There is no "solving cost of launch" even if it was 10x cheaper, for 10x lighter data centers that's still hundreds of flights and billions just to get the raw materials to GSO for the performance of a single data center, with no gain.
Keep in mind there has only been ~600 falcon 9 launches in total. What makes you believe SpaceX can ramp rocket flights up faster than we could just build nuclear here on earth? Where there is, you know, construction infrastructure?
I agree it's hard to get things into orbit. The question is if it's harder than solving the DC capacity problems here on Earth.
In the 1950s everyone thought we were entering the atomic age, an era when electricity would be too cheap to meter. That didn't happen: making nuclear simultaneously safe and cheap turned out to be much harder than anyone anticipated. Eventually people gave up on the Age Of Atoms and started saying that solar and wind were better. Go back in time and try to sell that in the 1950s and everyone would have thought you were insane. Huge land consumption and it only works intermittently? Why would that ever be easier than building a quick reactor?
And so here we are in 2026. The track record of SpaceX making things quickly and cheaply is vastly better than the modern nuclear industry. That's not necessarily the industries fault, but the over-regulation issue is real. If datacenters have the same problem Musk can still win despite the huge starting handicap. And everyone I know with experience of datacenter construction has similar stories. 90% of it is about dealing with governments and electricity suppliers (but that's mostly the grid, which is the government again).
Keep in mind there has only been ~600 falcon 9 launches in total. What makes you believe SpaceX can ramp rocket flights up faster than we could just build nuclear here on earth? Where there is, you know, construction infrastructure?