30 pointsby 01-_-6 hours ago5 comments
  • hkpack3 hours ago
    One of the most profound feelings I had was being in the middle of nowhere at night and looking at the sky.

    Majority of people my generation are able to experience what once was very common only few times in their lifetime due to light pollution.

    It feels dreadful to realize that even that experience will be taken away forever.

  • konschubert5 hours ago
    Orbital data centers are a dumb idea. Put a solar farm in the desert and add some batteries? That’s cheaper.

    So I wouldn’t be too worried about this, the economics of this won’t pan out.

    • schiffernan hour ago
      With today's very high orbital launch costs, it's trivially true that the desert is cheaper.

      With very low orbital launch costs, it's trivially true that space would become cheaper. Solar panels have no atmosphere/night/seasons and are always pointed at the Sun, no cover glass for hail, no 24h battery either. Radiators are 1/10th the area of PV which is very doable.

      The question is, where exactly is the tipping point between those two extremes, and will Starship reach that? Opinions on this naturally bifurcate depending on one's feelings about Elon Musk.

      I wouldn't be too worried because SpaceX engineers put a great deal of effort into reflection mitigation, including developing a space-rated mirror able to have an RF signal fire transparently through it.[1] The strategy is to bounce all the sunlight away from Earth, which makes satellites darker than even (hypothetically) covering a satellite in Vantablack.

      [1] https://youtu.be/MNc5yCYth5E?t=1717

    • cyanydeez4 hours ago
      Datacenters need cooling. Cooling always externalizes heat go the environment. The places you want centers are cold and water available.

      Neither space or typical deaert.

      • lostlogin31 minutes ago
        A desert isn’t necessarily hot.
      • konschubert4 hours ago
        Still easier to cool in the desert than in space
        • andsoitis4 hours ago
          > Still easier to cool in the desert than in space

          What is the physics and the math than let you conclude that?

          • dmos624 hours ago
            Presumably that vacuum is an insulator.
          • thrance4 hours ago
            Lack of medium in space so can't rely on convection or conduction there? This is really basic.
          • risc_taker2 hours ago
            [dead]
        • zajio1am4 hours ago
          You can do radiative cooling in space (you just need big radiators). You cannot do that reasonably in desert.
          • m4rtink2 hours ago
            Taking aside you certainly can do radiative cooling in desert at night just fine - you have air, which even if hot to desert standards during the day is still by magnitudes more effective for cooling via direct heat transfer than radiating heat away in vacuum.
            • cyanydeezan hour ago
              I did realize geothermal would be the way to do it in the desert; the ground is still typically cooler than the heat computers give off.

              It's still problematic that most deserts dont haveaccess to groundwater, so bootstraping and maintenance are an issue.

          • konschubert2 hours ago
            You can try to put the heat underground. Maybe there is an aquifer you can use. Or maybe your desert is close to the coast!

            Still easier than radiating it into space.

          • risc_taker2 hours ago
            [dead]
    • smackeyacky4 hours ago
      The world seems to have become an abstract plaything for these billionaires why would they give a damn about practicality. This idiot shot a car into space for no good reason.
      • d1sxeyesan hour ago
        Not completely 'no good reason'—they needed to test the ability to send heavy payloads, it's great marketing for SpaceX (who intend to make money by having people pay them to put things in space for them) and brand awareness for Tesla.
      • konschubert4 hours ago
        He can blow his money on 1 million satellites that will all decay back into the atmosphere within a few years
        • throw0101a2 hours ago
          > He can blow his money on 1 million satellites that will all decay back into the atmosphere within a few years

          He can also 'blow' his money on helping people by giving them opportunities:

          > In 1993, Harris Rosen “adopted” a run-down, drug-infested section of Orlando called Tangelo Park. Rosen offers free preschool for all children prior to kindergarten and a free college education for high school graduates. Today, the high school graduation rate for Tangelo Park is 100 percent. And no, that is not a typo.

          * https://www.ucf.edu/pegasus/harris-rosen/

          * https://www.today.com/news/millionaire-uses-fortune-help-kid...

          • nailer2 hours ago
            Helping people with ALS speak again seems worthy, as does helping humanity become a multi planetary species.
            • throw0101a2 hours ago
              Is throwing up "1 million satellites" going to do those things?

              How about running DOGE and gutting USAID?

              Or helping Trump get elected? Was that a worthy endeavour? How's that working out for the average American (or anyone else on the planet) with four dollar gas and five dollar diesel?

              • naileran hour ago
                Bringing satellite coverage to the world, including Iran and Ukraine is noble, yes.

                As is volunteering to help get rid of waste and fraud, particularly when his time could be spent on more lucrative pursuits.

                There are more things to life than the price of gas.

                • lostlogin34 minutes ago
                  > Bringing satellite coverage to world, including Iran and Ukraine is noble, yes.

                  Are we including cutting off Ukraine’s coverage at keys times? Or Russian usage?

                  No need to discuss the DOGE bit, no one believes that trillion dollar saving was real.

                  ‘Musk the Noble’ sure has a smell to it.

                  • nailer31 minutes ago
                    > cutting off Ukraine’s coverage at keys times?

                    The only 'key times' were Ukrainian military usage of Starlink inside Russia. Ukraine was given Starlink to use to defend Ukraine, not attack Russia.

                    > Or Russian usage?

                    Which was explicitly identified and cut off.

                    > No need to discuss the DOGE bit

                    Exactly. Nobody can defend fraud and abuse. Since your main issue is that the savings weren't as big as expected it sounds like you know that.

                    • lostlogin15 minutes ago
                      > The only 'key times' were Ukrainian military usage of Starlink inside Russia. Ukraine was given Starlink to use to defend Ukraine, not attack Russia.

                      Fighting without hurting the enemy? What’s the point? The approach of the Trump administration is just letting Ukraine bleed out.

                      Russian starlink usage has only just been cut off, how many years did that take?

                      > Nobody can defend fraud and abuse

                      This administration is anti-fraud and anti-abuse?

        • squidbeak2 hours ago
          Decay and be replaced. You make it sound as if this is short term, like flinging confetti up in the air, instead of long term, like tiling a roof.
        • smackeyacky3 hours ago
          Why should he be allowed to pollute the night sky like that?
          • Tadpole91812 hours ago
            Not to mention the planet. Launching satellites takes an incredible amount of fuel.
  • effed34 hours ago
    Proposals like this has more to do with Finance (spaceX quotation / funding / shares values) than real applications. But is anyway a risky very bad idea.
  • clonedhuman5 hours ago
    Billionaires are eating everything.
  • aaron6954 hours ago
    [dead]