1086
Anybody Who Thinks Orbital Data Centers are a Good Idea Is Suffering from AI Psychosis, Experts Argue (tech.yahoo.com)
submitted 1 month ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
403 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 42 points 1 month ago (2 children)

There's also the very real problem of data transfer.

On land you just lay down another fiber optic cable and you can double your data transfer rate.

In space, you have to deal with cross talk and interference on a limited spectrum.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 21 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Free space laser communications are possible, but even then you are only talking about 10s of GB/s, and you cant add more lasers or receivers on a satellite already in orbit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    But if you have a constellation of thousands of LEO communications satellites to leverage...

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 month ago

    Doesn't help, your laser (or RF comms if you are using them) can still only send out a fixed amount of data per second, it doesnt matter if it is being sent to the ground or another satellite, once it is launched there is a hard cap on how much data can flow into/out of it in a given time and there is no way to improve that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -24 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    That's what the lasers are for. It's a solved problem.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 31 points 1 month ago

    Not really, because it can't be solved, just worked around.

    Lasers are still subject to the inverse square law, but with a slightly different multiplier.

    Also, lasers still have the bandwidth issue of not being able to double up the communication lines due to cross talk and other fun physics issues.

    There's a reason why fiber will never go out of style.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    If it was a solved problem it would be widely used, but it isn't. Ever looked at the reports of starlink speeds? It's not reliable at all, everything other than a fully clear sky with cold weather (meaning less moisture and particles in the air) affects the communication. It physically can't be a good or better alternative to fiber (or anything else that isn't wireless).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 month ago

    Yeah... Terrestrial 5G towers with a fiber backbone for some proportion of them... are... stupendously more cost effective at getting a decent level of internet to a lot of people.

    Also doesn't cause Kessler Syndrome, which is, you know, good.

    Now, such a system will still suffer in more abberant atmospheric conditons, but to a far lesser extent.

    Literally the only actual 'use case' I can think of where StarLink 'makes sense' as a better solution is ... you are a boat that is actually moving most of the time.

    If you're a house boat... terrestrial 5G probably exists near your mooring.

    Either that or you truly, truly live far away from civilization.

    ... but we already had satellite internet that did those things.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent