zlacker

Maybe they should try to build it in the moon. Difficult, but perhaps not as difficult?

>>Findet+(OP)
Almost none of the parent’s bullet points are solved by building on the Moon instead of in Earth orbit.

The energy demands of getting to the 240k mile Moon are IMMENSE compared to 100 mile orbit.

Ultimately, when comparing the 3 general locations, Earth is still BY FAR the most hospitable and affordable location until some manufacturing innovations drop costs by orders of magnitude. But those manufacturing improvements have to be made in the same jurisdiction that SpaceXAI is trying to avoid building data centers in.

This whole things screams a solution in search of a problem. We have to solve the traditional data center issues (power supply, temperature, hazard resilience, etc) wherever the data centers are, whether on the ground or in space. None of these are solved for the theoretical space data centers, but they are all already solved for terrestrial data centers.

>>Findet+(OP)
It has all these problems, plus more.

>>Findet+(OP)
Yeah, carrying stuff 380k km and still deploying in vacuum (and super dusty ground) doesn't solve anything but adds cost and overhead. One day maybe, but not these next decades nor probably this century.

>>thephy+23
In situ iron, titanium, aluminum?

>>Findet+(OP)
Sounds more difficult. Not only is the moon further, you also need to use more fuel to land on it and you also have fine, abrasive dust to deal with. There’s no wind of course, but surely material will be stirred up and resettle based on all the landing activity.

And it’s still a vacuum with many of the same cooling issues. I suppose one upside is you could use the moon itself as a heat sink (maybe).

>>Findet+(OP)
The 2.5s round trip communication latency isn't going to be great for chat. (Alongside all the other reasons.)

>>ethbr1+e6
That's a hard problem to solve. Invest enough in solving that problem and you might get the ability to manufacture a radiator out of it, but you're still going to have to transport the majority of your datacenter to the moon. That probably works out more expensive than launching the whole thing to LEO

>>Findet+(OP)
Still a vacuum so the same heat dissipation issues, adding to it that the lunar dust makes solar panels less usable, and the lunar surface on the solar side gets really hot.

>>sdento+R9
And 2.5s is best case. Signal strength issues, antenna alignment issues, and all sorts of unknown unknowns conspire to make high-integrity/high-throughput digital signal transmissions from a moon-based compute system have a latency much worse than that on average.

>>ethbr1+e6
But none of those are usable, right? It will take decades of work at least to get a commercial grade mining operation going and even then the iron, titanium, aluminum would need to be fashioned...

Ah, I see the idea now. It is to get people to talk about robotics and how robots will be able to do all this on the moon or wherever.

Instantly pumps Tesla stock here now on earth!

>>nkrisc+e8
> Not only is the moon further, you also need to use more fuel to land on it

And take off again, if reusable spacecraft are meant to be used.