If you think data centers in the sky are whacked the DoD in the 60s seriously argued that the Russians would break nuclear test ban treaties by testing nukes on the dark side of the moon…
You don’t have to be an engineer working in the technology sector, as I was before I retired, to realize how quickly that fantastic new computer or server you just got becomes an old, antiquated, slow, buggy piece of crap in comparison to what is next available. I haven’t heard of any quick and inexpensive methods for hardware updates in orbit, nor are there any available recycling centers out there. As they say, this isn’t “rocket science” - so whom are they trying to fool?
It makes sense once we actually have stuff going on the moon; not before. Do you remember Space 1999? That was my favorite show as a kid and I’m sad 1999 came and went and we don’t have cool Eagle spaceships jetting around Moonbase Alpha.
This sound mainly as typical Musk hype-driven financial engineering.
I don't see anybody building data centers in the Sahara desert, which would enjoy many of the advantages (cheap land, lot of sun) at a much lower price and without the disadvantages of space.
These guys are idiots, all. If it costs 20x-50x to put centers in space and we only get sunlight on earth 50% of the time, it's a better solution to put 2X the solar panels on the ground, where we can get to them, maintain and upgrade the chips/panels, and save the propulsion/insertion costs to put 1/2 the quantity of panels in orbit. This doesn't even take a bar napkin to calculate.
Spend the excess to get fusion working or breeder reactors working ( thorium ) and use fission, which we have mastered. That is a much shorter and more reasonable development path for power.
Musk is brain dead. His supporters are too vapid to see it. A million satellites? His big Starship can not current lift anything. This is mass delusion, starting with him and all I can conclude is that the other AI folks are doing is matching his hype for fear of losing out.
AI and data centers have some serious problems and implications, even on earth. Putting them in space is exponentially more insane.
Yes. Any investment in the space tech needed would be far better spent on improving the technology needed for data centres on the ground. To me it looks more like an effort to pump SpaceX stock before he goes for an IPO.
I hope you are right about the idea of a million plus xAI satellites (and the others) not actually getting off the ground, because right now there's a lot of worry that a) the night sky will be completely ruined by the satellites outnumbering the stars and b) the environmental impacts of satellite disposal by re-entry into the atmosphere.
A million satellites is just not going to happen. You would have to launch 100 satellites every day for 30 years just to get close to that number. It looks more like an attention grabbing number rather than any serious effort. Its also not the first time Musk has announced a huge number of satellites and then just not delivered them.
Following fascists giving nazi salutes who only earn 80k a year into space is as bad as following draft dodging, rapey paedophiles into war in the middle east...
I'm surprised that no one seems to be discussing the elephant in the room—the 800-pound gorilla. Come on, folks, just consider the effort required to build whatever ambitious project you're envisioning on the Moon. Sure, it's expensive, but it's entirely feasible, and it could eliminate many of the persistent engineering and maintenance challenges we face. It would take time, of course, but the Moon's low gravity would alleviate the gravitational issues that plague us here on Earth. We're heading there anyway, so why not establish the infrastructure to meet all our needs? I'm convinced that's exactly what Elon Musk has in mind—he's far more than just a competent engineer; he's a true visionary. Never underestimate Musk!
If you think data centers in the sky are whacked the DoD in the 60s seriously argued that the Russians would break nuclear test ban treaties by testing nukes on the dark side of the moon…
You don’t have to be an engineer working in the technology sector, as I was before I retired, to realize how quickly that fantastic new computer or server you just got becomes an old, antiquated, slow, buggy piece of crap in comparison to what is next available. I haven’t heard of any quick and inexpensive methods for hardware updates in orbit, nor are there any available recycling centers out there. As they say, this isn’t “rocket science” - so whom are they trying to fool?
It makes sense once we actually have stuff going on the moon; not before. Do you remember Space 1999? That was my favorite show as a kid and I’m sad 1999 came and went and we don’t have cool Eagle spaceships jetting around Moonbase Alpha.
This sound mainly as typical Musk hype-driven financial engineering.
I don't see anybody building data centers in the Sahara desert, which would enjoy many of the advantages (cheap land, lot of sun) at a much lower price and without the disadvantages of space.
These guys are idiots, all. If it costs 20x-50x to put centers in space and we only get sunlight on earth 50% of the time, it's a better solution to put 2X the solar panels on the ground, where we can get to them, maintain and upgrade the chips/panels, and save the propulsion/insertion costs to put 1/2 the quantity of panels in orbit. This doesn't even take a bar napkin to calculate.
Spend the excess to get fusion working or breeder reactors working ( thorium ) and use fission, which we have mastered. That is a much shorter and more reasonable development path for power.
Musk is brain dead. His supporters are too vapid to see it. A million satellites? His big Starship can not current lift anything. This is mass delusion, starting with him and all I can conclude is that the other AI folks are doing is matching his hype for fear of losing out.
AI and data centers have some serious problems and implications, even on earth. Putting them in space is exponentially more insane.
Yes. Any investment in the space tech needed would be far better spent on improving the technology needed for data centres on the ground. To me it looks more like an effort to pump SpaceX stock before he goes for an IPO.
I hope you are right about the idea of a million plus xAI satellites (and the others) not actually getting off the ground, because right now there's a lot of worry that a) the night sky will be completely ruined by the satellites outnumbering the stars and b) the environmental impacts of satellite disposal by re-entry into the atmosphere.
A million satellites is just not going to happen. You would have to launch 100 satellites every day for 30 years just to get close to that number. It looks more like an attention grabbing number rather than any serious effort. Its also not the first time Musk has announced a huge number of satellites and then just not delivered them.
Following fascists giving nazi salutes who only earn 80k a year into space is as bad as following draft dodging, rapey paedophiles into war in the middle east...
I'm surprised that no one seems to be discussing the elephant in the room—the 800-pound gorilla. Come on, folks, just consider the effort required to build whatever ambitious project you're envisioning on the Moon. Sure, it's expensive, but it's entirely feasible, and it could eliminate many of the persistent engineering and maintenance challenges we face. It would take time, of course, but the Moon's low gravity would alleviate the gravitational issues that plague us here on Earth. We're heading there anyway, so why not establish the infrastructure to meet all our needs? I'm convinced that's exactly what Elon Musk has in mind—he's far more than just a competent engineer; he's a true visionary. Never underestimate Musk!