this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2026
646 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

82131 readers
3918 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Ftumch@lemmy.today 32 points 1 day ago (7 children)

There's another problem that nobody mentions. Putting thousands of additional satellites into space would seriously increase the risk of Kessler Syndrome occurring.

[–] Blackmist@feddit.uk 3 points 1 day ago

At this point I feel we'd just be immunising the rest of the universe from human stupidity.

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 1 points 20 hours ago (2 children)

Little bit of a nitpick but Kessler syndrome doesn't care about how many satellites you have, and more about how many dead satellites you have hanging around on random orbits. You could put hundreds of millions of satellites in space as long as you had some sort of decommissioned program. You can always send up rockets if you can just move the satellites out of the way / know where they are.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] FanciestPants@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago (6 children)

Naive question, but would bit-flip also be a problem without the atmosphere to shield (some) radiation?

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] Mwa@thelemmy.club 2 points 21 hours ago (6 children)
load more comments (6 replies)
[–] mechoman444@lemmy.world 25 points 1 day ago (5 children)

The idea of putting data centers in low Earth orbit sounds cool at first. It feels futuristic. It feels like something that should be efficient. It is not.

Yes, space is cold. Yes, you get a lot of solar power. Those are the two points everyone repeats. What they leave out is basic physics and cost.

Cooling in space is not free. There is no convection. Heat only leaves through radiation. That means giant radiator panels. AI racks throw off massive heat loads. The more compute you add, the more radiator surface area you need. That adds mass. Mass costs money to launch.

Even with companies like SpaceX driving launch prices down, it is still extremely expensive per kilogram. And servers are not permanent infrastructure. They get replaced every three to five years. You cannot economically upgrade racks in orbit the way you do in a building on Earth.

Then you have radiation. Either you harden the electronics, which makes them slower and more expensive, or you accept higher failure rates and build in heavy redundancy. Maintenance becomes a logistical nightmare. A failed power supply on Earth is a service call. In orbit it is a robotics problem.

Meanwhile hyperscalers like Amazon Web Services, Microsoft, and Google put data centers next to cheap power, fiber backbones, and cold climates. It is boring. It is practical. It works. Orbital data centers only make sense if we already have large scale industry in space. We do not.

And what really makes these threads irritating is the obvious rage bait framing. Throw up a clickbait title about AI destroying the planet or Big Tech trying to escape Earth and you attract people who already hate AI. The discussion stops being about engineering and economics and turns into ideological noise.

If someone wants to seriously debate energy efficiency or scaling limits, fine. But pretending near Earth orbit is some obvious solution is not serious analysis. It is a cool sci fi concept. It is not a rational infrastructure strategy.

[–] prenatal_confusion@feddit.org 1 points 20 hours ago

Servers get replaced that often because they are using too much energy for too little computing power compared to newer generations. If the module is already up there and functioning and energy is free then it's a whole different thing.

Defects are another topic.

And the whole thing is obviously crazy for a whole lot of other reasons.

[–] Avicenna@programming.dev 4 points 1 day ago (4 children)

The whole point is that it is cool so that it can be hyped up like AGI and then sold.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] mech@feddit.org 96 points 1 day ago (22 children)

They're a great idea if you happen to own a company making AI, a company making rockets, and a company controlling public opinion.

load more comments (22 replies)
[–] lordnikon@lemmy.world 111 points 2 days ago (64 children)

My question is always how the hell are you going to cool them. Do you know hard it is to move heat in a vacuum?

[–] EndOfLine@lemmy.world 90 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The problems; plural; is that the person who popularized the idea of data centers in space has little to zero understanding of any of the space sciences and yet owns and directs one of the world's largest, and privately owned, aerospace companies with massive government contracts that splits its time with their own AI work.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (63 replies)
[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 9 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Maybe for a space based population a data center in space would work. This is just taking off site hosting too far.

[–] some_kind_of_guy@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] very_well_lost@lemmy.world 2 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Introducing: Microsoft Cosmos!

Send your data to heaven while we turn the planet into hell!

[–] elucubra@sopuli.xyz 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Plus the problem of having my data hosted, not just In another country, but In a different celestial body!

[–] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 4 points 1 day ago

Ah shit, this is all for child porn again.... Can the fucking tech industry just not do this every few months?!

[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Before even considering radiation damage, hopium $200/kg launch costs mean 15c/kwh electricity. The you add the cost of specialized panels and radiation emitters. At least 20x that of earthly systems.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Okay, but have you considered how cool it would be to put a data center in space?

What if I told you that we have to BEAT CHINA to space?

load more comments (5 replies)

Dumping heat in space is actually hard to do. You'd need huge radiators for radiative emission cooling.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›