▲ 590 ▼ SpaceX Stock Plunge Wipes Out $600 Billion After Cursor Deal Spooks Investors (www.forbes.com) submitted 4 months ago by sanitation@lemmy.today to c/technology@lemmy.world 138 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] hamid@crazypeople.online 12 points 4 months ago (4 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Nouvellalia@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago No, it's totally possible. Not with any technology we've ever built, maybe not with any technology we can build, but physics doesn't preclude it outright. Your point still stands though. It's a promise that's impossible to meet within the lifetime of the investors. permalink fedilink source parent [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (2 children) It’s possible, but not economical. For basically any “space datacenter” scenario, imagine putting that same thing in a vast desert instead. You’ll find it’s easier and an order of magnitude cheaper. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] hamid@crazypeople.online 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child) 800K is 526C! You can't run a datacenter at that. 80C (still very hot for datacenter hardware coolant) is 350K. And there are other challenges, like effects from being in LEO, or proximity to wherever the solar array is. And this is just one of MANY ridiclous engineering challenges. Another great example is that GPUs, memory, and SSDs get random bit flips in orbit, and the issue gets worse with smaller lithography: https://www.itpro.com/server-storage/high-performance-computing-hpc/367323/hpes-supercomputer-helps-iss-astronauts There's tons of spam about "solving" this after the Tech Bro boom, but I don't really buy anything I've seen. Nothing but a bunch of lead (or the Earth's atmosphere) is going to stop fat gamma rays or extremely fast nuclei. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] hamid@crazypeople.online 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago* To be fair, 100MW is pretty big. AI doesn’t actually need that much. I’m pretty sure entire models like GLM 5.2 or Deepseek v4 are trained (and served) on a much, much smaller scale than a 100MW cluster. But if that’s the case… why even invest in orbital data centers in the first place? Why not desert ones? Why all this cash there instead of actually improving LLM architectures!? There are so many nested levels of absurdity here. It’s all just total mania, with zero punishment to those doing the funding because they are too rich to feel any consequences. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] Nouvellalia@lemmy.world 11 points 4 months ago No, it's totally possible. Not with any technology we've ever built, maybe not with any technology we can build, but physics doesn't preclude it outright. Your point still stands though. It's a promise that's impossible to meet within the lifetime of the investors. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago* (2 children) It’s possible, but not economical. For basically any “space datacenter” scenario, imagine putting that same thing in a vast desert instead. You’ll find it’s easier and an order of magnitude cheaper. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] hamid@crazypeople.online 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child) 800K is 526C! You can't run a datacenter at that. 80C (still very hot for datacenter hardware coolant) is 350K. And there are other challenges, like effects from being in LEO, or proximity to wherever the solar array is. And this is just one of MANY ridiclous engineering challenges. Another great example is that GPUs, memory, and SSDs get random bit flips in orbit, and the issue gets worse with smaller lithography: https://www.itpro.com/server-storage/high-performance-computing-hpc/367323/hpes-supercomputer-helps-iss-astronauts There's tons of spam about "solving" this after the Tech Bro boom, but I don't really buy anything I've seen. Nothing but a bunch of lead (or the Earth's atmosphere) is going to stop fat gamma rays or extremely fast nuclei. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] hamid@crazypeople.online 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago* To be fair, 100MW is pretty big. AI doesn’t actually need that much. I’m pretty sure entire models like GLM 5.2 or Deepseek v4 are trained (and served) on a much, much smaller scale than a 100MW cluster. But if that’s the case… why even invest in orbital data centers in the first place? Why not desert ones? Why all this cash there instead of actually improving LLM architectures!? There are so many nested levels of absurdity here. It’s all just total mania, with zero punishment to those doing the funding because they are too rich to feel any consequences. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies) load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] hamid@crazypeople.online 3 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child) 800K is 526C! You can't run a datacenter at that. 80C (still very hot for datacenter hardware coolant) is 350K. And there are other challenges, like effects from being in LEO, or proximity to wherever the solar array is. And this is just one of MANY ridiclous engineering challenges. Another great example is that GPUs, memory, and SSDs get random bit flips in orbit, and the issue gets worse with smaller lithography: https://www.itpro.com/server-storage/high-performance-computing-hpc/367323/hpes-supercomputer-helps-iss-astronauts There's tons of spam about "solving" this after the Tech Bro boom, but I don't really buy anything I've seen. Nothing but a bunch of lead (or the Earth's atmosphere) is going to stop fat gamma rays or extremely fast nuclei. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] hamid@crazypeople.online 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago* To be fair, 100MW is pretty big. AI doesn’t actually need that much. I’m pretty sure entire models like GLM 5.2 or Deepseek v4 are trained (and served) on a much, much smaller scale than a 100MW cluster. But if that’s the case… why even invest in orbital data centers in the first place? Why not desert ones? Why all this cash there instead of actually improving LLM architectures!? There are so many nested levels of absurdity here. It’s all just total mania, with zero punishment to those doing the funding because they are too rich to feel any consequences. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child) 800K is 526C! You can't run a datacenter at that. 80C (still very hot for datacenter hardware coolant) is 350K. And there are other challenges, like effects from being in LEO, or proximity to wherever the solar array is. And this is just one of MANY ridiclous engineering challenges. Another great example is that GPUs, memory, and SSDs get random bit flips in orbit, and the issue gets worse with smaller lithography: https://www.itpro.com/server-storage/high-performance-computing-hpc/367323/hpes-supercomputer-helps-iss-astronauts There's tons of spam about "solving" this after the Tech Bro boom, but I don't really buy anything I've seen. Nothing but a bunch of lead (or the Earth's atmosphere) is going to stop fat gamma rays or extremely fast nuclei. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [+] hamid@crazypeople.online 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago* To be fair, 100MW is pretty big. AI doesn’t actually need that much. I’m pretty sure entire models like GLM 5.2 or Deepseek v4 are trained (and served) on a much, much smaller scale than a 100MW cluster. But if that’s the case… why even invest in orbital data centers in the first place? Why not desert ones? Why all this cash there instead of actually improving LLM architectures!? There are so many nested levels of absurdity here. It’s all just total mania, with zero punishment to those doing the funding because they are too rich to feel any consequences. permalink fedilink source parent load more comments (-1 replies)
[+] hamid@crazypeople.online 2 points 4 months ago (1 child) [deleted] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago* To be fair, 100MW is pretty big. AI doesn’t actually need that much. I’m pretty sure entire models like GLM 5.2 or Deepseek v4 are trained (and served) on a much, much smaller scale than a 100MW cluster. But if that’s the case… why even invest in orbital data centers in the first place? Why not desert ones? Why all this cash there instead of actually improving LLM architectures!? There are so many nested levels of absurdity here. It’s all just total mania, with zero punishment to those doing the funding because they are too rich to feel any consequences. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 point 4 months ago* To be fair, 100MW is pretty big. AI doesn’t actually need that much. I’m pretty sure entire models like GLM 5.2 or Deepseek v4 are trained (and served) on a much, much smaller scale than a 100MW cluster. But if that’s the case… why even invest in orbital data centers in the first place? Why not desert ones? Why all this cash there instead of actually improving LLM architectures!? There are so many nested levels of absurdity here. It’s all just total mania, with zero punishment to those doing the funding because they are too rich to feel any consequences. permalink fedilink source parent