Thread

1. zactato · 1790267254 · focus · HN ↗

   How are they solving the heat dissipation issues?

   1. GMoromisato · 1790270501 · focus · HN ↗

      Please stop with this argument. This is one of the easiest problems to solve. Heat dissipation requires a radiator, which is just a dumb hunk of metal. All you need is a cheap way to launch mass to orbit, which is exactly what SpaceX (and Chinese companies) are doing.

      The only valid argument against data centers in space is the economic cost. If the per megatoken price for space datacenters is higher than terrestrial, then this won't work.

      But the price for terrestrial datacenters keeps going up and technology keeps dropping the price of space-based.

      1. 0cf8612b2e1e · 1790272676 · focus · HN ↗

         That is not a fake argument, but real physics. Yes, you can design out X kw can be dissipated by this much radiators, but that adds an enormous quantity of mass, more than the solar panels that feed it.

         If you are trying to generate a profit, every extra kg puts you further in the red. It still costs over $1000/kg of mass to get into orbit.

         1. GMoromisato · 1790275041 · focus · HN ↗

            So is it a physics problem or an economic problem? Sounds to me like you are acknowledging that it is just an economic problem. If it cost $1/kg to get to orbit then this wouldn't be a problem, right? Just make a bigger radiator.

            But if it's an economic argument, then you need to do the actual math. How big is the radiator? How low could the price to orbit go? How much can you charge per million tokens in 2030?

            The reason this is a fake argument is because the validity depends on the math, and nobody advancing the "you can't cool stuff in space" argument is actually doing the math.

            1. motionlessveloc · 1790281005 · focus · HN ↗

               The economics is constrained by physics. AI in space is not viable if it costs $1000/kg to launch to space. Starship promises to cut that down to $100/kg (more if you believe Elon, but most don't), but that's still not competitive.

               Sure, things would be different if the cost was $1/kg, but short of somebody building a space elevator that's just not going to happen.

               1. GMoromisato · 1790282269 · focus · HN ↗

                  I won't believe less than $100/kg until I see it. I agree with you on that.

                  But are you sure that $100/kg is not competitive? I don't remember all the math, but even their initial AI1 design[1] would throw a lot of profit, if you can sell at the price they offered to Anthropic.

                  I suspect the price of manufacturing the satellite, plus chips, is the dominating factor, not necessarily the launch costs.

                  [1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spacex.com&#x2F;spacexai&#x2F;starmind" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.spacex.com&#x2F;spacexai&#x2F;starmind

               2. sourcecodeplz · 1790320032 · focus · HN ↗

                  &gt; if you believe Elon.

                  Why wouldn;t you? he delivered on almost everything he promised, just the timeline was a lot later.

                  we are talking sci-fi things here, these will take time but can be done.

                  would you rather we bury our heads in the sand and never innovated beyond basics?

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.