Comment on Datacenters in space are a terrible, horrible, no good idea.

WanderingThoughts@europe.pub ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

• Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  For anyone who doesn’t know, this is because space is an absolutely terrible place to put computers. Getting power is actually the easiest problem to solve, and is still really hard, because building any kind of infrastructure in space is hard. Then you’ve got all that radiation you have to shield against because you’re no longer protected by the Earth’s atmosphere, and worst of all you’ve got the cooling problem because Jesus fucking Christ, space is not cold!

  This is why I get annoyed every time a scifi movie shows people freezing to death in space. Because it leads to this level of mass delusion and then suddenly it matters and everyone just unquestioningly believes the lie that space is cold. Space is a vacuum. A vacuum is what your Contigo travel mug uses to keep your coffee scalding hot after four hours. If vacuums are that good at keeping something hot when it naturally wants to get colder, think about what they’ll do to something that is actively generating heat. All of your components are going to cook.

  There are proposals to put data centres at the bottom of the ocean that are substantially more credible than this idiocy.

  source

  • KenOh@feddit.online ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    I’m always annoyed that people don’t get that space isn’t cold or hot, since heat is a property of matter, and that’s exactly what a vacuum doesn’t have. Your travel mug example is great. I’m going to start using it.

    source

    • brucethemoose@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      That’s because science literacy is pretty low.

      And to be fair, the average person doesn’t need to understand vacuum thermodynamics. The issues is when a few of those “average people” are now billionaires making decisions, surrounded by yes men and feeds instead of experts informing them of reality.

      source
  • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Maybe we should put datacenters on Mars, to warm it up.

    source

    • Peppycito@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      I’d rather on the moon. It’ll melt all the cheese and there’ll be fondue lakes!

      source

      • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        Whatever you do, don’t put it on Jupiter! It’ll get more stupider!

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    seems the bottom of ocean equally stupid. in space you would have to deal with comsic/solar radiation damaging a satellite-type data center, and then you need solar cells/nuclear power, space debris is another problem.

    a bottom of the ocean you would have to deal with the enormous pressures, even at several hundred feet down, corrosion, critters living or clogging up the 'buildings, silt.

    source

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Yes, the bottom of the ocean is a terrible place to put a data centre. And the fact that it is, somehow, still a more practical option than space is a really good indicator of how unbelievably stupid the entire notion of space data centres is.

      source
  • BeardededSquidward@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    Tell me if I’m wrong, but with the shielding they have on the ISS doesn’t it have issues that consumer grade computers they use last a few months due to various radiation and heat that they die? So an AI data center is going to be insane to protect long enough to make its components useful.

    source

    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      Yep. Radiation is deadly to computers, and without the atmosphere to protect you there is a LOT of radiation in space.

      source
  • bufalo1973@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

    I don’t know if it would work but… Could an infrared laser expel enough heat?

    source

    • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨21⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Project Icarus it was called, the fourth space program of that name and the first for which it was appropriate. Long before Jacob’s parents were born—before the Overturn and the Covenant, before the Power Satellite League, before even the full flower of the old Bureaucracy—old grandfather NASA decided that it would be interesting to drop expendable probes into the Sun to see what happened.

      They discovered that the probes did a quaint thing when they got close. They burned up.

      In America’s “Indian Summer” nothing was thought impossible. Americans were building cities in space—a more durable probe couldn’t be much of a challenge!

      Shells were made, with materials that could take unheard of stress and whose surfaces reflected almost anything. Magnetic fields guided the diffuse but tremendously hot plasmas of corona and chromosphere around and away from those hulls. Powerful communications lasers pierced the solar atmosphere with two-way streams of commands and data.

      Still, the robot ships burned. However good the mirrors and insulation, however evenly the superconductors distributed heat, the laws of thermodynamics still held. heat will pass from a higher temperature to a zone where the temperature is lower, sooner or later.

      The solar physicists might have gone on resignedly burning up probes in exchange for fleeting bursts of information had Tina Merchant not offered another way. “Why don’t you refrigerate?” she asked. “You have all the power you want. You can run refrigerators to push heat from one part of the probe to another.”

      Her colleagues answered that, with superconductors, equalizing heat throughout was no problem.

      “Who said anything about equalizing?” the Belle of Cambridge replied. “You should take all excess heat from the part of the ship were the instruments are and pump it into another part where the instruments aren’t.”

      “And that part will burn up!” one colleague said. “Yes, but we can make a chain of these ‘heat dumps,’” said another engineer, slightly more bright. “And then we can drop them off, one by one …”

      “No, no you don’t quite understand.” The triple Nobel Laureate strode to the chalkboard and drew a circle, then another circle within.

      'Here!" She pointed to the inner circle. “You pump your heat into here until it is, for a short time, hotter than the ambient plasma outside of the ship. Then, before it can do harm there, you dump it out into the chromosphere.”

      “And how,” asked a renowned physicist, “do you expect to do that?”

      Tina Merchant had smiled as if she could almost see the Astronautics Prize held out to her. “Why I’m surprised at all of you!” she said. “You have onboard a communications laser with a brightness temperature of millions of degrees! Use it!”

      Enter the age of the Solar Bathysphere. Floating in part by buoyancy and also by balancing atop the thrust of their refrigerator lasers, probes lingered for days, weeks, monitoring the subtle variations at the Sun, that wrought weather on the Earth.

      — David Brin, Sundiver, 1980

      Here’s an interesting discussion about the concept, with Brin himself explaining his reasoning.

      source
    • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      You need to think about how an infrared laser works. You’re taking electricity, converting it into light and then focusing the light.

      So you’d need to take the heat from your GPUs, inefficiently convert it into electricity (a lot of it would remain as heat), then inefficiently convert electricity into light (much of the electricity would turn back into heat in this process) and then focus the light away from the space data centre.

      Now, we already have a process for moving heat away from things as infrared light, without going through all those steps (which would just reduce the efficiency of the process). It’s called a radiator, and it’s how we cool things in space. That’s literally where the name comes from; they radiate heat away as infrared light. That’s why hot things glow in thermal cameras.

      It is incredibly inefficient. Radiation (ie, infrared light) is, by far, the worst way of cooling things. But in space its the only option you have, because there’s no convection or conduction across vacuum.

      A top end GPU puts out about 1,000 watts of waste heat. The entire International Space Station has enough cooling for 14 of those, if it was doing nothing else whatsoever. An average server rack contains 72. The ISS cost $100 billion dollars. So at a minimum you’re looking at around $500 billion to put one single server rack in space. And that’s before accounting for the heat from the sun, which we can’t avoid because we need solar power to run this thing. So probably closer to a trillion. In other words, twice the already ludicrous price tag of Sam Altman’s “Stargate” project. For a single server rack.

      source

      • elephantium@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        But in space its the only option you have

        Hmm, this has me thinking about the stealth ships in The Expanse. The engineering needed to make it work makes me want to cry, but in principle you could run a Peltier cooler with a swappable heat sink.

        To be clear, I don’t think this is a viable option, but it’s interesting to think about.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
    • Kirp123@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

      You could cool them through radiative panels bit you would need quite big panels to radiate away the heat a data center produces.

      source

      • Voroxpete@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

        The entire ISS has 14GW of cooling (and a lot of that just goes towards keeping the sun from cooking it). A single server rack can produce around 72GW of heat.

        The ISS cost about $100 billion.

        Basically, if you took the entire budget of Sam Altman’s “Stargate” project (money that, to be clear, he does not have and will not get) and put it into space data centres you might, optimistically, put one rack in space.

        Most data centres have dozens to hundred.

        source
• LillyPip@lemmy.ca ⁨2⁩ ⁨days⁩ ago

  Oh, then the dipshit is definitely going to try it.

  source