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

Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 113 posts

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#81

Post by mc32 »

PowerfulWizard wrote: post #44
tristanj wrote: post #5

Economics calculator for Orbital vs Terrestrial Data Centers https://andrewmccalip.com/space-datacenters You can play around with the cost sliders to estimate the economics, but even being quite optimistic, space data centers cost ~2-3x of their terrestrial counterparts.

To remove heat by radiation there's a big benefit to running the GPUs hotter as the radiation will be proportional to the fourth power of temperature. This resource is using 85 deg C versus 60 deg C for OP which will improve cooling performance. If Nvidia/SpaceX can make the chips run at a higher temperature that would help a lot although I assume it would have already been done if it were possible. Another option is…

Sorry but wouldn’t space based DCs need radiation hardened parts which are typically a few generations behind SoTA? Do the centers deploy massive shields to protect the electronics?

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#82

Post by lispisok »

tristanj wrote: post #5

Economics calculator for Orbital vs Terrestrial Data Centers https://andrewmccalip.com/space-datacenters You can play around with the cost sliders to estimate the economics, but even being quite optimistic, space data centers cost ~2-3x of their terrestrial counterparts.

The point of datacenters in space is about control not economics. They dont want the masses which they are trying to replace with AI and robots to have access to the datacenters running everything.

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#83

Post by fulafel »

OutOfHere wrote: post #70
xnx wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you counting the emissions to get the datacenters into space?

That's an environmental and financial cost, but it's a one time cost. For datacenters on Earth, the emissions are continuous.

Are there going to be self sustaining server factories in space? The hw needs updating every few years.

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#84

Post by jshaqaw »

wahern wrote: post #42
jubilanti wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the specific attraction to space is the copious massive amounts of free solar energy, isn't it? Yes you get more energy harvest from solar above the atmosphere and can orient them to always be pointed towards the sun. But it is still so much more expensive than building out conventional solar in the Sun Belt, which is so much more expensive than just building a massive natural gas plant right next to people…

> People living near data centers have gotten wise to the fact that local people pay most of the externalities of data centers and AI, but the benefits mostly go elsewhere. That's true of just about every industrial, commercial, civic, or residential site. It's the fundamental premise behind every NIMBY protest ever. The benefit of each individual site always runs disproportionately to people further away. It's only…

Data centers could pay locals a sufficient amount that it overcomes the NIMBY opposition. If you can’t pay locals enough while still generating value for external beneficiaries then the project simply isn’t economical.

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#85

Post by bayindirh »

lispisok wrote: post #82
tristanj wrote: post #5

Economics calculator for Orbital vs Terrestrial Data Centers https://andrewmccalip.com/space-datacenters You can play around with the cost sliders to estimate the economics, but even being quite optimistic, space data centers cost ~2-3x of their terrestrial counterparts.

The point of datacenters in space is about control not economics. They dont want the masses which they are trying to replace with AI and robots to have access to the datacenters running everything.

Why people always take the worst parts of SciFi novels and try to built torment nexus?

Again, we're getting closer to Hyperion Cantos here.

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#86

Post by rbanffy »

stackghost wrote: post #22
rbanffy wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would suggest data centres near the arctic - it's close to most of the Northern hemisphere's users, presents an easy option for cooling (the place is a heat sink), and, with collapsing glaciers, there will be abundant hydro power to be used. It has the killer feature of allowing a human to walk up to a rack and replace a component.

>I would suggest data centres near the arctic - it's close to most of the Northern hemisphere's users, presents an easy option for cooling (the place is a heat sink), and, with collapsing glaciers, there will be abundant hydro power to be used. Advocating for exacerbating the melting of the polar ice cap, which will endanger dozens of millions of people, just to have more convenient data centers for manufacturing AI…

If they are going to build them, they might as well build them in a place that could use extra power and where cooling would use less energy.

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#87

Post by PowerfulWizard »

mc32 wrote: post #81
PowerfulWizard wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To remove heat by radiation there's a big benefit to running the GPUs hotter as the radiation will be proportional to the fourth power of temperature. This resource is using 85 deg C versus 60 deg C for OP which will improve cooling performance. If Nvidia/SpaceX can make the chips run at a higher temperature that would help a lot although I assume it would have already been done if it were possible. Another option is…

Sorry but wouldn’t space based DCs need radiation hardened parts which are typically a few generations behind SoTA? Do the centers deploy massive shields to protect the electronics?

I haven't heard of that being a problem for Starlink, whatever they've done there seems to be working. The Orbital AI would be at a higher orbit but still within LEO which reduces the radiation. I wonder if occasional bit flips even matter for typical AI calculations. Quantization seems to suggest a lot of the lower bits aren't all that important. Either way SpaceX has already had success building systems with commercial-off-the-shelf products in space.

To me the biggest problem of the system is the dependence on launch cost. The more launch cost can be lowered the more viable the system is and the more options there are for solving every problem. But IMO the reason Musk is building this system is to lower launch cost. He needs a project that can fund a high volume of launches and create economies of scale to lower launch cost, the way that Starlink did for Falcon 9.

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#88

Post by jmpman »

lispisok wrote: post #82
tristanj wrote: post #5

Economics calculator for Orbital vs Terrestrial Data Centers https://andrewmccalip.com/space-datacenters You can play around with the cost sliders to estimate the economics, but even being quite optimistic, space data centers cost ~2-3x of their terrestrial counterparts.

The point of datacenters in space is about control not economics. They dont want the masses which they are trying to replace with AI and robots to have access to the datacenters running everything.

You might be on to something. Starship is moving its launch facility to Florida. Elon previously suspected a sniper shooting at the SpaceX rockets. Moving the launches to Cape Canaveral would make them much harder for a sniper to target. And his terrestrial data centers are easily accessible for anyone who has a grudge with him. Moving those to space would also isolate him from the masses uprising.

https://arstechnica.com/space/2025/05/spacex-pushed-sniper-t...

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#89

Post by CamperBob2 »

arjie wrote: post #79
CamperBob2 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you just use solar panels on the container ship. The same ones you'd use on a satellite. There are thousands of container ships in international waters at any given time, so you wouldn't install a few massive power-hungry data centers on a few ships. You'd put a lot of PV-powered data centers on a lot of ships. Pretend you launched them into space, in other words... but don't actually launch them. And yes, you'd…

But ships have night. The PVs would need backup batteries for the entire night-time period to say nothing of the 4x capacity loss. A satellite can just see the sun the whole time and it's getting nice clean sunshine. I think the powership works better. Regardless, every time this guy does something super capital intensive, it looks stupid and then works out for him. So long as it keeps happening, the probability that…

If there's not enough power available on the ship, which for all I know there is (some of them have 100,000-HP engines, or 75+ MW), then you don't bother running the data center at night. Yes, now you need 2x as many of them, but you can afford them since they are 10x cheaper.

Regardless, every time this guy does something super capital intensive, it looks stupid and then works out for him

That's how it looks at first, agreed. But if you look closer, you'll notice something kind of funny. The only times Musk really wins big have been when the competition is either incompetent or lazy (launch services and satellite Internet), or doesn't show up to the game at all (EVs, self-driving and otherwise.)

Data centers and semiconductors aren't like that. Those guys aren't going to stand by passively and let him eat their lunch like General Motors and ULA did.

Re: Thermodynamics rules future orbital data centers

#90

Post by arjie »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #89
arjie wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But ships have night. The PVs would need backup batteries for the entire night-time period to say nothing of the 4x capacity loss. A satellite can just see the sun the whole time and it's getting nice clean sunshine. I think the powership works better. Regardless, every time this guy does something super capital intensive, it looks stupid and then works out for him. So long as it keeps happening, the probability that…

If there's not enough power available on the ship, which for all I know there is (some of them have 100,000-HP engines, or 75+ MW), then you don't bother running the data center at night. Yes, now you need 2x as many of them, but you can afford them since they are 10x cheaper. Regardless, every time this guy does something super capital intensive, it looks stupid and then works out for him That's how it looks at firs…

Haha, I must admit that having 2x ships one on each side of the world and swapping them to keep it flying all the time is definitely good stuff. Very entertaining. And I did forget the engines. It is true, surface vessels do seem to dominate space. Fun chat.
Post reply on HN