zlacker

>>g-mork+(OP)
A former NASA engineer with a PhD in space electronics who later worked at Google for 10 years wrote an article about why datacenters in space are very technically challenging:

https://taranis.ie/datacenters-in-space-are-a-terrible-horri...

I don't have any specialized knowledge of the physics but I saw an article suggesting the real reason for the push to build them in space is to hedge against political pushback preventing construction on Earth.

I can't find the original article but here is one about datacenter pushback:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2025-08-20/ai-and...

But even if political pushback on Earth is the real reason, it still seems datacenters in space are extremely technically challenging/impossible to build.

>>n_u+zs
"Technically challenging", a nice way to say "impossible"

>>edhela+Mt
Just like rockets landing themselves

>>boxede+Yy
No, rockets landing themselves is just controlling the mechanism you use to have them take off, and builds on trust vectoring technology from 1970s jet fighters based on sound physics.

Figuring out how to radiate a lot of waste heat into a vacuum is fighting physics. Ordinarily we use a void on earth as a very effective _insulator_ to keep our hot drinks hot.

>>sollew+WB
> Figuring out how to radiate a lot of waste heat into a vacuum is fighting physics.

Radiators should work pretty well, and large solar panels can do double duty as radiators.

Also, curiously, newer GPUs are developed to require significantly less cooling than previous generations. Perhaps not so coincidentally?

>>fooker+vF
Well there lies the rub, solar panels already need their own thermal radiators when used in space ...

>>doctor+1L
Great, so you seem to agree the technology exists for this and it is a matter of deploying more of it?

>>fooker+5M
It's a matter of deploying it for cheaper or with fewer downsides than what can be done on earth. Launching things to space is expensive even with reusable rockets, and a single server blade would need a lot of accompanying tech to power it, cool it, and connect to other satellites and earth.

Right now only upsides an expensive satellite acting as a server node would be physical security and avoiding various local environmental laws and effects

>>Numerl+s51
> Right now only upsides ...

You are missing some pretty important upsides.

Lower latency is a major one. And not having to buy land and water to power/cool it. Both are fairly limited as far as resources go, and gets exponentially expensive with competition.

The major downside is, of course, cost. In my opinion, this has never really stopped humans from building and scaling up things until the economies of scale work out.

> connect to other satellites and earth

If only there was a large number of satellites in low earth orbit and a company with expertise building these ;)