Datacenters in space aren't going to work

📝 Discussion Summary (Click to expand)

The discussion about AI data centers in space primarily revolved around three key themes: the severe engineering challenges of thermal management, the fundamental premise whether space offers any actual advantage over Earth solutions, and the underlying motivations (including geopolitical factors) driving the proposal.

Here are the three most prevalent themes:

1. Extreme Difficulty of Thermal Management in Vacuum

The most contentious aspect of the proposal was the physics of cooling massive compute power in space. Users widely argued that while radiation is the only heat transfer mechanism available, the required radiator size makes the scale impractical with current technology.

Supporting Quotes:
- "Cooling is more difficult in space, yes it's colder, but transferring heat is more difficult." quoted by "cmptrnerd6".
- "There's no atmosphere that helps with heat loss through convection, there's nowhere to shed heat through conduction, all you have is radiation." stated by "noselasd".
- "The ISS EATCS radiators reject 0.07 MW of power in 85 sq. m, so you're talking about 9700 sq. m of radiators, or bigger than a football field/pitch." calculated by "nick238" for an 8MW data center.

2. Lack of Clear Economic or Engineering Advantage Over Terrestrial Options

Many participants argued that the immense engineering hurdles (cooling, radiation shielding, maintenance access) are not offset by any functional benefit, especially when cheaper, proven alternatives (like underwater data centers or remote terrestrial sites) exist.

Supporting Quotes:
- "And there are zero benefits to putting a datacenter in space over building it on Earth. So why would you want to add all that extra expense?" questioned "skywhopper".
- "Risky/untried things aren't dumb because they're hard, they're dumb when they're more expensive/harder than cheaper/easier alternatives that already exist that do the same thing." argued by "burnt-resistor".
- "Underwater is the obvious choice for both space and cooling. Seal the thing and chuck it next to an internet backbone cable." suggested "moffkalast".

3. Skepticism Regarding Sci-Fi Enthusiasm and Underlying Intent

A significant thread suggested the idea is divorced from practical engineering ("sci-fi thinking") and might be driven by motivations other than pure utility, such as geopolitical advantage or an evasion of national jurisdiction.

Supporting Quotes:
- "So many ideas involving AI just seems to be built off of sci-fi (not in a good way), including this one." criticized "Infinity315".
- "I swear, nothing on Earth more dangerous than someone with dollar signs in their eyes." noted "salawat" regarding potentially reckless innovation.
- "The solution to oppressive government is not technological, it's political." asserted "mandevil" when discussing the supposed benefit of escaping jurisdiction.

🚀 Project Ideas

Speculative Fiction / AI Product Impact Evaluator (SpecFit)

Summary

A tool designed to analyze hypothetical technology proposals (especially AI/Space data centers) against established principles of speculative fiction, focusing on cascading social, political, and practical consequences rather than purely technical feasibility.
Core Value: To move the discussion beyond "Will it technically fly?" to "What happens to us when it does?"

Details

Key	Value
Target Audience	Product managers, speculative fiction authors, policy analysts, and skeptical developers who complain about "sci-fi" tech proposals lacking practical/human considerations.
Core Feature	Input a technology concept (e.g., "AI data centers in space"). The tool cross-references themes discussed in literature (social friction, power shifts, unintended consequences) with the proposed technical solution's real-world trade-offs identified in the current discussion (e.g., cooling difficulty, maintenance cost).
Tech Stack	Python (for NLP/Thematic analysis), fine-tuned smaller LLM (or even symbolic AI rules derived from literary analysis) to map tech features to socio-political outcomes. React frontend.
Difficulty	High (Requires robust framework for mapping speculative concerns to real-world failure modes).
Monetization	Hobby

Notes

Why HN commenters would love it (quote users if possible): Addresses the high-level complaint that many new tech ideas "miss the point of the stories" (0_____0). It directly tackles the need to evaluate the "unforeseen consequences of human ingenuity."
Potential for discussion or practical utility: Could become a standard step in corporate tech risk assessment, shifting the focus from technical failure modes to socio-economic disruption.

Thermal Constraint Verification Service (DeepCool)

Summary

A service that rigorously stress-tests proposed computational architectures against the hard physical constraints of their intended environment (e.g., vacuum, deep ocean, lunar regolith).
Solves the problem where proponents ignore foundational physics (like the inverse square law of radiation or the insulation properties of regolith) because they are far removed from ground-level engineering knowledge.
Core Value: Providing quantitative, physics-backed counter-arguments to overly optimistic deployment scenarios, specifically targeting heat rejection and radiation.

Details

Key	Value
Target Audience	Engineers pitching novel high-power compute locations (space, deep sea, high altitude balloons), investors needing diligence on extreme-environment infrastructure.
Core Feature	Users input Total Power Dissipation (MW), Target Environment (LEO, Lunar Surface, Underwater Hull Depth), and specified heat rejection mechanism (Surface Area Available, Albedo/Emissivity values). The tool calculates the required radiator area or heat sink effective volume needed, comparing it against stated capabilities (e.g., ISS radiators, hypothetical Starship launch volume).
Tech Stack	Python (NumPy/SciPy for thermal/radiation modeling), a structured database of Material Thermal Properties (conductivity, emissivity), and a REST API for integration.
Difficulty	Medium (The core physics is known, but creating an easy-to-use interface that handles complex orbital mechanics/albedo variations is tricky).
Monetization	Hobby

Notes

Why HN commenters would love it (quote users if possible): Directly addresses the "spherical cow" step in theoretical physics implementation (Ekaros), specifically arguing about the practical reality: "Cooling in space is a major problem because the actually effective ways to do it are not available," (Sharlin). It quantifies the need for "colossal radiator panels" (ethmarks).
Potential for discussion or practical utility: Could be an open-source tool that settles physics debates quickly, forcing proponents to either accept the massive surface area costs or fundamentally change their power density calculations.

The "Legal Asteroid" Liability Tracking System (OuterSphere Tracer)

Summary

A decentralized ledger and tracking service designed to map launched assets in space back to their originating responsible entities, based on the Outer Space Treaty (OST).
Addresses the jurisdictional and deniability concerns raised when high-value assets (like massive data centers) end up in orbit, making it harder for entities to hide responsibility or claim plausible deniability following collisions or malfunctions.
Core Value: Imposing terrestrial legal accountability onto orbital assets by creating an immutable, publicly verifiable chain of custody record linking satellites to launch nation/company.

Details

Key	Value
Target Audience	Government space agencies (for liability tracking), insurance underwriters for orbital assets, and developers skeptical of space-based legal frameworks.
Core Feature	Requires standardized metadata submission (per OST requirements) at launch planning. The system uses existing public orbital data (like NORAD/Space-Track) to confirm the asset's presence and trajectory against the registered payload, logging necessary information onto a high-integrity ledger.
Tech Stack	Blockchain/DLT (for immutability of registry data), integration with public STK/TLE data providers, Rust/Go backend for high-throughput ledger validation.
Difficulty	Medium (The technical challenges of data ingestion are solvable, but getting broad international/corporate adoption for mandatory registration is a significant policy hurdle).
Monetization	Hobby

Notes

Why HN commenters would love it (quote users if possible): This is the direct counter to the "Space is beyond the law" argument (NoMoreNicksLeft), forcing structure onto potentially rogue infrastructure. It provides a necessary "who is responsible?" layer when discussing things that are "not exactly small things" (shagie).
Potential for discussion or practical utility: It provides a technical foundation for enforcing orbital regulation, potentially allowing insurance markets to mature for space infrastructure, which is currently too opaque.