| ▲ | wolvoleo 8 hours ago | |||||||
If you look at how small a Starlink sat is, and how much of that space is taken up by power generation and storage, antennas, signal conditioning, RF electronics and more, I'm sure that whatever resources are running the computing in the entire starlink fleet orbiting the world can fit all together in one single row of servers in an existing datacenter. And yes, a space-based computing node would not need quite as much of some of these things but they'll still need them in some way. It's not like you can just plug in a power and ethernet cable into them. I doubt this will scale to a level that is actually useful. It's a nice experiment, just like Microsoft when they threw a datacenter container into the ocean. But not practical in the current conditions: https://news.microsoft.com/source/features/sustainability/pr... Yes they say it is amazing and sustainable there in that blog post, yet somehow they've never bothered to do it again. | ||||||||
| ▲ | asdff 8 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||
They can't make them a little bit bigger? But also I found this interesting image on the scale at hand here of a given launch of starlinks, no clue how many are included in a single launch, and it is a substantial amount of rack space they have been sending up at once: https://i.redd.it/zh7qvyfqgvx21.jpg So to me they have solved the issue of having a space based compute array network interfacing with the earth. They have solved the issue of launching and deploying this array. And their given launches seem to have a substantial payload of compute going up at once just in sheer volume. And right now the only real difference is that the nodes they are launching are just pretty weakly specced. Everything else is in place and turnkey. | ||||||||
| ||||||||