←back to thread

Starcloud can’t put a data centre in space at $8.2M in one Starship

(angadh.com)
199 points angadh | 7 comments | 26 Jun 25 20:06 UTC | HN request time: 0.706s | source | bottom
Show context
weinzierl ◴[27 Jun 25 08:37 UTC] No.44394986[source]▶
Why do they want to put a data center in space in the first place?

Free cooling?

Doesn't make much sense to me. As the article points out the radiators need to me massive.

Access to solar energy?

Solar is more efficient in space, I'll give them that, but does that really outweigh the whole hassle to put the panels in space in the first place?

Physical isolation and security?

Against manipulation maybe, but not against denial of service. Willfully damaged satellite is something I expect to see in the news in the foreseeable future.

Low latency comms?

Latency is limited by distance and speed of light. Everyone with a satellite internet connections knows that low latency is not a particular strength of it.

Marketing and PR?

That, probably.

EDIT:

Thought of another one:

Environmental impact?

No land use, no thermal stress for rivers on one hand but the huge overhead of a space launch on the other.

replies(9): >>44395282 #>>44395382 #>>44396169 #>>44396392 #>>44396890 #>>44397052 #>>44397428 #>>44398557 #>>44403245 #
1. ThinkingGuy ◴[27 Jun 25 12:46 UTC] No.44396392[source]▶
My initial thought was: ambiguous regulatory environment.

Not being physically located the US, the EU, or any other sovereign territory, they could plausably claim exemption from pretty much any national regulations.

replies(5): >>44396762 #>>44396885 #>>44396930 #>>44398086 #>>44406654 #
2. HPsquared ◴[27 Jun 25 13:43 UTC] No.44396762[source]▶
A bit like international waters. I wonder when we'll see the first space pirates.
replies(1): >>44397486 #
3. itsoktocry ◴[27 Jun 25 14:02 UTC] No.44396885[source]▶
This might be true, but unrealistic.

If you run amiss of US (or EU) regulators, they will never say, "well, it's in space, out of our jurisdiction!".

They will make your life hell on Earth.

4. zarzavat ◴[27 Jun 25 14:08 UTC] No.44396930[source]▶
Space is terrible for that. There's only a handful of countries with launch vehicles and/or launch sites. You obviously need to be in their good graces for the launch to be approved.

If you want permissive regulatory environment, just spend the money buying a Mercedes for some politician in a corrupt country, you'll get a lot further...

5. ceejayoz ◴[27 Jun 25 15:20 UTC] No.44397486[source]▶
> A bit like international waters.

Which is a good analogy; international waters are far from lawless.

You're still subject to the law of your flag state, just as if you were on their territory. In addition to that, you're subject to everyone's jurisdiction if you commit certain crimes - including piracy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction

6. nilamo ◴[27 Jun 25 16:25 UTC] No.44398086[source]▶
Quick, we need a new Cryptonomicon, in space!
7. spauldo ◴[28 Jun 25 17:46 UTC] No.44406654[source]▶
I don't see it.

The US government does questionable things to people in places like Guantanamo Bay because the constitution gives those people rights if they set foot on US soil. Data doesn't have rights, and governments have the capability to waive their own laws for things like national security.

Corporations operating in space are bound to the laws of the country the spacecraft belongs to, so there's no difference between a data harbor in Whogivesastan vs. a data harbor on a spacecraft operated by Whogivesastan.