[luke5441]

I think what often gets confused is people saying it isn't viable with "it is not physically possible".

It is physically possible, but it won't have positive ROI so it is not viable.

If you have a paper/post doing the calculations for positive ROI, I'd be all ears. It can even have the optimistic Elon assumptions about price of mass to orbit.

[geertj]

I don’t think people are confused between the two. What’s happening is that drive by objections have no real way to assess viability. That calculation you ask for has line items in it that greatly depend on engineering optimizations that, unless you work in the field, are hard to estimate accurately.

[IshKebab]

I don't think you really need those calculations to know that it is always going to be less viable than a traditional data centre. It's like the idea about putting data centres under water.

I'm sure you can do it and you can come up with estimates over how much it will cost... but it's always going to cost more than not putting your data centre underwater.

[luke5441]

On those line items make the most optimistic assumption. E.g. use Elons Starship cost to orbit. Assume useful GPU lifetime of 6+ years. Assume max physical possible radiators etc.