Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

angadh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 365 posts

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#341

Post by yencabulator »

littlecranky67 wrote: post #137
weinzierl wrote: post #131

I worked in aerospace for a couple of years in the beginning of my career. While my area of expertise was the mechanical design I shared my office with the guy who did the thermal design and I learned two things: 1. Satellites are mostly run at room temperature. It doesn't have to be that way but it simplifies a lot of things. 2. Every satellite is a delicately balanced system where heat generation and actively radia…

They address that issue in the link; The propose a 63m^2 radiator for heat dissipation.

The comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44399181 says the ISS radiator is 42m^2. Radiating so much more at just 63m^2 seems hype-based.

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#342

Post by spauldo »

oceanplexian wrote: post #83
GlenTheMachine wrote: post #76

Space roboticist here. As with a lot of things, it isn't the initial outlay, it's the maintenance costs. Terrestrial datacenters have parts fail and get replaced all the time. The mass analysis given here -- which appears quite good, at first glance -- doesn't including any mass, energy, or thermal system numbers for the infrastructure you would need to have to replace failed components. As a first cut, this would re…

Why does it need to be robots? On Earth we have skeleton crews maintain large datacenters. If the cost of mass to orbit is 100x cheaper, it’s not that absurd to have an on-call rotation of humans to maintain the space datacenter and install parts shipped on space FedEx or whatever we have in the future.

This sort of work is ideal for robots. We don't do it much on Earth because you can pay a tech $20/hr to swap hardware modules, not because it's hard for robots to do.

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#343

Post by spauldo »

intended wrote: post #149
GlenTheMachine wrote: post #76

Space roboticist here. As with a lot of things, it isn't the initial outlay, it's the maintenance costs. Terrestrial datacenters have parts fail and get replaced all the time. The mass analysis given here -- which appears quite good, at first glance -- doesn't including any mass, energy, or thermal system numbers for the infrastructure you would need to have to replace failed components. As a first cut, this would re…

It sounds like building it on the moon would be better.

Depends what you want to use it for. Ping time to the moon and back is about 2.5 seconds best case.

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#344

Post by yencabulator »

singron wrote: post #187
teekert wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lay people associate space with cold because nearly every scifi movie has people freezing over in seconds when exposed to the vacuum of space (insert Picard face-palm gif). Even The Expanse, even them! Although they are otherwise so realistic, that I have to say I started doubting myself a bit. I wonder what would really would happen and how fast... People even complained that Leia did not freeze over (in stead of co…

Wouldn't a body essentially freeze dry as a wet being exposed to vacuum? I.e. the temperature of the space is still irrelevant and the cooling comes from vaporization.

Any exposed fluids (mostly saliva) technically boils but you can think of it as evaporation to avoid layperson associations with heat -- it's all about low pressure, not about heat in layperson terms.

Whether you freeze or not depends on whether you're in the sun or not. Spacesuits are white to reflect as much light as feasible mostly to keep the astronauts from cooking. For example, surface of the moon can heat to 120° C / 250° Fahrenheit / 400 K.

Over time I'm sure all the liquids will manage to escape. Here's what happens to blood not contained by blood vessels and skin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU3MOLqA3WA

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#345

Post by yencabulator »

nandomrumber wrote: post #332
abdullahkhalids wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the answers in OP is > A lot of waste heat is generated running TDCs, which contributes to climate change—so migrating to space would alleviate the toll on Earth’s thermal budget. This seems like a compelling environmental argument. TDCs already consume about 1-1.5% of global electricity and it’s safe to assume that this will only grow in the pursuit of AGI. The comparison here is between solar powered TDCs in…

Low Earth orbits are in the dark about 49% of time, but suffer no seasonal variability. Low Earth orbit is also very hot, and regular solar panels become less efficient the hotter they get. The only sensible way to count pollution from solar+battery power manufacturing & disposal is do it on a per kWh basis.

The size of solar panels and radiators needed for an actual data center would be crazy in LEO. LEO still touches the atmosphere. ISS needs to be pushed higher regularly because of atmospheric drag.

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#346

Post by spauldo »

ThinkingGuy wrote: post #186
weinzierl wrote: post #138

Why do they want to put a data center in space in the first place? Free cooling? Doesn't make much sense to me. As the article points out the radiators need to me massive. Access to solar energy? Solar is more efficient in space, I'll give them that, but does that really outweigh the whole hassle to put the panels in space in the first place? Physical isolation and security? Against manipulation maybe, but not agains…

My initial thought was: ambiguous regulatory environment. Not being physically located the US, the EU, or any other sovereign territory, they could plausably claim exemption from pretty much any national regulations.

I don't see it.

The US government does questionable things to people in places like Guantanamo Bay because the constitution gives those people rights if they set foot on US soil. Data doesn't have rights, and governments have the capability to waive their own laws for things like national security.

Corporations operating in space are bound to the laws of the country the spacecraft belongs to, so there's no difference between a data harbor in Whogivesastan vs. a data harbor on a spacecraft operated by Whogivesastan.

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#347

Post by nkrisc »

dismalpedigree wrote: post #72
nkrisc wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty worthless unless the execs live in space too.

Why? Its not like we put execs in jail for allowing their companies to do terrible things under their watch.

Not often enough, but it does happen.

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#348

Post by dyauspitr »

nandomrumber wrote: post #330
dyauspitr wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re a little too dismissive of the 24/7 always available solar power, and the free cooling.

There’s no free cooling in space. In space there’s no ambient environment to speak of, so you’re limited to radiative cooling, which is massively inferior to refrigeration. There’s also no 24/7 solar in low Earth orbit, which is where you want to be for latency and serviceable.

That’s actually something I never considered. In a true vacuum since there are no particles, temperature is undefined.

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#349

Post by Aperocky »

ggreer wrote: post #309
Aperocky wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same with hydrogen fuel cell vehicles, inventing a detour because it sounds cool and ultimately don't work out because Occam's Razor.

Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are a little different because there are safety, economic, and physical constraints that mean they will always be worse than battery electric or gas cars. I and many others correctly predicted this.[1] For hydrogen to succeed, batteries would have to get more expensive and/or have worse energy density than they did in 2015. Satellite data centers seem unlikely to me, but at least their fea…

It does not make sense, you can do the same thing on Earth without launching it into space.

The entire launch thing is completely not necessary and is entirely detrimental to the product.

Re: Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

#350

Post by nandomrumber »

dyauspitr wrote: post #348
nandomrumber wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s no free cooling in space. In space there’s no ambient environment to speak of, so you’re limited to radiative cooling, which is massively inferior to refrigeration. There’s also no 24/7 solar in low Earth orbit, which is where you want to be for latency and serviceable.

That’s actually something I never considered. In a true vacuum since there are no particles, temperature is undefined.

With the added bonus of there being no ozone layer to absorb UV.
Post reply on HN