[datadrivenangel]

They'll do smaller satellites, and if they can get an order of magnitude improvement on cooling and power generation to weight ratios, it'll be close to the same order of magnitude cost-wise as a terrestrial datacenter. 10x the cost is likely not enough to make it all work, so it's a bad idea, but it's possibly less bad than using lead ballast for starship launches... maybe.

[amluto]

I still don’t see it. The equipment is very, very expensive, is subject to shortages, and has residual value after five years. But these very low Earth orbit satellites literally burn up when they run out of fuel for station keeping.

Even if you pay a bit more to position them in a higher, more stable orbit, you still can’t physically get to them to repurpose equipment.

Check this datacenter gadget out:

https://www.marvell.com/blogs/sustainable-computing-with-cxl...

That trick is a complete nonstarter if the modules you’re trying to reuse are in space.

[datadrivenangel]

Even with order of magnitude improvements on the state of the art they're still looking at ~10x the price per installed and powered unit of compute.

[toomuchtodo]

“Supervised Full Self Driving.” Buy the hope, sell reality.

[jmalicki]

Is there some reason significant improvement on cooling and power generation to weight generation ratios is even remotely possible?

[datadrivenangel]

Better integration allows for a lot of potential improvements, so if the cooling and power and compute are tightly integrated and use structural materials it may be plausible.

Still not going to be cheaper, but if you get moderately optimistic it's cheap enough to maayyyybe start looking like a source of demand for starship if you can find suckers (government) to pay 10x the price per compute.