zlacker

[parent] [thread] 6 comments
1. Veedra+(OP)[view] [source] 2024-09-08 07:11:57
Starship is aiming for a low-single-digit-millions launch cost.
replies(2): >>reaper+v >>raverb+T
2. reaper+v[view] [source] 2024-09-08 07:23:43
>>Veedra+(OP)
I mean, okay…if SpaceX launch prices were lowered from the current $100 million per Falcon Heavy price down to $1 million per Starship launch I guess 5 Starship launches could be enough for a 40MW compute unit in space.

If SpaceX can really pull that off, my math above would look a lot different.

3. raverb+T[view] [source] 2024-09-08 07:31:07
>>Veedra+(OP)
Cool, just add now the cost of custom hardware (have they ever heard of radiation hardening? Do they think your regular server hardware survives radiation at LEO?)
replies(1): >>Veedra+D1
◧◩
4. Veedra+D1[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-09-08 07:43:17
>>raverb+T
I'm not claiming this is a good idea today, nor claiming Starship looks to hit its cost goals any time soon, but I would note that COTS hardware works fine in LEO. SpaceX's Dragon is all COTS, using radiation tolerance rather than hardening.
replies(2): >>raverb+q4 >>atoav+Z4
◧◩◪
5. raverb+q4[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-09-08 08:28:43
>>Veedra+D1
> using radiation tolerance rather than hardening

True. But this relies a lot on software and probably some specialized details in hardware as well

Your Dragon docking maneuvering requires way less calculations than your typical AI training. Hence it is ok to have HW do the same calculation multiple times and check the values.

This is different from AI training where you want the most reliability 24h/day

◧◩◪
6. atoav+Z4[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-09-08 08:39:01
>>Veedra+D1
> using radiation tolerance rather than hardening

Another aspect that is entirely missing from that pdf that doesn't necessarily convince me these people have a plan.

replies(1): >>Veedra+R8
◧◩◪◨
7. Veedra+R8[view] [source] [discussion] 2024-09-08 09:38:40
>>atoav+Z4
This is literally covered multiple times in the pdf.
[go to top]