I am just honestly confused. There seem to be no logical reason for it, except that it would raise the stock value of rocket producers like SpaceX and Blue Origin.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 7 points 1 hour ago

it would raise the stock value of rocket producers like SpaceX and Blue Origin.

Nailed it. Data centers in space is an objectively terrible idea but most people are too stupid to understand why. They see it as free real estate in the ignorance of the logistical problems of constructing structures in space large enough to be of any use, let alone powering and cooling them. The failure of the American education system has made the populace an easy hunting ground for modern Snake Oil salesmen.

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 4 hours ago

    ever heard of the Nazi bases on the moon?

    yeah. that's why.

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

    I don't think it makes any sense either:

    • Cooling will be large and expensive as hell
    • Getting computers there will be expensive
    • Getting solar cells there will be expensive
    • The radiolink to earthbound networks will be expensive and slow

    The only positive is that the energy will be cheap, and that the computers are safe except from nation state actors and untracked space debris.

    I lean towards this being a narrative for the markets. Space Exploration Technologies Corp. claimed a 370 billion USD total addressable market (TAM) in space enabled solutions, and a 26.5 trillion USD TAM for AI in their S-1 filing before going public. They state within that their goal over time is to launch 100 gigawatts of compute to space each year.

    By making the claim that this would be worthwhile they present themselves as uniquely positioned to profit from this situation. Moreso than other AI compute companies or other rocket launch companies.

  • source
  • [–] 16 points 16 hours ago (1 child)

    You answered half of your own question.

    "it would raise the value of rocket producers like SpaceX and Blue Origin."

    The other thing is a complete lack of jurisdiction. At least theoretically, nobody can go after them for generating grossly illegal content in space.

    Also, pure hypermasculine fetishism.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 21 hours ago

    No, it seems like you understand it perfectly.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 20 hours ago (1 child)

    There is zero economic reason. Most optimistic cost estimates are 5x more expensive than earth systems powered by solar and batteries. With near term optimism 10x more expensive.

    The only reason is skynet that is immune for anyone in the US pulling the plug from skynet. Russia/China can already hit sattelites or terrestrial datacenters with missiles, and space ones are more vulnerable because Americans are more likely to cheer destruction of skynet assets used to oppress them.

    The other factor is international law permits squatters rights to the most desirable orbits. 300 years from now, we may need power/data beemed to/from space. Privatizing it for oligarchy is a great long term investment if it is subsidized by US government.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

    I remember watching a real engineering video, the white paper for it doesn't go into properly explaining the cooling mechanism. There were plenty of other problems too, but this alone was enough for me to know it's running on pure hopium.

    Oh and you cannot just use the corporate maths in this and not count initial costs, and costs of assembling the whole thing. Estimated area of solar panels for a datacenter of 5GW was 12.5km² assuming the best of the solar technologies used. The initial cost of putting it up there would be so high, it might even dwarf the lifetime operation cost.

    In my opinion, it's just another grift like hyperloop ko keep the AI bubble from popping.

    Edit:5 not 4gw

    Edit 2: I had watched the video long ago, and I glossed over a lot of things,

    https://youtu.be/_qpdUNMt2yg

    Here's a link to the video to go watch yourself

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 9 points 23 hours ago

    Skynet. They want to build skynet. Go watch Terminator. I guess that's going to become a posthumous documentary.

    • Global geographic coverage with very low dependence on local infrastructure
    • Extremely difficult physical access compared with a conventional datacenter
    • Enormous distributed sensor/communications/computing network
    • Integration with Starlink's existing global communications infrastructure
    • Resilience against localized disasters or attacks
    • Direct access to governments and militaries that want autonomous communications, sensing, and computation
    • Essentially uninterruptible power source
    • Guided weapon systems, military intelligence and recon

    Etc... come on. It's skynet! That's the funny thing you called a data center but really that's kind of the least of what's going on.

  • source
  • [–] 38 points 1 day ago (2 children)

    There's no reason, Musk is just bullshiting like with Mars colony by 2025.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 1 day ago

    They're harder for us to burn to the fucking ground if we can't reach them.

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 day ago (6 children)

    The tech billiionaires got annoyed by regulations and complaints and are looking for a easier way.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 158 points 1 day ago (13 children)

    This idea is a total scam. This is just a way of asking investors for an enormous amount of money, with literally no intention of actually following through with it.

    They might throw a couple of cheap satellites in orbit, just to say they "did it"...but no one with any actual comprehension of these things is honestly expecting it to yield results. The vast majority of that investment money, is going to be used for unrelated things.

    In any sane world, this would be considered fraud. But, here we are.

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • load more comments (13 replies)
    [–] 17 points 1 day ago

    Snake oil. As almost everything else.

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    My theory is that it's so they are beyond the reach of protesters, the law, etc. I think that is going to be a very in-demand property for servers going forward.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 13 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    With the money that it costs to send an entire data center to space you can easily fortify and militarize your data center on earth to the extent that no protester will ever come close?

    The law is anyway already largely under their control right? They don't have to go to space to evade the law.

    And to the extent that the law still applies to them and constraints then, doesn't it also still apply to the necessary ground-based necessities for space based data centers? As in, if the state wants to shut them down, they can still do so?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
  • [–] 55 points 1 day ago (4 children)

    I believe Apartheid Pedo cited space being cold as a reason (ie don't have to worry about cooling the servers), except as usual he's a fuckwit with no idea what he's talking about. Space is empty, which means there's nothing to carry heat away, so the only way to lose heat is via radiation. And that takes forever.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›