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

xAI joins SpaceX

spacex.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#341

Post by MagicMoonlight »

wongarsu wrote: post #117
rybosworld wrote: post #70

> The basic math is that launching a million tons per year of satellites generating 100 kW of compute power per ton would add 100 gigawatts of AI compute capacity annually, with no ongoing operational or maintenance needs. Ultimately, there is a path to launching 1 TW/year from Earth. > My estimate is that within 2 to 3 years, the lowest cost way to generate AI compute will be in space. This is so obviously false. Fo…

You operate them like Microsoft's submerged data center project: you don't do maintenance, whatever fails fails. You start with enough redundancy in critical components like power and networking and accept that compute resources will slowly decrease as nodes fail No operational needs is obviously ... simplified. You still need to manage downlink capacity, station keeping, collision avoidance, etc. But for a large con…

But if we’re going down that line of thinking then it’s a poor comparison. I could open a data centre on the ground and use the same principle of zero maintenance, and it would be way cheaper and way more powerful.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#342

Post by schiffern »

willis936 wrote: post #141
wongarsu wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You operate them like Microsoft's submerged data center project: you don't do maintenance, whatever fails fails. You start with enough redundancy in critical components like power and networking and accept that compute resources will slowly decrease as nodes fail No operational needs is obviously ... simplified. You still need to manage downlink capacity, station keeping, collision avoidance, etc. But for a large con…

How do you make a small fortune? Start with a big one. The thing being called obvious here is that the maintenance you have to do on earth is vastly cheaper than the overspeccing you need to do in space (otherwise we would overspec on earth). That's before even considering the harsh radiation environment and the incredible cost to put even a single pound into low earth orbit.

If you think the primary source of electricity is solar (which clearly Musk does), then space increases the amount of compute per solar cell by ~5x, and eliminates the relatively large battery required for 24/7 operation. The thermal radiators and radiation effects are manageable.

The basic idea of putting compute in space to avoid inefficient power beaming goes back to NASA in the 60s, but the problem was always the high cost to orbit. Clearly Musk expects Starship will change that.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#343

Post by FloorEgg »

brandonlovesked wrote: post #281
FloorEgg wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Setting aside the possibility it's window dressing for a financial bailout, there would be two ways compute in space makes sense: 1) new technology improves vacuum heat radiation efficiency 2) new technology reduces waste heat generation from compute All the takes I've seen have been focused on #1, but I'm starting to wonder about #2... Specifically spintronics and photonic chips.

If you solve 2, heat dissipation goes away on earth too, so what’s the advantage of space

I'm not the best person to make that case as I can only speculate (land cost, permitting, latency, etc). /Shrug

In all the conversations I've seen play out on hacker news about compute in space, what comes up every time is "it's unviable because cooling is so inefficient".

Which got me thinking, what if cooling needs dropped by orders of magnitude? Then I learned about photonic chips and spintronics.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#344

Post by mkw5053 »

Musk is moving value out of public hands and into his own. He overpaid $44B for Twitter, then rebranded it as an AI asset by folding X into xAI. He pushed Tesla to invest $2B of shareholder money into xAI despite shareholders voting no. Five days later, SpaceX acquired xAI, effectively turning Tesla’s cash into equity in a private company Musk owns far more of. Musk controlled every step, there was no real arm’s-length process, and he almost certainly knew the outcome in advance. Musk and his private investors get control, inflated valuations, and IPO upside. Tesla shareholders supply the cash, take the risk, and lose leverage.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#345

Post by [deleted] »

TehCorwiz wrote: post #247
SimianSci wrote: post #113

The Goalpost shift continues, If elon were working for me, I would have fired him for having never delivered on any of his projects. Hyperloop > Neuralink > Self-Driving Cars > Robotaxi fleets > Personal Robots > Orbital Datacenters > [Insert next]

Hey now. Huperliop was designed to scuttle California’s light rail project. Which it did. Mission accomplished.

[deleted]

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#346

Post by haritha-j »

rybosworld wrote: post #70

> The basic math is that launching a million tons per year of satellites generating 100 kW of compute power per ton would add 100 gigawatts of AI compute capacity annually, with no ongoing operational or maintenance needs. Ultimately, there is a path to launching 1 TW/year from Earth. > My estimate is that within 2 to 3 years, the lowest cost way to generate AI compute will be in space. This is so obviously false. Fo…

Any estimate by Elon musk, you need to add or substract a zero to/from the end. Here, I'll fix it for you.

> The basic math is that launching a 100,000 tons per year of satellites generating 10 kW of compute power per ton would add 1 gigawatt of AI compute capacity annually, with no ongoing operational or maintenance needs. Ultimately, there is a path to launching 0.01 TW/year from Earth. > My estimate is that within 20 to 30 years, the lowest cost way to generate AI compute will be in space.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#347

Post by CGMthrowaway »

Neywiny wrote: post #334
CGMthrowaway wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's clearly rhetorical hyperbole happening there. But assuming that thermal rejection is good in space, & launch costs continue falling, as earth-based data centers become power/grid-constrained, there is a viable path for space power gen. The craziest part of those statements is "100 kW per ton." IDK what math he is doing there or future assumptions, but today we can't even sniff at 10 kW per ton. iROSA [1] on t…

Not to be an Elon defender, but can you back up your 0.15/ton? My own searching puts ROSA orders of magnitude higher. Each array is 600kg (0.6t) and puts out 20kw ( https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_sdat/irosa-1.htm ) which makes 20/0.6 = 33.333 kw/ton

You're right, my fault. I made an math booboo somewhere. Your calc seems right

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#348

Post by _fzslm »

ohyoutravel wrote: post #171

I am concerned, and haven’t seen anyone else point this out yet, that Musk will move Grok’s CSAM generation capabilities to space to be beyond the reach of terrestrial policing. Does this create some sort of legal loophole here so Musk can do this with impunity?

AFAIK he can do whatever he wants in space, but CSAM is still illegal to view or even download in most (all?) countries of the world. So unless the degenerates also move out into space (which I'm sure they're eager to do), it wouldn't really ease the legal situation here on Earth.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#349

Post by MagicMoonlight »

rybosworld wrote: post #70

> The basic math is that launching a million tons per year of satellites generating 100 kW of compute power per ton would add 100 gigawatts of AI compute capacity annually, with no ongoing operational or maintenance needs. Ultimately, there is a path to launching 1 TW/year from Earth. > My estimate is that within 2 to 3 years, the lowest cost way to generate AI compute will be in space. This is so obviously false. Fo…

But more importantly, there is no heat dissipation in space. There’s no atmosphere to cool you, no water you can put heat into. Just an empty void. You can radiate a little, but the sun alone is enough to cook you, without you having a rack of GPUs inside your satellite.

It’s completely delusional to think you could operate a data centre in a void with nowhere to put the heat.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#350

Post by farresito »

outside1234 wrote: post #300
Buttons840 wrote: post #50

SpaceX is too big to fail. It's important for national security. I wonder if Elon wants to tangle all his businesses into SpaceX so they are all kept afloat by SpaceX's importance.

Why? Let it fail. Bring back NASA.

NASA just splurges money. The private sector is far better when it comes to money.
Post reply on HN