zlacker

[return to "Data centers in space makes no sense"]
1. beloch+kK[view] [source] 2026-02-03 23:33:46
>>ajyoon+(OP)
I would not assume cooling has been worked out.

Space is a vacuum. i.e. The lack-of-a-thing that makes a thermos great at keeping your drink hot. A satellite is, if nothing else, a fantastic thermos. A data center in space would necessarily rely completely on cooling by radiation, unlike a terrestrial data center that can make use of convection and conduction. You can't just pipe heat out into the atmosphere or build a heat exchanger. You can't exchange heat with vacuum. You can only radiate heat into it.

Heat is going to limit the compute that can be done in a satellite data centre and radiative cooling solutions are going to massively increase weight. It makes far more sense to build data centers in the arctic.

Musk is up to something here. This could be another hyperloop (i.e. A distracting promise meant to sabotage competition). It could be a legal dodge. It could be a power grab. What it will not be is a useful source of computing power. Anyone who takes this venture seriously is probably going to be burned.

◧◩
2. atleas+qL[view] [source] 2026-02-03 23:39:06
>>beloch+kK
Its very simple, xAI needs money to win the AI race, so best option is to attach to Elon’s moneybank (spacex) to get cash without dilution
◧◩◪
3. george+IX[view] [source] 2026-02-04 00:50:44
>>atleas+qL
> xAI needs money to win the AI race

Off on a tangent here but I'd love for anyone to seriously explain how they believe the "AI race" is economically winnable in any meaningful way.

Like what is the believed inflection point that changes us from the current situation (where all of the state-of-the-art models are roughly equal if you squint, and the open models are only like one release cycle behind) to one where someone achieves a clear advantage that won't be reproduced by everyone else in the "race" virtually immediately.

◧◩◪◨
4. Exotic+6V1[view] [source] 2026-02-04 09:19:50
>>george+IX
> Off on a tangent here but I'd love for anyone to seriously explain how they believe the "AI race" is economically winnable in any meaningful way.

Because the first company to have a full functioning AGI will most likely be the most valuable in the world. So it is worth all the effort to be the first.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. george+FQ2[view] [source] 2026-02-04 15:32:43
>>Exotic+6V1
> Because the first company to have a full functioning AGI will most likely be the most valuable in the world.

This may be what they are going for, but there are two effectively religious beliefs with this line of thinking, IMO.

The first is that LLMs lead to AGI.

The second is that even if the first did turn out to be true that they wouldn't all stumble into AGI at the same time, which given how relatively lockstep all of the models have been for the past couple of years seems far more likely to me than any single company having a breakthrough the others don't immediately reproduce.

[go to top]