FaceDeer comments on An in-space construction firm says it can help build massive data centers in orbit

and forget about running 4nm chips in space. shit has to be radiation hardened, which means bigger process nodes and higher energy cost, and lower speed

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Another thing they probably didn't think of. Nobody's run chips in space before.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

they did think of it. lots of people have. I just mentioned what was required. Rad hardened processors are usually 10 to 20 times slower than what we have on the surface

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 1 point 1 year ago

So don't use rad-hardened processors, put them in a radiation vault instead. Those become more mass-efficient the more hardware you're putting inside them.

Really, I assure you the people proposing these things have put more thought and expertise into it than a bunch of random Fediverse commentators.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

for starters, at the loads they're running at, they have literally hundreds of gpu failures a day. How do you propose doing that in space?

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 5 child comments

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io -2 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Include spares.

I hope they're reading this thread and taking notes, they probably didn't think of that.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 4 child comments

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

and the infrastructure and robotics to replace them, of course.

Assuming 200 nvidia H100 failures a day (conservativo, reality is worse) that's an extra ~340kg of weight you'd need to launch per day. Which is an extra 120 tons yearly.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

So, one Starship launch per year. Doesn't sound like a problem.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

at least two, you can't stuff a rocket full of just gpus, you need something to actually dock and deliver the payload in space. So you need to launch at least 2 rockets (in a non-reusable configuration, so you need to pay for the whole rocket and the launch) to ship a bunch of gpus that are, at best, only 10% as fast as usual.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 1 point 1 year ago

Okay, two then. It's still cheap.