you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 71 points 2 weeks ago* (10 children)

It's really difficult to cool things in space, and it's really difficult to power stationary things in space. It's also really expensive to put things in space so size/weight is a problem.

So if it's not cheaper/better for cooling, and it's not cheaper/better for power, and it's not cheaper/better for rack space.. why is there a focus on shipping compute to space?

The point I keep coming back to is that it's really hard for the public to protest/damage/destroy data centres in space.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 2 weeks ago

    I think its simpler than that, its just stock price pumping. They can tell the plebs that they have the tech to put servers in space, and the plebs will eat it up and pump the stock.

    You can still destroy the terrestrial base stations.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 2 weeks ago

    The only legitimate thing I can think of is that if we ever colonize the moon or mars, we are going to need compute and storage at the location. If we can launch equipment into orbit instead of waiting until it's needed then it'll give a headstart to test different solutions. If we can also figure out how to do that without having to build it or maintain it on the moon/mars, then that might result in less risk. But it's all conjecture and you don't know what you don't know unless you try.

  • source
  • parent