view the rest of the comments
No Stupid Questions
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here. This includes using AI responses and summaries.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
Well, they'd be solar powered. Wouldn't contribute to climate change, etc. no unlicensed methane burning turbines in Memphis or other places around the country causing asthma for little children and families.
Ideally if we could export all industry to the moon (so it doesn't eventually crash into the Earth) that'd be really great, too. Solar would be excellent there. Lots of good stuff to mine...
Ultimately though by data centers they probably mean things that are going to surveil what's on planet Earth and yeah... And you know then the people who don't like surveillance will have a really hard time to get to those data centers.
I think your problem is you just kind of like stuck in your own point of view and maybe you need to see things from other people's point of views? Even if those people want to explain you surveil you know everything you do we know everything you look at online every single last image every single last week every single ass porn video.... ❤️
The rocket fuel to get them there, plus all the energy to build and produce the rocket fuel definitely is a contribution. They could be solar powered down here. The reason they’re not is money.
Plus the ozone layer destruction as they re-enter the atmosphere when decommissioned
No no, we don't talk about the vaporized metals in the high atmosphere...
Funny how you peeps never talk about cooling those space slop generators eh?
Radiators work in space. The area required for solar arrays easily accommodates cooling. And there's the issue that you actually need to heat electronics in space for them to function properly.
So really the issue is heating them and not cooling them. But yeah overall you would need heat pumps.
It's funny how a guy with no engineering experience whatsoever thinks they know more than people putting fucking rockets into space.
You can even do fun things with TEG. Utilizing the difference in temperature between two surfaces to generate energy.
And the hotter your radiator the better it radiates. So yes heat pumps would move heat, which is funny we call it heat cuz it would actually be relatively cold compared to the radiators (potentially), and your radiator operates at T^4 scaling. You get that thing(radiator) as hot as possible that would be the goal.
Really it's more of a Goldilocks problem. Or basically just a heat pump problem you have to be able to pipe your heat perhaps to the processor perhaps away from the processor depending the Tj(thermal junction.)
That is just a load of bs. Heat pumps do not operate efficiently at high temperatures, and they only add more heat to the circuit. You cannot generate energy from the temperature difference, because then you would slow heat transfer significantly while generating an insignificant amount of power.
It has already been calculated, and radiators are a really big issue for "space datacenters". Even with our current cooling technology advancements. Server hardware needs to be kept at a cool temperature (ideally not higher than 50°C), and most importantly, it needs to be constant in spite of very variable hardware load. That is really difficult to manage in space, and an issue that needs to be considered even for our non datacenter satellites.
But even if cooling was trivial, space datacenters make absolutely no sense.
For starters, it wouldn't be possible to put any server in the market up there. Chips are very vulnerable to the radiation in space, which is why space CPUs are stupidly expensive and way slower than earth CPUs. They need to use less efficient litographies, with very special shielding that isn't commonly available. The sheer compute and memory density of our current servers would be impossible to properly shield, even if we ignore the cost. ECC RAM and ZFS pools for drives would very quickly stop protecting your server from errors, since the bit flips would be too common, and your computations would often be incorrect.
If you ignore both cooling and space radiation, you still have the issue of accesibility. Datacenters have people always coming and going, because hardware needs maintenance. Sometimes you want to upgrade the server, change the connections, add or remove hardware, and of course, you need to replace the parts that break over time. Hardware becomes old really quickly, especially for the compute intensive workloads that are planned for those "space datacenters".
Datacenters are kept fast and competitive through constant upgrading of the parts. Compute intensive servers also churn through parts very quickly, because even at 50-60°C temps, keeping hardware at 100% utilization isn't the best. This is further exhacerbated by temperature fluctuations, which can prematurely kill the silicon.
Like someone else mentioned in another comment, Microsoft already tried dumping containers with servers into the ocean, and putting wind turbines on top. That's free cooling, very stable temperatures, and free energy. Even if it was a success in every measure, Microsoft dropped it because it wasn't accessible enough, which made it unusable for any real usecase.
The truth is, datacenters are a market where cost is very important, and solutions are already very competitive. Putting a datacenter in orbit would be stupidly costly, even if you could fix all the issues mentioned. Free electricity does not offset those costs, and that's without taking into account the cost of the rockets for putting the datacenters in orbit.
TL;DR: There are so many issues and extra costs, even when ignoring cooling, that make datacenters in space a stupid thing to even consider.
And before you say I'm not an engineer and I don't know what I'm talking about, server infrastructure is my field. I've worked with datacenters, maintained server stacks and I myself have worked on those cost calculations. I know what I'm talking about.