zlacker

>>jonbae+(OP)
They state that in 10 years all data centers will be in outer space. I state that in 10 years we will look back and think this was a ridiculous idea. The meta and maintenance costs, the pollution of sending them to space, the space pollution itself, the outer space radiation, the extra redundant error correction needed*,* and much more all speak against this. Why not throw that trillion dollars into optical computing chip research? Why not create better sustainable methods here on earth*?* We could run a single data center down here, or pay a million times moreto do this in space. The argument that we are polluting Earth down here is very weak. Yes, we do, but why on earth do we then not invest more in research for solving these problems*?* There are startups out there that will one day solve these issues. And then space data centers will be something for the Star Trek age, which humanity will probably never achieve.

>>0xcb0+u7
I think the bigger thing about a space-based data center that it's not on anyone's land, and not easy to inspect or capture.

Solar energy available around the clock allows it to be self-sufficient for a long time.

I suppose there will be some demand for high-security, high-price setups like that.

>>nine_k+49
But read/write access to the datacentre is on someone's land, and spacefaring powers without access to that can still interfere with its effective operation...

>>notaha+V9
The access is the customer's concern, much like starlink.

>>nine_k+uq
The customer is going to be extremely concerned when it turns out physically locating datacentres in space doesn't actually render the data inaccessible or uncensorable...

>>notaha+ky
To render your data inaccessible, use /dev/null. For practical purposes, some access is required.

Censoring data in a datacenter in space requires either administrative access, or physical access. The latter is complicated in space, The former depends on your trust to the operator, and your security posture.

>>nine_k+sl1
Since the admins aren't in space, actors that want to use administrative privileges to interfere with your data have no less access to it than if the datacentre was located on the ground.

The difference between the US government censoring a datacentre in orbit and one in California is a matter of cost rather than practicality, and it's actually easier for other spacefaring powers to interfere with it in a deniable manner if it's that important to them than the datacentre in California

>>notaha+6o1
This depend on you threat model. If your model is mostly legal threats form less-than-nation-state actors, being formally outside any terrestrial jurisdiction may help. If you try to protect yourself from a big threat that won't mind raiding (or bombing) your DC without a court order, quite possibly locating it in space is not the best idea.