Put a data center on the moon?

>>pseudo+(OP)
> Some parts of the moon are permanently shadowed and therefore extremely cold, as low as -173 °C. This means that no energy or water would need to be expended to cool the data center.

That doesn't sound right to me. If there's no air, then only black body radiation can be used to cool the data center. That means a massive radiator, a lot larger than a heat-to-air radiator+fan used on earth.

>>M95D+E6
They've got it all figured out, you just don't understand. Basically, the plan is:

1. Put data on the moon

2. ???

3. Profit

For more info, check out their promotional video: https://www.lonestarlunar.com/video

>>mppm+Be
This is as big a scam or waste as those solar mirror people. Throwing a USB stick out the lunar rover window and calling it a data center. Data centers usually do stuff other than sit in the dust.

Feel free to invest though, perhaps if you feel good about discarding hard drives on the moon I could interest you in space mirrors and for a low low price I'll lease you the spot where your harddrive lands for 100 years.

>>uberma+Sv
> Throwing a USB stick out the lunar rover window and calling it a data center. Data centers usually do stuff other than sit in the dust.

Okay, so here me out: the ultimate cold storage for someone like Iron Mountain. You'd have to understand that you'll need a minimum of 96 hours for retrieval time, and it's gonna be expensive to get that retrieval rocket there and back. Or, build a big dish and send the data via satellite signals.

>>dylan6+GL
If you want your data to survive a global nuclear armageddon or Chicxulub impactor, a flash drive on the moon isn't a bad place to put it.

You know what they say, 3-2-1 backup: three copies of your data, stored on two different types of media, with one copy kept offsite to guard against common-cause data loss. Depending on the cause, off-site could be a difficult place to go!

>>LeifCa+6Q
Let's tale it at face value that a hard drive on the moon does not entropy. Let's also take it as given that the data is so important that you would pay millions of dollars to place it on the moon and millions more to get it back when needed in the event that all your other forms of backup failed due to some global catastrophe.

1) At the moment, we can't even get living people off the international space station let alone land on the moon and take off from the same spot twice.

2) If a space based proof of concept was practical, why would we not store our hard drive on the ISS. It is looking for some excuse to remain in operation and we can already come and go from it on a semi-regular basis?

3) If there was a global catastrophe to the extent that only moon based archives remained, then how are we going to go get them? This crisis destroys all data archives but preserves our space program?

4) Once we did get the drive back, what exactly might we do with it considering all other forms of data storage were destroyed?

5) If the data on the drive was so valuable that we were willing to pay millions of dollars for the chance that after Armageddon we could still get it back... Then why would the Chinese not just wait for us to place the drive then go get it themselves? Surely you would never encrypt it as the key would be just as vulnerable to loss as the data.

>>uberma+DT1
> 1) At the moment, we can't even get living people off the international space station let alone land on the moon and take off from the same spot twice.

This is absolute garbage. It's not even close to being true. Since the astronauts arrived on the Boeing craft, SpaceX has delivered and retrieved other astronauts. They are not still on the ISS because there's no ability to bring humans back, but because of a scheduling logistics situation.

Continuing to push this scheduling snafu as being unable is just nonsense, and you are as well for pushing it.

> 2) If a space based proof of concept was practical, why would we not store our hard drive on the ISS. It is looking for some excuse to remain in operation and we can already come and go from it on a semi-regular basis?

There's only so much space on the ISS. Also, it's being decommissioned soon, so unless some company wants to take it over as a business--which NASA is open to yet no takers--they've contracted SpaceX to de-orbit the station.

zlacker