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

Starship V3

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 667 posts

Re: Starship V3

#131

Post by Teever »

pveierland wrote: post #116
spankalee wrote: post #38

[flagged]

Beyond aggressively optimistic timelines, I find it difficult to disagree with the premise. The aggressively optimistic timelines is also what makes it feasible to even attempt these things, where e.g. the amount of iteration required for Starship would have broken most other companies. > In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale. In the long term - all mass and energy available is outside o…

All of this may be true but the scale that Musk is talking about would require an immense amount of solar panels -- and if he has the means to produce so many solar panels why not use them to solve our climate and energy crisis on Earth?

Seems more like a grift to me, after the car grift and the Mars grift didn't pan out.

Re: Starship V3

#132

Post by dnautics »

pveierland wrote: post #116
spankalee wrote: post #38

[flagged]

Beyond aggressively optimistic timelines, I find it difficult to disagree with the premise. The aggressively optimistic timelines is also what makes it feasible to even attempt these things, where e.g. the amount of iteration required for Starship would have broken most other companies. > In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale. In the long term - all mass and energy available is outside o…

Yes, beyond the three things that are the hard parts it's easy.

Re: Starship V3

#133

Post by shaewest »

troyvit wrote: post #104
jiggawatts wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Elon explained the logic at length in an interview: Cheaper != Available. The availability of power is the constraint almost everywhere, no matter how much money you throw at it. Gas turbine production has a many-year backlog. Everybody that can make the single-crystal superalloy turbine blades is fully booked for most of a decade and can't expand capacity for years (at least). Meanwhile, putting a slightly larger so…

What are the benefits of a solar panel in space vs a solar panel here on Earth? I get that there's less "night" up there, and there's less interference from the atmosphere so the solar is more efficient, but is it that much more efficient that it actually makes more sense than solar panels on earth?

Admittedly asked Claude, but improvements are estimated to be x6-8 improvements on energy collection

Re: Starship V3

#134

Post by dnautics »

neuronexmachina wrote: post #47
spankalee wrote: post #38

[flagged]

I'm basically assuming that "space-based data centers" are some Glomar Explorer-style cover for something else.

The math works out if you project certain macro trends out a sufficient amount of time.

I think if fusion is real, it might not be so advantageous until space mining is a thing.

Re: Starship V3

#135

Post by piloto_ciego »

MattDamonSpace wrote: post #98
piloto_ciego wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I think he's spot on, and I normally am not fond of Elon's public behavior. I mentioned in another thread that they're getting around having to ask permission to build datacenters by doing it in space. The entire thing is to avoid NIMBY stuff I'd bet.

It really depends on scale. There will be enough terrestrial vetoes that if what we build is 10-1000x what people are already halting through legal challenges …

I doubt it. Like, I hate to have to be the bearer of bad news, and maybe it’s my weird arctic anarchist soul, but, the old world order, the need for these companies to follow rules at least in spirit? That’s dead now. There are no laws but the laws of physics and the the laws others force your organization to follow.

I recognize that that is distressing to people, hell, it’s been obvious to me since I was at OWS in my 20s. But we are in a new world now and the old rules don’t apply. A company that has the backing of the government to launch their spacecraft will simply do it. You think Texas is going to stop them? Or Florida? Or even California? Of course not.

A lot changes in a world where you can plan things out with AI. A lot changes in a world with abundance. If we play our cards right we could have the culture, but that means letting go of the conservative yearning to put things back to how they were. The old world is 10 light years away now, it wasn’t as great as we remember it and it ain’t coming back.

And if I had to choose, I’d much rather have datacenters in orbit than one burning hydrocarbons loudly 2 blocks from my kids’ school.

Re: Starship V3

#136

Post by dzhiurgis »

legitster wrote: post #107
spankalee wrote: post #38

[flagged]

One of the underrated topics about space right now is the potential supply of rockets outstrips demand by a lot. We're simply out things we can profitably send to space so SpaceX and others are trying to come up with ideas to induce demand. My understanding is that Starlink mostly grew out of the same need to justify scaling up rocket production.

> potential supply of rockets outstrips demand by a lot.

IDK I think plenty of people will want to go to space or even cut 24 hour flights across the world to 90 minutes.

As for experience - it's going to be pricy, but look how many multi-million dollar yachts are out there, parked, doing nothing. People do have money for such experiences.

Re: Starship V3

#137

Post by cameldrv »

Teever wrote: post #131
pveierland wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beyond aggressively optimistic timelines, I find it difficult to disagree with the premise. The aggressively optimistic timelines is also what makes it feasible to even attempt these things, where e.g. the amount of iteration required for Starship would have broken most other companies. > In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale. In the long term - all mass and energy available is outside o…

All of this may be true but the scale that Musk is talking about would require an immense amount of solar panels -- and if he has the means to produce so many solar panels why not use them to solve our climate and energy crisis on Earth? Seems more like a grift to me, after the car grift and the Mars grift didn't pan out.

I’m not saying the math checks out, but the argument is that you get full sun with no atmospheric losses 24/7, so you produce way more energy per panel, and you don’t need batteries, because the power production is consistent and predictable.

Re: Starship V3

#138

Post by mrandish »

Teever wrote: post #109
mrandish wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was initially very skeptical about the viability of space-based data centers but after a couple hours reading papers, studies and summary technical assessments I realized there are a range of credible expert viewpoints from, "pretty unlikely" to "it could actually work". There at least appear to be plausible, though unproven, solutions to the most obvious drive-by objections I had off the top of my non-expert head.…

Putting a datacentre in space may be feasible but the scale that he's suggesting is really unbelievable. And if he's actually capable of producing solar panels in the quantity that he's talking about in the time frame that he's talking about -- why doesn't he just put them on earth to solve our growing climate change problems and fuel shortages?

> but the scale that he's suggesting...

Well, yeah but that's just Elon being Elon. At this point I think even the most pro-Elon folks freely admit "The first rule of Elon is: 'Ignore everything he says about timeframes and scale.'"

Re: Starship V3

#139

Post by ulfw »

spankalee wrote: post #38

[flagged]

I am sick of living in this world where the richest scam artist can get richer and richer and richer with lies and lies and lies and empty promises and there is no SEC, no anything to stop him.

Re: Starship V3

#140

Post by skybrian »

pveierland wrote: post #116
spankalee wrote: post #38

[flagged]

Beyond aggressively optimistic timelines, I find it difficult to disagree with the premise. The aggressively optimistic timelines is also what makes it feasible to even attempt these things, where e.g. the amount of iteration required for Starship would have broken most other companies. > In the long term, space-based AI is obviously the only way to scale. In the long term - all mass and energy available is outside o…

> all mass and energy available is outside of Earth

Manufacturing capabilities are quite lacking, though, in the short and medium terms, so this doesn't seem all that relevant.

Maybe a self-contained, modular solar panel / radiator / compute unit could be built, but it will be manufactured on Earth. (Where the fabs are.)

And it still seems easier to put solar panels and batteries near the data centers that SpaceX is already building on Earth.

Post reply on HN