| ▲ | reissbaker 5 hours ago |
| FWIW, given how many places in the U.S. are passing datacenter bans, I'd expect space-based datacenters to make a lot more sense over the coming years just because it'll be illegal to build them anywhere else. |
|
| ▲ | DrewADesign 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The world is a very, very large place and I have a hard time imagining space would be an easier place to do anything. Nobody wants to live near petrochemical factories or aluminum smelters, either, but we’ve got lots of petrochemicals and aluminum. SV execs shredded any chance of cheap public cooperation by presenting like cartoonishly evil, patronizing, greedy big corporate bad guys from some shitty legal dramedy. They need to learn from their mistakes, develop some humility, and approach people with a serious financial proposition, like the oil industry in Alaska. That’s not as cheap as it could have been if they didn’t start out acting like scaled-up shady local real estate developers trying to build condos on protected wetlands, but it will absolutely be a lot cheaper than space. |
| |
| ▲ | vasco 28 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | The oil industry in Alaska that never pays what it should as oil prices are at all time highs? | |
| ▲ | azan_ 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > SV execs shredded any chance of cheap public cooperation by presenting like cartoonishly evil, patronizing, greedy big corporate bad guys from some shitty legal dramedy. Did they though? From what I’ve read the places where they build get lots of money and infrastructure (not only DC-related) from them. | | |
| ▲ | DrewADesign 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Lots of places don’t. Some spin yarns describing job creation and huge economic opportunities, which are largely bullshit, in exchange for large tax exemptions. In Alaska, the people get money, directly, not just some institutions. The oil and gas industries are notoriously uncaring about the people near their operations, but they recognized what needed to be done to smoothly operate in Alaska, and they just did it. There’s a lot of fantastic reasons to dislike the oil and gas industries, but that’l is what mature big business looks like. | |
| ▲ | Tanjreeve 12 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Someone ought to tell the voters who supported all the anti data center propositions and politicians that they're wrong and just imagining it not being handled well. In seriousness this is an example of the previous point. Rather than engaging with the issue the tech/DC industry seems to think they can wordplay their way out of it by quibbling about irrelevant technical details and people are primed to get extremely angry at grinfucking type behaviour nowadays. | |
| ▲ | thayne 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Oh yes, there is lots of money going to the places near me getting DCs. Specifically to the politicians who conveniently happen to own the land the DCs are built on or construction companies that are building them. | |
| ▲ | MattGaiser 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The cartoon evil part is less about the data centres and how they speak of AI. Whether it’s A16Z tweeting about how the value of all white collar wages is their market or Anthropic basically saying entry level jobs are done. | | |
| ▲ | DrewADesign 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It’s also very much about GPU-focused data centers. They’ve been installing essentially illegal (with shaky loopholes) gas-powered turbines on site with no emissions control to speak of, in populated areas. They’ve made local governments sign NDAs, under false promises of huge economic development and job creation, preventing them from telling residents that the big real estate project in town was a giant data center. Cartoonish. | |
| ▲ | lenerdenator 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Oh, they do that too, but it's cartoonishly evil to go in and ask for property tax abatements and for the local ratepayers to support your infrastructure when you have valuations in the hundreds of billions, if not trillions, of dollars. |
| |
| ▲ | jazzypants 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It's hard for the citizens who live nearby to learn about all of that when the idiotic SV execs forced their civic leadership to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements. Somehow, they just recently learned that was a bad idea. https://www.wired.com/story/amazon-says-it-is-going-to-stop-... https://www.wpr.org/news/microsoft-to-stop-using-ndas-with-l... https://www.npr.org/2026/08/27/nx-s1-5879528/data-center-nda... | | |
| ▲ | DrewADesign 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Psychotic? Likely. Arrogant? Unquestionably. Maniacal? Utterly. Cunning? Indeed. Delusional? Arguably. But, I wouldn’t call them idiotic, per se. | | |
| ▲ | jazzypants 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If they're so smart, why didn't they see this data center backlash coming and plan for it accordingly? I mostly agree with you, and obviously there is a lot of intelligence in the valley, but there doesn't seem to be much wisdom. | | |
| ▲ | wahern 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | They did see it coming. Thus all the secrecy, and why datacenters in space have seen so much attention the past few years. Maybe they didn't predict the magnitude and vitriol of the backlash, but NIMBY resistance to all infrastructure projects has only been growing over the years. For example, wrt solar and wind power. It was obvious data centers were going to see at least as much resistance because you need to build the data centers and more power generation. Do data centers in space make less sense than build outs in more accommodating countries? Not necessarily. It's not an either/or thing, and it all depends on the concrete bottom line numbers. In space you don't have to worry about managing political winds at all; you control everything. More accomodating countries tend to be poorer with worse infrastructure, so there are more unknown risks. And you don't need to develop or manage a foreign workforce, which is why 100% of Silicon Valley jobs didn't instantly jump to India or Poland. | |
| ▲ | DrewADesign 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I think they couldn’t see it because they’re steeped in the cult of AI, and far too arrogant, maniacal, et al to read the room. I don’t think you have to be dumb to fail to acknowledge reality. I agree there is a profound lack of wisdom in tech, and they seem to be proud of it… like they believe they’ve discovered a workaround. | | |
| ▲ | customguy an hour ago | parent [-] | | Well, I for one think self-awareness is a much higher order of intelligence than clever manipulation of symbols or the external world, so I still find it stupid. Finding a workaround for the inability to have ironic self-distance is kind of the most pointless, dumbest activity I can even think of. > I agree there is a profound lack of wisdom in tech, and they seem to be proud of it… like they believe they’ve discovered a workaround. Even in discussions here I'm constantly put off by comments that are this hand-rubbing talking to oneself about how the "AI haters" are all stupid, or how they can be forced to use or consume things they don't want against their will. It kind of baits all the sociopaths out into the open, because if their deus ex machina is about to show up, why bother with the tedious masking? > I don’t think you have to be dumb to fail to acknowledge reality. No, but you can be emotionally stunted to force you to be dumb. Call it narcissism or whatever, but no sense of others or self = constant need to rewrite the world around you, and fearing logic and honesty like a vampire would fear sunlight. A dumb person can learn, people who are forced to act dumb cannot. They are still, effectively, very dumb. They will go to their graves dumber than an illiterate or mentally handicapped person would have. Not knowing a bunch of things that are true is meh... but thinking you know a trillion things that are all just the scab on a wound that happened in childhood, none of them true, and one dumber than the other, now that is astonishingly dumb. |
|
| |
| ▲ | kirubakaran 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sufficiently advanced arrogance is indistinguishable from stupidity | |
| ▲ | samrus 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The majority of data center bans on the ballot passed. I undertsand theres a little schadenfruede in calling them idiotic, but the outcome doesnt realy scream competence. These execs arent beating the allegations if not being able to pass a ninth grade civics class https://www.govtech.com/question-of-the-day/how-many-anti-da... |
|
| |
| ▲ | lern_too_spel 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It depends on the company building the data center and the competence of the government approving the plan. https://www.governing.com/infrastructure/rural-louisiana-roa... |
|
|
|
| ▲ | overfeed 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > FWIW, given how many places in the U.S. are passing datacenter bans If you have the technical chops to set up a data center in space — with no connections to the electrical grid or municipal water, you can use your technology to build your data center with the same specs right here on earth in 90% of places that you think are issuing "bans". You'll also get much better cooling for free via convection. A remote town with a population of 43 will be happy for a data center to employ 2 locals, but data center operators aren't doing that today because they want tax breaks tiny towns can't give, infrastructure tiny towns don't have, nevermind a well-armed police force to deter would-be GPU thieves. Space is a red herring. |
| |
| ▲ | robotresearcher 41 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | If all the energy for a space appliance comes from the sun, in steady state they only have to radiate away the same amount that hits them. All long-lived spacecraft manage it. Whether they can be worth the money it cost to put them in orbit is another story. | | |
| ▲ | overfeed 20 minutes ago | parent [-] | | > All long-lived spacecraft manage it. Apples to oranges, long-luver satellites have modest power needs. Doing a back-of-the napkin math on required size of solar array and radiative elements for a single-rack's worth of energy is a sobering exercise for those who are a overly exuberant on the topic. The all-in power estimate for a single GB300 chip is 2.1kW |
| |
| ▲ | bryan_w an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | It's not a technical problem. It's a people problem. Every data center project over the last year has experienced some form of pushback no matter where they're built | | |
| ▲ | overfeed 43 minutes ago | parent [-] | | By definition, a data center in space is remote, self-reliant on electrical power and doesn't use potable water. These characteristics require technical solution to be practical, and once one has cracked those challenges, they have disarmed all the push-back arguments people have raised against data centers. It's telling that the data centers want to build-out near population centers, i.e. where someone else has paid for fiber, grid and water infrastructure; it's a good old fashioned raid of the commons. This is why no-one is pushing for building data centers in locales with 0.2 people/sq mile. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | victorbjorklund 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Feels like it would be cheaper and easier to put a data center on a platform/ship in international water than in space. Also pretty sure there will always be empty land somewhere on earth where no one cares. It will always be easier to build and maintain even in a desert than in space. |
|
| ▲ | thayne 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think the data centers would get a lot less push back if they were built using new solar and/or wind power in places that have abundant water, and maybe further away from residential areas. Yes that is more expensive than what they are doing now, but it is still almost certainly cheaper than building in space. Heck, putting data centers in the ocean is probably cheaper than space. |
|
| ▲ | nradov 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't support data center bans but even if that happens in the US I'm pretty sure some other countries will welcome them. For AI inference workloads the network latency doesn't matter. |
| |
| ▲ | reaperducer 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I don't think the entire nation would ban data centers. The problem is that tech companies are building them on cheap land. Which usually means land that has little water and is better used for food or oxygen or things other than a massive one-story building. Data centers in brownfields and urban environments see near-zero resistance. There are data centers in skyscrapers in the center of most major U.S. cities, and nobody cares. Stop plowing down the forests, slurping up the aquifers, and digging up the prairies, and people will stop complaining. | | |
| ▲ | derektank 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Data centers in urban areas definitely see massive resistance. Seattle straight up banned any new data centers with a capacity over 20 MW, even though water is a non-issue, and we have tons of industrial land in the south of the city. | | |
| ▲ | jquery 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | The problem is data centers produce absolutely colossal amounts of noise that can be heard and felt for miles. Even if water is a non-issue, the noise isn’t. | | |
| ▲ | derektank 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Neither is a problem in the sense that both noise and water consumption can be mitigated with some minor (relative to the total cost of a project) capital investments. If these were rational objections, states and municipalities could simply issue noise codes and water access caps, then let the companies figure out how to work within the lines. Instead, we’re left with blanket bans | |
| ▲ | chunky1994 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | No, it’s not the noise it’s the power consumption. Your locale becomes a power consumption hog so your off-peak hours and your peak hours become very similarly priced. Noise can be dampened, the power bill cannot. | |
| ▲ | ipsum2 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is actually a meme/fake videos on the internet, where they add random noise over their videos while recording a datacenter to make it seem really loud. Realistically you can only hear it if you're within 30-50 feet of the data center, unless there's a separate diesel/natural gas generator. |
|
| |
| ▲ | kenferry 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | https://www.ktvu.com/news/san-francisco-approves-other-citie... | |
| ▲ | jquery 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | People are complaining because they are building data centers near people, and data centers produce prodigious amounts of noise pollution. They should be building them far away from civilization, where the low frequency noise has plenty of distance to attenuate. | | |
| ▲ | IcyWindows 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | People are complaining because of propaganda online. My middle school age children think data centers are evil and we don't have any around us nor have they ever seen one. |
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | gmerc 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It’s still cheaper to build in a completely undeveloped desert with no neighbors and costly utility hookups than space. By orders of magnitude. That gap will never be materially close. Space datacenters are just SDI2, a convenient bullshit to be able to funnel more money to campaign donors. As long as there’s space on earth, Space Datacenters can never be economical. It’s rally that simple. |
| |
| ▲ | hparadiz 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | If Starship launches end up in the $20 million range they would be easily economical. Running cable isn't free. |
|
|
| ▲ | dopa42365 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Nah, they'll just bite the bullet and build the data centers in remote Canada or Finland or somewhere else no one's complaining (ignore Greta as per usual) and tap into the local hydropower resources. Might take a tad longer and cost slightly more money than in [quasi-lawless US state], but other than that, no problem. Aluminium smelters (basically a solid form of electricity export) in Quebec and Siberia have been doing that for decades already (like 20GW private-ish hydropower). |
| |
| ▲ | jltsiren 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Finland only has limited hydro capacity that is needed for load-following due to the prevalence of wind power. It makes no sense to waste it for baseload generation. Additionally, the last major hydro power plant was built in 1976. All subsequent attempts have been massively controversial. A recent law also gave data centers the last priority for grid access. The idea was to prioritize productive industry over less productive uses of electricity. Even something with as little added value as steel production tends to employ ~10 people (directly or as subcontractors) and produce ~€10 million/year of exports for every MW of average power consumption. | |
| ▲ | devilsdata 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Wish they'd find a good spot in no man's land and do geothermal. |
|
|
| ▲ | paxy 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| If cities are banning datacenters, we can a. put them a few miles outside urban centers b. put them in space Which is a cheaper, better option? |
|
| ▲ | nonethewiser 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You aren’t necessarily wrong but thats a dumb reason for space data centers to be good ideas. |
|
| ▲ | senordevnyc 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't really understand this perspective. The margins for data centers are such that they could pay massive subsidies to state and local governments and put them in the middle of nowhere with BTM power, and almost all that opposition would evaporate overnight. And you'd still come out way ahead of space-based DCs. They're not doing this yet because they don't have to. |
|
| ▲ | lenerdenator 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| You could probably see some of those bans reversed. You just need to have companies go into communities and act like they're a multi-trillion-dollar company instead of begging for tax abatements and shoving off the cost of the infrastructure on the people who feel like they might lose their jobs from AI. |
|
| ▲ | m3kw9 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| they are not gonna law itself back to stone age by making data centers illegal, it's just too much money, security implications to chain yourself up just because a few politicians wants a few votes and "enviromentalists" demands it. Don't forget there are people that are ok with data centers. |