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

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#881

Post by theshrike79 »

jstummbillig wrote: post #839
bgnn wrote: post #800

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real reason is, Elon has SpaceX and xAI. He can create an illusion of synergy and orders of magnitude advancements to boost the market cap and pocket all the money. He realized long time ago you don't need to deliver to play the market cap game, in fact it's better if you are selling a story far in the future rather than a something you can deliver now.

I don't understand the claim. SpaceX is literally delivering? And I don't think there is any delusion about that being optional.

[flagged]

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#882

Post by queenkjuul »

GMoromisato wrote: post #592
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]

I'm amazed at this kind of thinking. I get it, obviously, and it's not uncommon, but still. Elon Musk has already revolutionized three industries: 1. EVs: Before Tesla, no one thought electric cars could be a mass-market product. And even today, the Model 3 and Model Y are at the top of almost all sales lists. 2. Orbital Launch: No one expected Space X to succeed. What does a software guy know about real engineering?…

Business ability, ok. Engineering? I've seen no evidence to date musk has engineered anything in his life, unless you count zip2

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#883

Post by FinnKuhn »

el_nahual wrote: post #623
dahinds wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't really true, though? The ISS does it with radiators that are ~1/2 the area of its solar panels, and both should scale linearly with power?

Radiator size scales linearly with power but, crucially, coolant power, pumps, etc do not. Imagine the capillary/friction losses, the force required, and the energy use(!) required to pump ammonia through a football-field sized radiator panel.

Additionally, I feel like a datacenter is going to produce a LOT more heat than the ISS.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#884

Post by senko »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #867
senko wrote: post #120

As a SpaceX fan, I am saddened by this news. The only reason for xAI to join SpaceX is to offload Elon's Twitter debt in the upcoming IPO.

The Twitter debt is not that big in the grand scheme of things. Twitter has been absorbed into his AI company some time ago. SpaceX is a big business. And despite the decline, Tesla is also still a big business. Both generate quite a few billions in revenue. The staggering amount of money Elon Musk raised for doing AI stuff is quite a bit more than what he ever expended on the Twitter value implosion. I think we can…

> The staggering amount of money Elon Musk raised for doing AI stuff is quite a bit more than what he ever expended on the Twitter value implosion.

Total investment in xAI are around $30B-40B (including the latest E round). Twitter purchase price at $44B was more than that. Out of that 44B, ~$25B was debt financing.

> Star Link is one of those mad plans that actually seems to make sense now [...] AI data centers in space are similarly ludicrous unless you have a newly developed 100+ ton to orbit reusable launch capability at your disposal

I don't think these two are comparable. Starlink obviously makes sense if you can put thousands of satellites in LEO cheaply, which (only) SpaceX could. The challenge there was to actually build and put them there.

For data centers, even if you can launch for free, the physics and economics don't make sense. Solar is free but the amount of solar arrays (and cooling radiators) required means it's just easier and cheaper to build out the same thing on Earth, and that's without thinking about maintenance of either the data center or the required support equipment.

In theory it can be done. In practice, I humbly propose that putting the same engineering brains on solving the hard questions of keeping people alive in space (so they can, eg, get to Mars and back) would align more closely with the SpaceX mission.

> But what's the alternative if you are semi serious about controlling an armada of space craft across the solar system?

"X Combinator" for space tech (life support, stations, habitats, etc - everything that SpaceX itself isn't focusing on). Refueling depots at strategic locations that are good launching points for deep space (Mars+) missions.

Not a friggin' LLM.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#885

Post by moontear »

mrweasel wrote: post #821
lugao wrote: post #608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only people who never interacted with data center reliability think it's doable to maintain servers with no human intervention.

Microsoft did do the experiment (Project Natick) where they had "datacenters" in pods under the sea with really good results. The idea was simply to ship enough extra capacity, but due to the environment, the failure rates where 1/8th of normal. Still, dropping a pod into the sea makes more sense than launching it into space. At least cooling, power, connectivity and eventual maintenance is simpler. The whole thing m…

The experiment may have been successful, but if it was why don't we see underwater datacenters everywhere? It probably is a similar reason why we won't see space datacenters in the near future either.

Space has solar energy going for itself. With underwater you don't need to lug a 1420 ton rocket with a datacenter payload to space.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#886

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

andruby wrote: post #805
bgnn wrote: post #800

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real reason is, Elon has SpaceX and xAI. He can create an illusion of synergy and orders of magnitude advancements to boost the market cap and pocket all the money. He realized long time ago you don't need to deliver to play the market cap game, in fact it's better if you are selling a story far in the future rather than a something you can deliver now.

exactly. This smells like a way to boost the SpaceX IPO to meme-stock premiums

I mean, personally I'd probably have invested in SpaceX but it's a hard no with xAI attached.

I'm probably an outlier though.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#887

Post by FeepingCreature »

usrusr wrote: post #811
mr_toad wrote: post #614

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We currently make around 1 TW of photovoltaic cells per year, globally. Doubling every three years; at that rate it would take about 30 years for 1TW to become 1000TW. Whether on not the trend continues largely depends on demand, but as of right now humanity seems to have an insatiable demand for power.

Space to put them, terrestrially, is not infinite. Demand has a hard ceiling.

That's a supply ceiling. Funnily, it's also one that's solved by putting them in space.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#888

Post by invalidusernam3 »

dahinds wrote: post #119
alangibson wrote: post #89

Either this is a straight up con, or Musk found a glitch in physics. It's extremely difficult to keep things cold in space.

This isn't really true, though? The ISS does it with radiators that are ~1/2 the area of its solar panels, and both should scale linearly with power?

Here's an interesting post linked elsewhere in this thread https://taranis.ie/datacenters-in-space-are-a-terrible-horri...

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#889

Post by nutjob2 »

DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #756
nutjob2 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a con, his AI business is failing, so he's rolling it up into the profitable business. Did a similar thing with Twitter. This is so obvious, but it's so stupid and at this scale that people find it hard to believe.

If they AI business is failing why did they just do a successful large raise?

Your implication is that investors are in some way infallible? Hilarious.

Re: xAI joins SpaceX

#890

Post by phtrivier »

tyre wrote: post #587
spikels wrote: post #528

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Context missing. This is in reference to a vision the (distant?) future where the satellites are manufactured in factories on the Moon and sent into space with mass drivers. Full paragraph quote comes from: > While launching AI satellites from Earth is the immediate focus, Starship’s capabilities will also enable operations on other worlds. Thanks to advancements like in-space propellant transfer, Starship will be ca…

Why is it cheaper to ship all of the materials to space, then to the moon for assembly (which also includes shipping all of the people and supplies to keep them alive), then back into space vs just… building them on earth and then shipping them up? We’re not exactly at a loss for land over here.

> which also includes shipping all of the people and supplies to keep them alive)

What do you mean, "people" ? I'm pretty sure Musk is only expecting to send self-assembling Optimus robots [1] to do the whole manufacturing.

[1] "pre-order now, expected delivery any time soon"

(Oh, those times where you try to be sarcastic and realize: "wait, maybe that's the actual plan".)

Post reply on HN