4 ms·

It has nothing to do with Grok, at least not the current iteration. SpaceX is the only company that can concievably launch large scale orbital compute.

jazzyjackson 4mo ago
I’m out of the loop, why is compute better /after/ being launched into space? Is the idea just to be co-located within the ISP to reduce round trip time to the LLMs?
- BLKNSLVR 4mo ago
  Grokipedia would be way better launched into space.
  - speedgoose 4mo ago
    The risk is getting our planet annihilated if something stumbles upon it.
- laughing_man 4mo ago
  There would be some benefits, assuming you could do it for a reasonable cost. For one, you have effectively uninterruptible power using solar panels in space. And it's free, too, once you have the hardware in place. And you don't have to deal with any of the site selection stuff you have for terrestrial data centers. No NIMBYs. No politicians trying to extort bribes. No water problems. In space there are no earthquakes, tornadoes, or floods. I'm still skeptical. It's hard to believe it costs so much to build a data center on the ground that putting it into orbit is an economically viable alternative.
  - delecti 4mo ago
    Yeah, launch costs alone make it infeasible, and power being "free" exacerbates the cost (gotta get all those panels up there). Cooling is also dramatically harder, plus shielding, and it makes repair/upgrade basically impossible. I'm not going to assert that large scale space compute will never happen, but I feel confident saying it won't happen this decade or next.
    - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
      > launch costs alone make it infeasible Last time I did the math, launch costs were well balanced against permitting delays (mediated by interest rates). The break even rests almost entirely on radiator mass efficiency (which is, admittedly, a function of launch costs). Like, if everyone’s terrestrial datacenter projects start getting blocked, and demand for AI continues, the price a rational buyer would pay for in-orbit compute could get ridiculous enough to break even on current kit. And current kit in launch vehicles, radiators and solar panels is advancing. I don’t think the thesis is met yet. But it’s less ridiculous than I thought it was before I sat down with pen and paper.
      - histriosum 4mo ago
        Wouldn’t it be easier and cheaper simply to focus building your data centers in other poorer countries where your permits won’t be blocked? Why would the next most logical choice be “let’s put it in orbit”?
    - laughing_man 4mo ago
      When they get the kinks out of Starship, launch costs will be dramatically lower than we're used to thinking. They'll probably be using it to launch Starlink sats in earnest next year, so I don't think that would be the long leg. I used to think heat would be a problem, too, but I've come around. It's a consideration, but it's doable. Remember we already have some pretty high power sats up there, so it's not something we haven't already been working around. IMO the big cash drain will end up being maintenance, as in, you can't do it. If you have a box or a power supply fail on the ground you can swap it out. Anything in orbit would have to be replaced.
      - frm88 4mo ago
        Things to think about: the russian satellites currently already in orbit and being tested to jam global GPS signals: https://youtu.be/tz23G_UXCGA?si=Jkg7hYnwER39-FXf https://youtu.be/tz23G_UXCGA?si=Jkg7hYnwER39-FXf (Veritasium). In all these sci-fi space datacentre scenarios, has anybody considered that astrolaw is in no way currently equipped to deal with datacenters in space? Neither are international relations.

jazzyjackson 4mo ago

I’m out of the loop, why is compute better /after/ being launched into space? Is the idea just to be co-located within the ISP to reduce round trip time to the LLMs?

BLKNSLVR 4mo ago
Grokipedia would be way better launched into space.
- speedgoose 4mo ago
  The risk is getting our planet annihilated if something stumbles upon it.
laughing_man 4mo ago
There would be some benefits, assuming you could do it for a reasonable cost. For one, you have effectively uninterruptible power using solar panels in space. And it's free, too, once you have the hardware in place. And you don't have to deal with any of the site selection stuff you have for terrestrial data centers. No NIMBYs. No politicians trying to extort bribes. No water problems. In space there are no earthquakes, tornadoes, or floods. I'm still skeptical. It's hard to believe it costs so much to build a data center on the ground that putting it into orbit is an economically viable alternative.
- delecti 4mo ago
  Yeah, launch costs alone make it infeasible, and power being "free" exacerbates the cost (gotta get all those panels up there). Cooling is also dramatically harder, plus shielding, and it makes repair/upgrade basically impossible. I'm not going to assert that large scale space compute will never happen, but I feel confident saying it won't happen this decade or next.
  - JumpCrisscross 4mo ago
    > launch costs alone make it infeasible Last time I did the math, launch costs were well balanced against permitting delays (mediated by interest rates). The break even rests almost entirely on radiator mass efficiency (which is, admittedly, a function of launch costs). Like, if everyone’s terrestrial datacenter projects start getting blocked, and demand for AI continues, the price a rational buyer would pay for in-orbit compute could get ridiculous enough to break even on current kit. And current kit in launch vehicles, radiators and solar panels is advancing. I don’t think the thesis is met yet. But it’s less ridiculous than I thought it was before I sat down with pen and paper.
    - histriosum 4mo ago
      Wouldn’t it be easier and cheaper simply to focus building your data centers in other poorer countries where your permits won’t be blocked? Why would the next most logical choice be “let’s put it in orbit”?
  - laughing_man 4mo ago
    When they get the kinks out of Starship, launch costs will be dramatically lower than we're used to thinking. They'll probably be using it to launch Starlink sats in earnest next year, so I don't think that would be the long leg. I used to think heat would be a problem, too, but I've come around. It's a consideration, but it's doable. Remember we already have some pretty high power sats up there, so it's not something we haven't already been working around. IMO the big cash drain will end up being maintenance, as in, you can't do it. If you have a box or a power supply fail on the ground you can swap it out. Anything in orbit would have to be replaced.
    - frm88 4mo ago
      Things to think about: the russian satellites currently already in orbit and being tested to jam global GPS signals: https://youtu.be/tz23G_UXCGA?si=Jkg7hYnwER39-FXf https://youtu.be/tz23G_UXCGA?si=Jkg7hYnwER39-FXf (Veritasium). In all these sci-fi space datacentre scenarios, has anybody considered that astrolaw is in no way currently equipped to deal with datacenters in space? Neither are international relations.