Thread

1. fwlr · 1790297624 · focus · HN ↗

   Yes, the physics are worse, and yes, the economics are worse, but data centers in space have the crucial advantage that they are out of range of the molotov-throwing arm of Joe Public (recently unemployed).

   1. thelastgallon · 1790304034 · focus · HN ↗

      Businesses run anywhere real money can be made. Middle east is the most volatile place. Yet, the businesses are perfectly okay building infrastructure to extract, refine and ship oil from there.

      If real money can be made, there is no need of datacenters in space. Offer some country some money and they'll let you build whatever you want. The whole idea is entirely unprofitable thats why they are making up things that won't work economically. Keep giving us money indefinitely, we'll keep spending, money can be made after a few decades of spending ... trust us.

      1. ericd · 1790306056 · focus · HN ↗

         The real point is power limitations, putting stuff in space in the right orbit lets you turn solar power into reliable base load.

         1. thelastgallon · 1790307378 · focus · HN ↗

            Why stop somewhere in between? You can go straight to the Sun and directly tap into near infinite source of energy. No need of solar panels, direct access to thermonuclear energy, too cheap to meter. The economics already works out, zero capex, zero opex for the next ~4 billion years. Just needs a few small problems to be worked out, like a pipe to transfer energy.

            1. ericd · 1790310276 · focus · HN ↗

               I guess we'll see if their idea warrants your ludicrous comparison soon. Google is putting out a lot of real resources to test theirs out, so presumably it wasn't obviously insane to them when they ran the numbers.

               1. Dylan16807 · 1790311853 · focus · HN ↗

                  I do not presume that. Plenty of projects that happen don't actually make economic sense.

                  1. ericd · 1790312203 · focus · HN ↗

                     That's usually in hindsight? And I said it wasn't obviously insane to them, not that it would pencil out in the end.

                     Can also just be an asymmetric bet - relatively small outlay with low chance of working, but massive upside if it does, such that it's still positive expected value.

                     But mostly, I think all these armchair quarterbacks should not have very strong opinions about something that they almost certainly don't know much about compared to the people who build these. The person I responded to cited a random blog that ran some numbers, and includes such gems as "In space, a broken fan or a fried motherboard is a crisis." Just... lol

                     1. Dylan16807 · 1790314187 · focus · HN ↗

                        There are lots of motivations other than "this could be a profitable project". Something can be completely insane in a monetary way while not being insane in other ways. A pilot project being built is pretty weak evidence of larger practicality.

                        1. ericd · 1790347479 · focus · HN ↗

                           [delayed]

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.