logoalt Hacker News

delectitoday at 6:38 PM2 repliesview on HN

Yeah, launch costs alone make it infeasible, and power being "free" exacerbates the cost (gotta get all those panels up there). Cooling is also dramatically harder, plus shielding, and it makes repair/upgrade basically impossible.

I'm not going to assert that large scale space compute will never happen, but I feel confident saying it won't happen this decade or next.


Replies

laughing_mantoday at 10:51 PM

When they get the kinks out of Starship, launch costs will be dramatically lower than we're used to thinking. They'll probably be using it to launch Starlink sats in earnest next year, so I don't think that would be the long leg.

I used to think heat would be a problem, too, but I've come around. It's a consideration, but it's doable. Remember we already have some pretty high power sats up there, so it's not something we haven't already been working around.

IMO the big cash drain will end up being maintenance, as in, you can't do it. If you have a box or a power supply fail on the ground you can swap it out. Anything in orbit would have to be replaced.

JumpCrisscrosstoday at 9:00 PM

> launch costs alone make it infeasible

Last time I did the math, launch costs were well balanced against permitting delays (mediated by interest rates). The break even rests almost entirely on radiator mass efficiency (which is, admittedly, a function of launch costs).

Like, if everyone’s terrestrial datacenter projects start getting blocked, and demand for AI continues, the price a rational buyer would pay for in-orbit compute could get ridiculous enough to break even on current kit. And current kit in launch vehicles, radiators and solar panels is advancing.

I don’t think the thesis is met yet. But it’s less ridiculous than I thought it was before I sat down with pen and paper.