zlacker

>>mindra+(OP)
Datacenters in space is about circumventing nation states masked as ambitions to generate more power.

Follow the rationale:

1. Nation states ultimately control three key infrastructure pieces required to run data centers (a) land (protected by sovereign armed forces) (b) internet / internet infra (c) electricity. If crypto ever became a legitimate threat, nation states could simply seize any one of or all these three and basically negate any use of crypto.

2. So, if you have data centers that no longer rely on power derived from a nation state, land controller by a nation state or connectivity provided by the nation state's cabling infra, then you can always access your currency and assets.

>>mbesto+Wo1
I'm sorry, but this is stupid. It's the same dumb thinking behind Sealand: "we're outside state borders! nobody can touch us!", which was only true as long as nobody cared what they were doing. Once Sealand actually started angering people, the Royal Navy showed up and that was that. "Datacenters in space" wouldn't fare any better: multiple nations have successfully tested anti-satellite weapons.

>>Analem+kr1
> Once Sealand actually started angering people, the Royal Navy showed up and that was that.

What did the royal navy do? There is no mention of the UK using force against sealand in either the Wikipedia page or this BBC article about sealand. (Though obviously the royal navy could retake sealand if they wanted)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-suffolk-41135081