zlacker

>>angadh+(OP)
Putting a datacenter in space is one of the worst ideas I've heard in a while.

Reliable energy? Possible, but difficult -- need plenty of batteries

Cooling? Very difficult. Where does the heat transfer to?

Latency? Highly variable.

Equipment upgrades and maintenance? Impossible.

Radiation shielding? Not free.

Decommissioning? Potentially dangerous!

Orbital maintenance? Gotta install engines on your datacenter and keep them fueled.

There's no upside, it's only downsides as far as I can tell.

>>energy+T6
Yes cooling is difficult. Half the "solar panels" on the ISS aren't solar panels but heat radiation panels. That's the only way you can get rid of it and it's very inefficient so you need a huge surface.

>>wkat42+Ne
seems oddly paradoxical. ISS interior at some roughly livable temperature. Exterior is ... freakin' space! Temperature gradient seems as if it should take of it ...

... and then you realize that because it is space, there's almost nothing out there to absorb the heat ...

>>PaulDa+gx
there literally is nothing to absorb the heat. Conduction and convection are out, all you got is radiation.

new vc rule: no investing in space startups unless their founders have 1000 hours in KSP and 500 hours in children of a dead earth

>>throwa+0y
I’d settle for at least a high school physics education. This idea seemed insane when I first heard about it a few weeks back. This analysis just makes it that much more crazy.

If YC is hell bent on lighting piles of money on fire, I can think of some more enjoyable ways.