zlacker

>>g-mork+(OP)
> The basic math is that launching a million tons per year of satellites generating 100 kW of compute power per ton would add 100 gigawatts of AI compute capacity annually, with no ongoing operational or maintenance needs. Ultimately, there is a path to launching 1 TW/year from Earth.

> My estimate is that within 2 to 3 years, the lowest cost way to generate AI compute will be in space.

This is so obviously false. For one thing, in what fantasy world would the ongoing operational and maintenance needs be 0?

>>rybosw+u5
> For one thing, in what fantasy world would the ongoing operational and maintenance needs be 0?

Do you not understand how satellites work? They don't send repair people into space.

This has been a solved problem for decades before the AI gold rush assumed they have some new otherworldly knowledge to teach the rest of the world.

>>tokyob+Y9
> Do you not understand how satellites work?

Not trying to be rude - but it's you who doesn't understand how satellites work.

The U.S. has 31 GPS satellites in orbit right now. The operational cost of running those is $2 million/day.

Not to mention the scale of these satellites would be on the order of 10x-100x the size of the ISS, which we do send people to perform maintenance.