397
Anybody Who Thinks Orbital Data Centers are a Good Idea Is Suffering from AI Psychosis, Experts Argue (tech.yahoo.com)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/technology@lemmy.world
99 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0 points 2 months ago (6 children)

I'm doing neither one, but it's pretty clearly not an idea for this time. We lack an awful lot to be able to pull off a project at that scale, but frankly that makes me more curious not less.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Even not underestimating the scale, I'm not sure it would work because all the debris would need to be ejected from the thousands-of-kilometers-deep hole. And then you'd also have to have a solution to stop the walls from caving in before the next bomb had a chance to arrive. It's almost as if you not only need thousands of extremely powerful (even for nukes) bombs, but also need to deliver them in a continuous stream to keep the blast pressure up and the hole open.

    I feel like, at that point, the easier strategy to accomplish your goal would be redirecting a large asteroid to impact the planet, or something like that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    Oh, I don't care about the surface viability. An asteroid capable of altering the core would probably liquefy a significant portion of the planet though which is also not desirable.

    The goal of the thought is to give the planet a magnetosphere closer to that of earth, anywhere between would be a success. The general idea is to get the core somewhat hotter and moving much more, which probably also means it needs a more beefy moon than it has to maintain the change for any significant amount of time.

    idk it's just an idea I like to kick around sometimes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago*

    Saying it's a matter of scale is an understatement. You need mass to keep the core molten, along with the right combination of elements to produce a working magnetic field that doesn't fade over time. Mars has neither of those things going for it.

    If you want to terraform Mars, you would have to rebuild it from scratch...basically creating a whole new planet with the right core composition and size. Even if you could pull all that material into one location and guide it all into a stable orbit, it would then take hundreds of millions of years to cool and set into something we could even hope to live on.

    I don't think human beings will ever be capable of that level of geoengineering. It's just not realistic given the alternatives.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent