> Since the 1960s, space launching has never been limited by supply.

It has been limited by price. Tons of business that now exists could have existed before. There is a whole history of sat companies that went bust, and big reason they did go bust is because the capital requirements were to high.

And even if your statement was true, the only reason it was even remotely true is because things like the Space Shuttle were subsidized by the government at billions and billions of $ ever year.

Now the government doesn't have to subsidize launch anymore.

> That's why 80% of SpaceX's cargo is for satellites to support their marginally useful Starlink business.

4 million subscribers 'marginally useful' ...

> Like Hyperloop, "space startups" are just dressed up snake oil.

Hyperloop was literally just a idea blue paper. Starlink has 400 million subscribers and has had a literal influence in the larges European war in 7 decades. But sure those are comparable. Totally.

> I asked GPT

That you resort to that because you clearly don't know any of the industry yourself is very telling.