zlacker

Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

submitted by angadh+(OP) on 2025-06-26 20:06:28 | 199 points 343 comments
[view article] [source] [go to bottom]

NOTE: showing posts with links only show all posts
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
22. FredPr+2h[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-26 21:49:49
>>bryanr+re
By that logic, politicians around the world would make it illegal for themselves to trade stock on their insider knowledge. I'm not holding my breath.

See: https://unusualwhales.com/politics. Some of these politicians on both sides are very good and consistent stock pickers indeed.

30. kemote+Wm[view] [source] 2025-06-26 22:46:15
>>angadh+(OP)
Here is a video that I think thoroughly covers the challenges a datacenter in orbit would face.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAcR7kqOb3o

31. trhway+5n[view] [source] 2025-06-26 22:47:27
>>angadh+(OP)
My napkin is with Starcloud >>43190778 , ie. one Starship $10M launch - 10 000 GPU datacenter into LEO with energy and cooling. I missed there batteries for the half the time being in the Earth shadow (as originally i calculated that for crypto where you can have half the time off which isn't the case for the regular datacenter) and panels to charge them, that adds 10kg for 1 KWH, and thus it will get down to about 5000 GPU for the same weight and launch cost.

Paradoxically the datacenter in LEO is cheaper than on the ground, and have bunch of other benefits like for example physical security.

◧◩◪◨⬒
38. _carby+Xs[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-26 23:47:32
>>bigiai+Ir
Maybe not so much... they'll just grab you. Obligatory XKCD.

https://xkcd.com/538/

Unless you go up there with it and a literal lifetime supply? Although I guess if you don't take much it's still a lifetime supply...

◧◩
41. ggreer+4w[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 00:26:11
>>trhway+5n
If you read Starcloud's whitepaper[1], they mention using a dawn-dusk sun-synchronous orbit. This would keep the solar panels in sunlight except for occasional lunar eclipses (which would basically be scheduled downtime, since their plan is to use these data centers for AI training).

1. https://starcloudinc.github.io/wp.pdf

◧◩
42. ggreer+kw[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 00:29:30
>>energy+T6
If you read the Starcloud whitepaper[1], it claims that massive batteries aren't needed because the satellites would be placed in a dawn-dusk sun-synchronous orbit. Except for occasional lunar eclipses, the solar panels would be in constant sunlight.

The whitepaper also says that they're targeting use cases that don't require low latency or high availability. In short: AI model training and other big offline tasks.

For maintenance, they plan to have a modular architecture that allows upgrading and/or replacing failed/obsolete servers. If launch costs are low enough to allow for launching a datacenter into space, they'll be low enough to allow for launching replacement modules.

All satellites launched from the US are required to have a decommissioning plan and a debris assessment report. In other words: the government must be satisfied that they won't create orbital debris or create a hazard on the ground. Since these satellites would be very large, they'll almost certainly need thrusters that allow them to avoid potential collisions and deorbit in a controlled manner.

Whether or not their business is viable depends on the future cost of launches and the future cost of batteries. If batteries get really cheap, it will be economically feasible to have an off-the-grid datacenter on the ground. There's not much point in launching a datacenter into space if you can power it on the ground 24/7 with solar + batteries. If cost to orbit per kg plummets and the price of batteries remains high, they'll have a chance. If not, they're sunk.

I think they'll most likely fail, but their business could be very lucrative if they succeed. I wouldn't invest, but I can see why some people would.

1. https://starcloudinc.github.io/wp.pdf

◧◩◪◨
92. jand+DN[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 05:10:02
>>Brian_+3C
And it enjoyed some popularity. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beer_boot

◧◩◪
118. rambl3+l31[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 08:12:48
>>oceanp+7J
That sounds like the Guoxing Aerospace / ADA Space “Three-Body Computing Constellation”, currently at 12 satellites (out of a planned 2,800).

The Chinese project involves a larger number of less powerful inference-only nodes for edge computing, compared to Starcloud's training-capable hyperscale data centers.

[1] Andrew Jones. "China launches first of 2,800 satellites for AI space computing constellation". Spacenews, May 14, 2025. https://spacenews.com/china-launches-first-of-2800-satellite... [2] Ling Xin. "China launches satellites to start building the world’s first supercomputer in orbit". South China Morning Post, May 15, 2025. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3310506/chin... [3] Ben Turner. "China is building a constellation of AI supercomputers in space — and just launched the first pieces". June 2, 2025. https://www.livescience.com/technology/computing/china-is-bu...

◧◩
124. westpf+J41[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 08:27:16
>>philos+NO
Backblaze is a perfect example of parts failing.

https://www.backblaze.com/cloud-storage/resources/hard-drive...

Yes it was ONLY 1,000 out of 300,000. But that is only harddrives not other hardware failures/replacement. But it goes to show that things do fail. And the cost of replacement in space is drastically more expensive. The idea of a DC in space as it stands is a nothing burger.

150. ricard+sh1[view] [source] 2025-06-27 10:53:15
>>angadh+(OP)
The launch costs in the article look quite off from the outset.

A Falcon Heavy launch is already under $100M, and in the $1400/kg range; Starship’s main purpose is to massively reduce launch costs, so $1000/kg is not optimistic at all and would be a failure. Their current target is $250/kg eventually once full reusability is in place.

Still far from the dream of $30/kg but not that far.

The original “white paper” [1] also does acknowledge that a separate launch is needed for the solar panels and radiators at a 1:1 ratio to the server launches, which is ignored here. I think the author leaned in a bit too much on their deep research AI assistant output.

[1] https://starcloudinc.github.io/wp.pdf

◧◩
163. ceejay+Tn1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 12:03:05
>>t1E9mE+tj1
Laws definitely still apply.

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

> Article VI of the Outer Space Treaty deals with international responsibility, stating that "the activities of non-governmental entities in outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, shall require authorization and continuing supervision by the appropriate State Party to the Treaty" and that States Party shall bear international responsibility for national space activities whether carried out by governmental or non-governmental entities.

◧◩◪◨
172. btown+ss1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 12:46:13
>>rajnat+Pc1
https://accendoreliability.com/the-bath-tub-curve-explained/ is an interesting breakdown of bath tub curve dynamics for those curious!
◧◩
198. aleph_+2D1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 14:25:27
>>hughes+ER
> Who's asking for datacenters in space?

At >>44397026 I speculate that in particular militaries might be interested.

◧◩
199. aleph_+9D1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 14:26:41
>>weinzi+P51
> Why do they want to put a data center in space in the first place?

At >>44397026 I speculate that in particular militaries might be interested.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
202. aleph_+9E1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 14:33:52
>>xyzzy1+oC
> I'm not sure how you maintain hidden ground stations while providing a commercial service that justifies many $MM in capital and requires state support to get launch permission.

Who said that Starcloud's business model is about commercial services? At >>44397026 I rather speculate that Starcloud's business model is about getting big money defense contracts.

◧◩◪◨
215. ceejay+9K1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 15:20:34
>>HPsqua+ty1
> A bit like international waters.

Which is a good analogy; international waters are far from lawless.

You're still subject to the law of your flag state, just as if you were on their territory. In addition to that, you're subject to everyone's jurisdiction if you commit certain crimes - including piracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction

◧◩◪◨
239. Retric+3X1[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 16:49:14
>>drewg1+jV1
Electronics can be extremely resilient to vibration and g forces. Self guided artillery shells such as the M982 Excalibur include fairly normal electronics for GPS guidance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M982_Excalibur
251. RajT88+I12[view] [source] 2025-06-27 17:21:50
>>angadh+(OP)
This is way sillier than putting data centers under water.

https://www.techopedia.com/the-rise-of-underwater-data-cente...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
260. swores+s42[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 17:42:41
>>bevr13+NM1
Had they said "the array will be so large it'll have its own gravity." then you'd be making a valid point.

But they didn't say just "gravity", they said "gravity well".

> "First, let us simply define what a gravity well is. A gravity well is a term used metaphorically to describe the gravitational pull that a large body exerts in space."

- https://medium.com/intuition/what-are-gravity-wells-3c1fb6d6...

So they weren't suggesting that it will be big enough to get past some boundary below which things don't have gravity, just that smaller things don't have enough gravity to matter.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
263. ceejay+A62[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 18:01:32
>>c22+G22
Unless you invent some new launch method, a dozen or so countries will immediately know.

Shortly afterwards, amateur astronomers will spot it. https://gizmodo.com/amateur-astronomer-catches-fleeting-glim...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
266. bevr13+572[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 18:05:01
>>swores+s42
Given all mass has gravity, and gravity can be metaphorically described by a well, all mass has a gravity well. It is not necessary for mass to capture other mass in its gravity. A well is a pleasant and relative metaphor humans can visualize - not a threshold reached after certain mass.

"Large" is almost meaningless in this context. Douglas Adams put it best

> Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space.

From an education site:

> Everything with mass is able to bend space and the more massive an object is, the more it bends

They start with an explanation of a marble compared to a bowling ball. Both have a gravity well, but one exerts far more influence

https://www.howitworksdaily.com/the-solar-system-what-is-a-g...

◧◩◪◨⬒
277. badcry+1e2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 19:00:40
>>neom+b02
There are certainly nation states that are looking for ways to 1) prevent their satellites colliding with one another (https://eprint.iacr.org/2013/850.pdf) and 2) being able to do forms of computation that might be risky to do on earth for national security reasons.
◧◩◪◨
283. aeroph+Ln2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 20:25:44
>>TheOth+2F1
There is a neat solve for the thermal problem that York Space systems has been advocating (based on Russian tech)… put everything in an enclosure.

https://www.yorkspacesystems.com/

Short version: make a giant pressure vessel and keep things at 1 atm. Circulate air like you would do on earth. Yes, there is still plenty of excess heat you need to radiate, but dramatically simplifies things.

◧◩◪◨
292. ggreer+3y2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 21:53:18
>>Aperoc+9C
Hydrogen fuel cell vehicles are a little different because there are safety, economic, and physical constraints that mean they will always be worse than battery electric or gas cars. I and many others correctly predicted this.[1] For hydrogen to succeed, batteries would have to get more expensive and/or have worse energy density than they did in 2015.

Satellite data centers seem unlikely to me, but at least their feasibility doesn't require that existing stuff get more expensive/worse. Starcloud is a bet that three things will happen in the next decade:

- SpaceX Starship will succeed and drastically reduce launch costs.

- Batteries will not get 10x cheaper.

- There will be valuable applications for high latency, high performance compute (eg: AI training).

If any one of these things does not happen, Starcloud is doomed (or will have to pivot). If they all happen, Starcloud has a chance at success.

1. >>25875749

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
301. danans+QF2[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-27 22:58:52
>>ggreer+IC2
https://www.wesa.fm/environment-energy/2024-02-19/weirton-fo...

> Optimistically assuming 12 hours of sunlight per day, a 40MW datacenter would need 480MWh of batteries to cover the dark period, costing $50 million.

A 40MW data center doesn't run constantly at 40MW. That's its load rating. Like any industrial facility, actual peak loads are probably around 80% and average loads are lower.

Also, why do you assume that the data center has to be off-grid? That's a constraint of a space-based datacenter, not a ground based datacenter.

Datacenters with storage can complement grid power.

> The cheapest batteries today are around $100/kWh.

If we are comparing ground based data centers to hypothetical space based ones, then consider that grid scale iron air batteries are coming soon at $20/kWh.

https://www.wesa.fm/environment-energy/2024-02-19/weirton-fo...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
310. Mobius+E63[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-28 06:41:52
>>Robotb+pj2
Relevant Scott Manley video: https://youtu.be/nxeMoaxUpWk?si=QOO9KJCGS_Q8JeyR

Relevant tom Scott video: https://youtu.be/bJ_seXo-Enc?si=m_QjHpLaL8d8Cp8b

There is a lot of research, but it’s not as simple as operating under real gravity. Makes many movements harder and can result in getting sick.

◧◩◪
324. yencab+H34[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-28 17:19:08
>>little+I51
The comment at >>44399181 says the ISS radiator is 42m^2. Radiating so much more at just 63m^2 seems hype-based.
◧◩◪◨
327. yencab+B54[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-06-28 17:31:52
>>singro+Os1
Any exposed fluids (mostly saliva) technically boils but you can think of it as evaporation to avoid layperson associations with heat -- it's all about low pressure, not about heat in layperson terms.

Whether you freeze or not depends on whether you're in the sun or not. Spacesuits are white to reflect as much light as feasible mostly to keep the astronauts from cooking. For example, surface of the moon can heat to 120° C / 250° Fahrenheit / 400 K.

Over time I'm sure all the liquids will manage to escape. Here's what happens to blood not contained by blood vessels and skin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU3MOLqA3WA

[go to top]