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

291–300 of 365 posts

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

#291

Post by dieortin »

neom wrote: post #206
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…

I've talked to the founder of Starcloud about this, there is just going to be a lot of data generative stuff in space in the future, and further and further out into space. He thinks now is the right time to learn how to compute up there because people will want to process, and maybe orchestrate processing between many devices, in space. He's fully aware of all of the objections in this hn comments section, he just d…

> there is just going to be a lot of data generative stuff in space in the future

Why?

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

#292

Post by happyopossum »

6d6b73 wrote: post #184

Let's start by acknowledging that there is no Starship and it's likely that the current iteration of that system is not viable. It will need to be redesigned, and no one even knows if it's possible not to mention economically feasible.

That's... bold. Yeah, the development process is different from what we're used to seeing with government-led programs, but so far most stages of starship have proven viable (ie they've worked at least once) and each launch gets closer.

This claim also seems to ignore historical context - people said the same things about Falcon, then Falcon Heavy but those launch every few days now. You're basically saying that either you know more than the single most successful and experienced team of engineers in reusable space launch vehicle world, or they're busy burning their own cash by committing some sort of fraud.

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

#293

Post by neom »

dieortin wrote: post #291
neom wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've talked to the founder of Starcloud about this, there is just going to be a lot of data generative stuff in space in the future, and further and further out into space. He thinks now is the right time to learn how to compute up there because people will want to process, and maybe orchestrate processing between many devices, in space. He's fully aware of all of the objections in this hn comments section, he just d…

> there is just going to be a lot of data generative stuff in space in the future Why?

Because near all analysts have it on somewhere between a 5% and 7% CAGR.

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

#294

Post by badcryptobitch »

neom wrote: post #260
ceejayoz wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems far more likely that the "data generative stuff" will get smaller and cheaper to run (like cell phones with on-device models) much faster than "run a giant supercomputer in orbit" will become easy.

My headlights aren't good enough so I'm unsure but generally that maps. To me the interoperability part is what is interesting, your data and my data in real time being consumed by some understanding agent doing automated research? I could imagine putting something like a Stoffel MPC layer in there, then nations states can more easily work together? I presume space data/research will be highly competitive, even frien…

There are certainly nation states that are looking for ways to 1) prevent their satellites colliding with one another (https://eprint.iacr.org/2013/850.pdf) and 2) being able to do forms of computation that might be risky to do on earth for national security reasons.

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

#295

Post by bobmcnamara »

energywut wrote: post #4

Putting a datacenter in space is one of the worst ideas I've heard in a while. Reliable energy? Possible, but difficult -- need plenty of batteries Cooling? Very difficult. Where does the heat transfer to? Latency? Highly variable. Equipment upgrades and maintenance? Impossible. Radiation shielding? Not free. Decommissioning? Potentially dangerous! Orbital maintenance? Gotta install engines on your datacenter and kee…

> Reliable energy? Possible, but difficult -- need plenty of batteries

I can see it now - orbiting crypto mines power on at dawn, die off at dusk, Oscar-7 style

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

#296

Post by Robotbeat »

littlestymaar wrote: post #202
Robotbeat wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then just provide spin gravity for the crew habitat.

“just” It's theoretically possible for sure, but we've never done that in practice and it's far from trivial.

Yeah, “just.”

Every child on a merry go round experiences it. Every car driving on a curve. And Gemini tested it once as well. It’s a basic feature of physics. Now why NASA hasn’t decided to implement it in decades is actually kind of a mystery.

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

#297

Post by ceejayoz »

badcryptobitch wrote: post #294
neom wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My headlights aren't good enough so I'm unsure but generally that maps. To me the interoperability part is what is interesting, your data and my data in real time being consumed by some understanding agent doing automated research? I could imagine putting something like a Stoffel MPC layer in there, then nations states can more easily work together? I presume space data/research will be highly competitive, even frien…

There are certainly nation states that are looking for ways to 1) prevent their satellites colliding with one another ( https://eprint.iacr.org/2013/850.pdf ) and 2) being able to do forms of computation that might be risky to do on earth for national security reasons.

> forms of computation that might be risky to do on earth for national security reasons

Such as...?

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

#298

Post by nessbot »

neom wrote: post #293
dieortin wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there is just going to be a lot of data generative stuff in space in the future Why?

Because near all analysts have it on somewhere between a 5% and 7% CAGR.

That didn't answer the question but just repeat the original claim differently. Where are they getting those numbers?

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

#299

Post by strangeloops85 »

To those saying all you need is a lot of radiators.. remember that the radiators themselves gain heat from both sunlight and the Earth itself. It is a surprisingly tricky problem and, yes, all heat can be dissipated to achieve a desirable set point given sufficiently large area. But it is certainly not easier than just having say an economizer and dropping the data center in Iceland or a cold place. Makes no sense

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

#300

Post by aerophilic »

TheOtherHobbes wrote: post #218
vidarh wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had actual, real-life deployments in datacentres where we just left dead hardware in the racks until we needed the space, and we rarely did. Typically we'd visit a couple of times a year, because it was cheap to do so, but it'd have totally viable to let failures accumulate over a much longer time horizon. Failure rates tend to follow a bathtub curve, so if you burn-in the hardware before launch, you'd expect lo…

The analysis has zero redundancy for either servers or support systems. Redundancy is a small issue on Earth, but completely changes the calculations for space because you need more of everything, which makes the already-unfavourable space and mass requirements even less plausible. Without backup cooling and power one small failure could take the entire facility offline. And active cooling - which is a given at these…

There is a neat solve for the thermal problem that York Space systems has been advocating (based on Russian tech)… put everything in an enclosure.

https://www.yorkspacesystems.com/

Short version: make a giant pressure vessel and keep things at 1 atm. Circulate air like you would do on earth. Yes, there is still plenty of excess heat you need to radiate, but dramatically simplifies things.

Post reply on HN