Top
Best
New

Posted by simonebrunozzi 5 hours ago

Will we put data centers in space?(www.forethought.org)
50 points | 150 commentspage 5
InsideOutSanta 4 hours ago|
I thought this was one of these joke websites that just say "No."

I mean, Elon will probably shoot some GPUs up there and call it a success, but I'm not sure that should count as "data centers in space."

ben_w 4 hours ago|
I wouldn't put it past him to launch 20,000 of them before moving on to the next thing.

Or two. It's a broad range, but with his personality and prior history both are possible before he announces whatever the next pivot is.

Just, not a million. There's better things to do with the capacity to put a million up there, and better places to put a million (last I checked) 120 kW compute racks and associated PV systems.

UltraSane 4 hours ago||
Only if launch costs fall to 10% of current costs.
lefra 4 hours ago|
IMO, they need to fall below the land cost for the same computing power somewhere in a desert.
kevin_thibedeau 5 hours ago||
The only place where a space data center makes sense is in Mars orbit to reduce the amount of mass that needs to be landed. Every thing else is a smoke and mirrors game to justify rolling a bunch of failed businesses into SpaceX.
ben_w 4 hours ago||
Even then. If you're building a million satellites, they only need to be about 42 meters long for you to make them into a contiguous ring in LEO. Smaller (22.5m) or fewer (537,000) for the same in a 200 km orbit around Mars.

Do that, and you can quickly bootstrap an orbital ring and make rockets obsolete from surface to orbit of either body.

In the case of Mars, the planet-wide dust storms make it a good idea to locate your PV off-planet, and an orbital ring is also very convenient for that.

lefra 4 hours ago|||
Maybe I missed something obvious, but how does an orbital ring make rockets obsolete for surface to orbit trips?
ben_w 4 hours ago||
Because it's held up by being in orbit (strictly: a bit faster than that), you can by the same process as a maglev hang a stationary-with-respect-to-ground cable off it; and because the cable is only as long as your orbit is high (~200 km or whatever) rather than the 36,000 km you'd need for a full space elevator, we don't need to invent any supermaterials for it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_ring

Y_Y 4 hours ago|||
What would you like to make this orbital ring out of?
ben_w 4 hours ago|||
Structually, it barely matters. The physics works even if each element isn't joined contiguously to the next, it's just that if you do make it contiguous you can also use it for power delivery and worry less about elements drifting out of alignment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_ring

dvh 4 hours ago|||
Pangolin scales?
ben_w 4 hours ago||
Goodness no, all subspecies are listed on Wikipedia as having various kinds of "Threatened" conservation statuses.
eldenring 4 hours ago|||
What specifically do you disagree with from the article to say its Smoke and Mirrors? I think their analysis is reasonable and that it will reduce to a launch cost problem.
jasonwatkinspdx 4 hours ago|||
Giving it a quick look they're doing the same thing as everyone else and handwaving away really difficult engineering problems with some back of the envelope math that only looks at one or two aspects.

Like their section on collision avoidance isn't any more sophisticated than "Starlink has a great record so far" when we're talking about a very different scale of how much mass and surface area has to be moved around in a coordinated way.

This is in effect an editorial from two postgrads, not an actual detailed workup. I don't feel like spending time going into any more effort based on that.

maxerickson 4 hours ago|||
Saying it is equivalent to launch costs is hand waving. Their "median" scenario would involve Starship working at the lower bound of their operational goal for it.
howunfortunate 4 hours ago|||
"Failed businesses" is some insane cope.

The impulse to discredit someone's "art" because of their politics has always stuck me as incredibly juvenile.

It's as if people can't imagine competence - even in some narrow way - in someone who doesn't share all their exact beliefs.

It seems especially silly because literally every great man and woman of history shares only a tiny fraction of our modern beliefs.

bar8uyr 55 minutes ago||
Just so you know, this is what cope looks like.
howunfortunate 30 minutes ago||
Sure bud. The richest man alive is a huge business failure and I'm just coping about it.
TheBlight 4 hours ago||
[flagged]
ksudb 4 hours ago||
[dead]
guestlistplus10 3 hours ago||
[dead]
caidan 2 hours ago||
The real main purpose of putting data centers in space is not economic, and it’s not to guard against threats from major powers who could easily destroy them. It’s so that the ultra rich can have data centers that the rest of us cannot destroy. I make no argument about whether we should be thinking of doing so or not, but it is interesting to think of the implications is it not? And it certainly fits the personalities involved and their public statements.
pokstad 2 hours ago|
Since when have the public destroyed data centers?
etchalon 1 hour ago||
Hopefully soon.
FerretFred 5 hours ago||
Definitely need to see a Microsoft data centre in Uranus.

Sorry. Not sorry.

exe34 5 hours ago||
No.
ranger_danger 5 hours ago|
We kinda already have IMO.

Starcloud-1 is already in orbit, and many other plans by them and other firms are already well into development.

And Lonestar has a backup server on the moon. Seriously.