through a combination of regulatory rollbacks, faster permitting processes, and support for expanded LNG exports. While commodity prices remain the primary driver of industry profitability, the policy backdrop has generally been viewed as favorable for large producers, encouraging investment, consolidation, and long-term growth projects across the sector.

Tyler Durden Sun, 06/14/2026 - 21:35
Tyler Durden

The Inflation Sh*t Is Hitting The Fan

Zero Rss
4 days 7 hours ago
The Inflation Sh*t Is Hitting The Fan

Submitted by QTR's Fringe Finance

This week was proof that the inflation story that markets desperately want to go away refuses to cooperate. It also adds to the case that new Fed chair Kevin Warsh could have his hands tied — and may ultimately need to redefine inflation to untie them.

This week the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported another really ugly wholesale inflation print, adding to a growing pile of evidence that inflation pressures are proving far more persistent than policymakers, economists, and investors had hoped.

The Producer Price Index rose 1.1% in May, well above economist expectations of 0.7%. On a year-over-year basis, wholesale inflation accelerated to 6.5%, the highest reading since November 2022.

Even though core PPI, which excludes food and energy, came in slightly below expectations at 0.4% versus estimates of 0.5%, that distinction shouldn’t provide much comfort. The headline figure remains extraordinarily elevated, and businesses are still dealing with rising costs that eventually work their way through supply chains and into consumer prices. CNBC reported:

Most of the acceleration in the PPI — nearly 80% — came from a 2.8% surge in final demand goods prices, the biggest increase ever in a data series going back to December 2009. In turn, 80% of that increase came from a 10.7% jump in energy.

Zero Hedge posted the following chart on X showing the jump:

Economist Peter Schiff noted on X:

Producer prices spiked 1.1% in May, following a downwardly revised 1.1% rise in April. That's back-to-back months of 14% annualized increases. So far in 2026, the PPI is already up 4%. If this pace continues, it will rise 10% in 2026, matching the 2021 gain, the most since 1980.

PPI is often viewed as a leading indicator for future inflation because it measures costs before they reach consumers. When businesses face higher input costs, those costs rarely disappear into some magical accounting black hole. They generally get passed along. Companies can absorb some pain for a while, but eventually somebody pays the bill. Historically, that somebody is the consumer.

The significance of today’s report extends beyond a single monthly data point. It comes on the heels of yesterday’s CPI report, which showed inflation accelerating once again. The Consumer Price Index rose 0.5% during the month, pushing annual inflation to 4.2%. While both figures matched economist expectations, that hardly qualifies as good news.

In fact, inflation has now climbed above 4% for the first time in three years and sits at its highest level since April 2023. Personally I’m not sure how it could be made any clearer to the market that rates are going to have to hold steady or move higher than being nowhere f*cking near the Fed’s 2% “target”.

But markets seem determined to celebrate inflation reports whenever they merely meet expectations. However, there is a difference between meeting forecasts and solving inflation. The Federal Reserve’s target remains 2%. Inflation is currently running at 4.2%. That isn’t victory. It’s more than double the Fed’s target.

Taken together, yesterday’s CPI report and today’s PPI report paint a picture that should make rate-cut enthusiasts increasingly uncomfortable. Consumer inflation is accelerating. Wholesale inflation is accelerating. Energy prices are pushing higher. And the broad disinflation narrative that markets spent the better part of the last year embracing is showing signs of breaking down.

Last month, I argued that markets were underestimating how quickly the conversation could shift from rate cuts to rate hikes. At the time, that seemed like an aggressive position. Most investors were still operating under the assumption that inflation would continue drifting lower, growth would soften in an orderly fashion, and the Fed would eventually ride in with rate cuts to keep the party going.

That assumption looks considerably shakier today. And every inflation report that comes in hot further limits the Federal Reserve’s options.

At best, this data supports a case for keeping rates elevated for significantly longer than markets would like. At worst, it supports a growing argument that the next move from the Federal Reserve may not be lower rates at all…it may be higher.

That possibility still sounds absurd to many investors because markets have spent years conditioning themselves to expect monetary accommodation whenever conditions become uncomfortable. Somewhere along the way, investors became convinced that central banking was supposed to function like a customer service call center for the S&P 500.

Stocks down? Cut rates. Economy slowing? Cut rates. Credit markets stressed? Cut rates. Investors sad about the death of their pet goldfish? Cut rates. Octogenarian billionaires complaining about flatulence that investments are giving them? Cut rates.

Unfortunately for that crowd, inflation doesn’t particularly care about market expectations, portfolio allocations, or CNBC panel discussions about why six cuts are definitely coming next year.

The Fed can tolerate slower growth. It can tolerate weaker sentiment. It can tolerate hedge fund managers with gas and anchors nearly shitting themselves on financial television. What it cannot tolerate indefinitely is inflation running more than double its target while wholesale prices reaccelerate to levels not seen in years.

And that’s where this vice grip keeps tightening. This market is already facing a half-dozen serious roadblocks and questions that all investors should know about. I wrote about them earlier this week and it’s a free read here.

Now, every hot inflation report removes another degree of freedom from policymakers. Every upside surprise forces markets to reconsider assumptions about lower rates, easier financial conditions, and endless liquidity. Every month that inflation remains elevated increases the probability that “higher for longer” eventually becomes “higher still.”

That’s bad news for an economy that has spent the better part of fifteen years becoming addicted to cheap money.

🔥 80% Off If You Subscribe Today. This coupon allows for 80% off of annual subscriptions and results in a 85% savings over paying the monthly rate for a subscription to the blog. You keep the discounted rate for as long as you wish to remain a subscriber.: Get 80% off forever

Higher rates don’t simply affect stock valuations. They tighten financial conditions across the entire economy. They pressure borrowers. They increase refinancing risk. They squeeze commercial real estate. They stress private credit. They raise funding costs. They expose leverage that only works when money is cheap. The longer rates stay elevated, the tighter that grip becomes.

Yesterday’s CPI report showed inflation running at 4.2%, the highest level in more than three years. Today’s PPI report showed wholesale inflation running at 6.5%, the highest level since late 2022.

Neither report supports the case for imminent rate cuts. Together, they strongly support the opposite conclusion. At a minimum, they reinforce the argument that rates cannot be cut anytime soon without the Fed risking what little inflation-fighting credibility it has left. At the extreme, they strengthen the case that policymakers may eventually have to consider raising rates again.

That is a conversation markets still seem remarkably unwilling to have. Instead, investors continue behaving like a rate-cut rescue package is just one meeting away. Every soft data point gets interpreted as bullish because it means cuts are coming. Every strong data point gets interpreted as bullish because growth is resilient. Somehow every possible outcome leads to the exact same conclusion: buy more stocks.

It’s a fascinating intellectual framework. Unfortunately, inflation data has a nasty habit of ruining good stories. We’re already operating in territory that would have sounded ridiculous a decade ago. Inflation remains far above target. Interest rates are sitting near multi-decade highs. Government debt continues exploding. Asset prices remain historically elevated. Consumers are increasingly stretched. Credit markets are showing signs of strain. Yet markets continue acting as though the return of free money is some sort of natural law.

The reality is that the bill for years of monetary excess — and Janet Yellen’s massive super-genius brainpower — is still arriving.

At her final news conference as Fed chair Wednesday, Yellen said the Fed’s failure to bring inflation up to the central bank’s 2 percent mandate is her single disappointment.

“We have a 2 percent symmetric inflation objective. For a number of years now, inflation has been running under 2 percent, and I consider it an important priority to make sure that inflation doesn’t chronically undershoot our 2 percent objective,” she said.

The unprecedented situation we’re in isn’t stabilizing. It’s becoming more unstable. The vice grip on the economy and financial markets is tightening one data point at a time. The screws turn a little further with every inflation report that refuses to cooperate, every producer-price surprise, every CPI release that reminds everyone that inflation never actually went away—it merely stopped accelerating for a while.

The uncomfortable truth is that policymakers spent years trying to convince everyone there was a painless exit from the biggest monetary experiment in modern history. Now they’re discovering the same thing everyone else eventually discovers and the thing that Austrian economists have been screaming from rooftops: there are no painless exits, only delayed consequences.

Now read:

--

QTR’s Disclaimer: Please read my full legal disclaimer on my About page here. This post represents my opinions only. In addition, please understand I am an idiot and often get things wrong and lose money. I may own or transact in any names mentioned in this piece at any time without warning. Contributor posts and aggregated posts have been hand selected by me, have not been fact checked and are the opinions of their authors. They are either submitted to QTR by their author, reprinted under a Creative Commons license with my best effort to uphold what the license asks, or with the permission of the author.

This is not a recommendation to buy or sell any stocks or securities, just my opinions. I often lose money on positions I trade/invest in. I may add any name mentioned in this article and sell any name mentioned in this piece at any time, without further warning. None of this is a solicitation to buy or sell securities. I may or may not own names I write about and are watching. Sometimes I’m bullish without owning things, sometimes I’m bearish and do own things. Just assume my positions could be exactly the opposite of what you think they are just in case. If I’m long I could quickly be short and vice versa. I won’t update my positions.

As of May 20, 2026 I personally no longer actively trade (read my story here). My investing/saving is done by recurring contributions mostly to sector ETFs and a few select equities, trusted third parties who oversee my accounts, and advisors. Such advisors or funds, through individual equities, options, index funds, mutual funds, ETFs, or other securities, may have positions in, exposure to, or holdings of names mentioned herein that I know nothing about. Basically, via index funds, ETFs and individual equities it is possible I could own, have exposure to, or not own anything at any point. As of the same date, May 20, 2026, in an attempt to lead a healthier lifestyle, I’ve also excluded myself from fantasy sports, sports betting, online and in-person casinos and prediction markets.

And all positions can change immediately as soon as I publish this, with or without notice and at any point I can be long, short or neutral on any position. You are on your own. Do not make decisions based on my blog. I exist on the fringe. If you see numbers and calculations of any sort, assume they are wrong and double check them. I failed Algebra in 8th grade and topped off my high school math accolades by getting a D- in remedial Calculus my senior year, before becoming an English major in college so I could bullshit my way through things easier.

The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. These are not the opinions of any of my employers, partners, or associates. I did my best to be honest about my disclosures but can’t guarantee I am right; I write these posts after a couple beers sometimes. I edit after my posts are published because I’m impatient and lazy, so if you see a typo, check back in a half hour. Also, I just straight up get shit wrong a lot. I mention it twice because it’s that important.

Tyler Durden Sun, 06/14/2026 - 21:00
Tyler Durden

zero rss

Copyright (c) 2026 FYCKL Project