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.

  • Archangel1313@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    157
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    23 天前

    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.

    • tempest@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 天前

      Remember when Microsoft dumped containers of servers in the ocean to test things.

      If they couldn’t make that work they obviously can’t make space work.

      It was always a scam.

      • mushroommunk@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        23 天前

        You’re talking about project Natick. All reports I saw was that it was actually a resounding success. The only reason I’ve seen for why it was cancelled is because it wasn’t able to be kept at the bleeding edge as they couldn’t upgrade the servers randomly. It doesn’t really compare to launching them into space which gives basically zero benefit but adds an insane amount to the cost.

        • halcyoncmdr@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          ·
          23 天前

          Not only upgrading hardware, but maintaining any issues along the way. Hard drives fail, Memory fails, etc. That’s just stuff that happens and can be easily remedied in a normal data center.

          Now take all of those issues, and instead of being underwater… move it 500 miles into the vacuum of space. And take the heat dissipation of all that water, and make it a fraction because the vacuum of space is terrible at radiating heat despite the ambient temperature being so cold.

          • Inucune@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            23 天前

            Cosmic radiation causes random bit flips. You would have to shield everything and make it redundant. More power, more heat, more cooling, more power… Welcome to the loop.

        • tempest@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          23 天前

          Yeah… No maintenance… Which is a thing that datacenters require.

          Enterprise Hardware can have redundancy but things still break.

          If it was a success they would have done it. Ergo, not a success.

        • fizzle@quokk.au
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          23 天前

          IDK about success.

          I think it went predictably in that the cooling was ok but maintenance was an issue.

          Seawater is a real bitch. If you could cool things with it we would just pump it onshore.

        • jj4211@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          22 天前

          “resounding success” but given up as a bad idea.

          The fact that it could possibly “work” was not really in question, it was whether it would be worth the costs and drawbacks. It was not.

          But either way you are right, space even worse than water with no benefit compared to ocean.

        • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 天前

          The core reason space datacenters are uneconomical, is the 5 year replacement cycle. Includes trashing the solar and radiators every 5 years even if they could last 30+ because datacenter modules need to auto-deploy their own power and radiators. Ocean deployments would be far better. Wind/solar/batteries doesn’t need frequent change. Just drop in a new module every 5 years, while taking out the old one, and rebuilding its insides.

          • Mirshe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            22 天前

            Nah nah, we aren’t allowed to do wind and solar anymore. The US president is paying a shitload of money to a lot of companies to stop them from developing renewables in the US and abroad.

      • cley_faye@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        22 天前

        The microsoft thing worked. It also highlighted a lot of issues that would also exists in space, but way worse.

        But “genius billionaire buffoon” can’t read apparently.

      • Krusty@quokk.au
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        22 天前

        Microsoft? Hahaha. Like Microsoft would know shit about doing anything in space?

        While Elon has no issues crashing and burning, no matter how many times it takes, until he succeeds… That’s a true commitment to trial and error!

    • holy_scroller@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      23 天前

      I wish you could make money off of nowing when a company is spouting bullshit, but after watching Tesla stock for a decade…

  • TallonMetroid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    23 天前

    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.

  • Lasherz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 天前

    It’s a shameless attempt to loop in their own assets to a free for all money spree. There is literally nothing about it that makes any sense. It would be more efficient to beam laser light back to earth to power a dc than this, and that’s a stupid idea too.

  • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    23 天前

    It’s a terribly inneficient idea, but it sounds futuristic, which is basically what Elon trades on to acquire government subsidies and investor buy-in.

  • Swordgeek@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    22 天前

    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.

  • Squibbles@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 天前

    As stated elsewhere it’s a scam but their stated reason is because they want to build massive data centres on earth but there’s a huge backlog in getting electricity for them. Even generating their own electricity is troublesome because every single natural gas/methane turbine is already spoken for years into the future and solar etc takes a lot of land which they may have trouble getting the rights to build on. Thus, if you could build in space you can theoretically collect a lot more solar and more strongly than what you get on the planet’s surface. It just ignores all the other costly parts but I guess if you are being given unlimited money by venture capitalists what else are you going to promise them when they want more more more AI infrastructure

    • humanspiral@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      22 天前

      Solar on deserts, or even Nebraska farmland, is far more profitable than corn for ethanol and produces far more energy. Even with 2-5 hours of sunlight/day, battery systems, would be 5x cheaper in Nebraska than space for 24/7/365 power production, with perhaps minor throtling in winter. A datacenter in the middle of a solar farm also eliminates noise complaints from cooling systems.

  • decended_being@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    21 天前

    Ding ding!

    • It’s not better for cooling. - No air or water to dissipate heat.
    • It’s not better for communication. - Beaming data is always more lossy than its physically connected counterpart.
    • It’s not less expensive. - Just submerge it, or build closer to the poles with wind and solar to power it

    Also, it throws more junk in our orbit, is more difficult to maintain and upgrade, and has a significantly more catastrophic fail result.

    But why do things logically or sustainably when you* can make money?

    * you = someone who already is hoarding a large portion of our wealth.

  • jrs100000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    23 天前

    So I can actually think of a few reasons: Preprocessing vast amounts of super high resolution satellite imagery to save bandwidth, and jurisdictional black site processing data some countries would want to steal or arrest you for having or processing, particularly if you were hiding it from internal audit. You would be paying an extreme premium over ground based for ever FLOP, so, the customer base of practical customers is limited to a handful of very well funded intelligence agencies or scientific projects in very niche use cases.

  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    23 天前

    Solar energy is more efficient in space because there’s no atmosphere and depending on the orbit can be in the sun for much, much longer than on earth over the day. Apparently you can beam the energy down to earth somehow, but you lose something like 50%. So the solution is to put the data center up where you get the power. The downside is that it costs a fuckton to send it up, cooling becomes an issue, temperature gradients become an issue, heat and cold cycles as it goes from sun to the dark side of earth is an issue, and the funnest part is that cosmic rays can fry electronics like GPUs.

    • TribblesBestFriend
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      23 天前

      You can theoretically beam down energy with microwave… the problem is that it’s hard to concentrate and everything next to your receiver will burn