you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -25 points 4 months ago* (25 children)

There is no air is space therefore the datacenters will not work. Uhg man these forums are like this too. The AI hate train is trying to hold back high performance computing from processing sensor data and streaming it back to earth.

Honestly if anyone here thinks this is an exclusive or even mostly republican problem you're just dishonest. I know you can see your peers doing this and I know you are too bitch to call them out. Fuck you.

  • source
  • hideshow 25 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    Space is chock full of very hot dust. The data centers wouldn't be capable of cooling themselves. It would be nice if we used those resources to improve things, not litter the various orbital bands of The Earth, Moon, and Solar System.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] -2 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    Historically investing in STEM has had tremendously positive effects for most everyone.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    Historically, STEM doesn't exist for the vast majority of that time. Historically wasting resources on pet projects of egomaniacs kills a ton of people needlessly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 4 months ago (6 children)

    You don't know what historically means but don't worry you can just google it. And you are inserting elon musk to assault STEM that isn't cash money of you dude, that's a fuck you from me buddy.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (5 children)

    Lol. You either can't read, or assume everyone else's motives poorly. I didn't specify an egomanaiacle asshole, there are plenty to pick from. I have no issue with actual STEM. As a CS graduate, I do have an issue with dead-end hallucinating parrots eating trillions of dollars of resources that could have been used to feed, clothe, house, educate, and provide healthcare and a robust information network to all of humanity. Instead, around 2500 people are allowed to enact violence daily with their stupidity and egos.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] -3 points 4 months ago (4 children)

    You can’t read, or assume everyone else’s motives poorly

    Now I would brand this as republican levels of self awareness. You know what is wrong you just said it, but then you proceed to do that exact thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (3 children)

    Ad hominem. Thanks for conceding that you don't have an argument.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago* (2 children)

    You can’t read, or assume everyone else’s motives poorly

    You know what is wrong you just said it, but then you proceed to do that exact thing.

    Or you do something, someone does it back and you cry like a bitch. Very republican of you.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 child)

    Quoting yourself is an interesting way to show something that I did, which so far hasn't happened. I haven't assumed anyone's motives, and have addressed every single thing you've said. You've resorted to goalpoast moving, switching topics, and ad hominem. My statement wasn't ad hominem, as it attacked the content of your comment, not you.

    Projection is a part of the Gaslight Obstruct Project party. I personally don't need someone to tell me who my friends are, that's why I am not a part of any party, and why I didn't rush in university.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago

    Every accusation is a confession with you dude, and so you absolutely should feel personally attacked by me. Because I am not going to engage you genuinely, for obvious reasons. Bitch ass anti-science republican clown.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

    ... do we a have a confidentlywrong lemmy comm yet?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (11 children)

    This is a strawman argument.

    I've heard and considered several real, challenging barriers to putting data centers in space, but lack of air is not among them. Yet you've locked onto that one reason why everyone on lemmy who expresses disapproval for the idea must be wrong dumdums who are wrong, and therefore it's fine to just put data centers in space?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago (10 children)

    How are you going to mention strawman argument and then go on to say

    and therefore it’s fine to just put data centers in space?

    Do you want genuine engagement was this an error on your part or are you trying to troll or make a joke or something?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (9 children)

    Are you not advocating for building data centers in space? But you're frustrated by "people all over lemmy screaming that because there's no air in space datacenters won't work up there."

    Isn't that the point of your OC?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (8 children)

    Advocating for no.

    You’re frustrated by “people all over lemmy screaming that because there’s no air in space datacenters won’t work up there.”

    Yep.

    Consider this: Do all the reasons for not putting a datacenter in space also apply to not putting a big ass telescope in space?

    If you can justify putting up an expensive telescope into space than you can also justify sending some high performance computing up there to process the sensor data on site. If you want to call your cluster of computers a datacenter go for it.

    If you think datacenters in space are a bad idea for AI and other services here on Earth well then you'd obviously be right but if you think it is because of no air yea we are back to square one ima call you a fuckwit.

    Now if you believe most space exploration is a waste of money and is just used for weapons development that would be noble, but still it's not a bad idea because there is no air in space. No one has used this argument just the air in space and expensive ones.

    I am not advocating anything for I am just not letting your draconian tribalistic bullshit peer pressure into agreeing with dumbass shit spill over onto science without some pushback.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (7 children)

    But nobody in this thread is making that argument. You're being a total asshole and making personal attacks against other commenters, despite the fact that they don't bear any responsibility for that argument.

    Do all the reasons for not putting a datacenter in space also apply to not putting a big ass telescope in space?

    If you can justify putting up an expensive telescope into space than you can also justify sending some high performance computing up there to process the sensor data on site.

    What? No, they serve two totally different purposes and have significantly different requirements.

    I am just not letting your draconian tribalistic bullshit peer pressure into agreeing with dumbass shit spill over onto science without some pushback.

    Mine? Or "your" as in all of us on lemmy, which includes you? Again, nobody in this thread made that argument, nor defended it, nor defended any other commenters who did - and you're still acting like a complete dick about it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago* (6 children)

    What? No, they serve two totally different purposes and have significantly different requirements.

    We don't have eyeglasses on space based telescope guy there is no human up there looking through the telescope and writing down what they are finding.

    Mine? Or “your” as in all of us on lemmy, which includes you? Again, nobody in this thread made that argument, nor defended it, nor defended any other commenters who did - and you’re still acting like a complete dick about it.

    Yes YOUR tribalistic bullshit. You lying dog that is what this whole thread has been about it isn't my fault you didn't realise you were assaulting real science with your tribalism.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 4 months ago (5 children)

    Ah, OK, I think I'm starting to understand the problem here.

    You lying dog

    What exactly do you believe I'm lying about? What evidence do you have that I'm lying?

    you were assaulting real science with your tribalism

    In what way am I assaulting science, or engaging in tribalism?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago* (4 children)

    nobody in this thread made that argument, nor defended it, nor defended any other commenters who did

    Liar everyone in this thread made that argument including you it was the first thing you said. Apply that same logic to putting telescopes in space they aren't exactly the most efficient cost effective forms of science shit is difficult. Your entire reasoning that it is not cost effective and is difficult is anti-science. If you weren't being a tribalistic asshole you wouldn't care but because the AI is against your tribe and AI also happens to need datacenters you do care. I cared long before AI fuck you.

    Maybe you are under some impression that data is hoarded and not triaged. Onsite processing would be a leap in technology.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (3 children)

    Liar everyone in this thread made that argument including you it was the first thing you said.

    OK, quote me. Quote any of my comments in this thread where I argued that putting data centers in space is a bad idea because there is no air in space. Now who's lying?

    Apply that same logic to putting telescopes in space they aren’t exactly the most efficient cost effective forms of science shit is difficult.

    Putting telescopes in space solves a particularly difficult problem. Space telescopes have the advantage of missing that thing you keep hallucinating everyone here is arguing about - air. Because there's no atmospheric distortion, space telescopes are able to get images with orders of magnitude greater clarity. The heat dissipation problem is a tiny fraction compared to a data center, because there are (much) fewer components on a telescope that generate heat. The two things are not the same.

    When putting telescopes on earth, there is no way of dodging the fact that there is miles of atmosphere above it that cause distortion. There is no engineering around that. There are of course mitigations, but those are hurdles that are entirely skipped by putting them in space.

    Data centers have no such need. So what problem is solved by putting them in space? Why would you even want to? There are millions of square miles of earth to put them - where it would be much, much easier and cheaper to cool them, access them, power them, and maintain them.

    If you weren’t being a tribalistic asshole you wouldn’t care but because the AI is against your tribe and AI also happens to need datacenters you do care. I cared long before AI fuck you.

    Can you quote where I said anything about AI? What leads you to believe I am against AI, or data centers? The only thing I've argued against is putting data centers in space. You're the only one bringing up AI.

    It sure seems like you very desperately need to be a martyr, and that you need to see yourself as a champion for science when everyone around you is anti-science. That is not scientific, rational thinking. Taking the argument that "putting a data center in space is hard for many reasons" and reducing it to "we can't put data centers in space because there's no air" is dishonest. It's a straw man.

    This is now clearly a psychological issue with you, perhaps a psychiatric issue. You're angry, and you need to be angry and don't actually care what people are saying - you're going to argue against them because they must be anti-AI and anti-science.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (2 children)

    Buddy I conflated you with everyone else, your tribe. I am not going to study you and write you a personal essay get the fuck over yourself. You were part of the crowd take responsibility for being associated with them. And you're switching shit around I am just going to ignore that you loser.

    you very desperately need to be a martyr, and that you need to see yourself as a champion for science

    I eye fucked your intellectual identity and you took 10 hours to think of something this was it. I get it, it sounded big in your head but it's a little too big, I am arguing against you on lemmy lol

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago (1 child)

    Ok. I hope you get the help you need.

    You're clearly not willing to engage in rational discussion, but instead you're deliberately grouping everyone who disagrees with you into a single group, as if I was conspiring with other commenters just to fuck with you, and throwing personal attacks. You've made many unfounded assumptions about me, and are obviously going to continue doing so. You aren't really arguing so much as just insulting people. You've made 0 factual assertions and you've failed to respond to every one of my questions. Good luck.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment