pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
No bio...
User ID: 278
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
1d ago
There's a couple solutions here. The namespace solution is the obvious coder one: r.games.ffxiv. and r.games.ark., throw a page that lists them with some sort capability (and maybe allow management of that page by moderators for the recognized community), done.
I like this, it's like reinventing USENET. Arguably the overarching vision here is exactly USENET, but on the web.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
3d ago
Goo Gone
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
5d ago
After years away, jumped back in to Diablo III latest season to get a Crusader set I never tried.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
6d ago
It doesn't matter much for inference, which is what the satellites are for. Heck, you can run inference at home on your PC if you want to fork out for the hardware.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
6d ago
Amazing!
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
6d ago
The SysAdmin guys taking care of the servers at the companies I worked for, OTOH, were always running around and tinkering with shit.
Heh, this is my day job. Most of the time, the tinkering is replacing very old stuff with less old (or, ideally) new stuff. Sometimes stuff that was deliberately underprovisioned for business reasons that has to be upgraded later. And if it's a business office, physical networking often needs to change to suit the needs of the office workers. But often as not the old stuff coming out has been operating continuously for many years on end with ~0 maintenance and still works. I routinely pick up enterprise gear from work for my home that was retired and removed in perfect working order, but is no longer supported, surplus to requirements, or replaced with something more capable and more efficient. Usually if there is a failure, it's a spinning hard disk or a cooling fan; eliminate those and enterprise gear is generally pretty bulletproof and service lifetimes of 10 years or more are not uncommon at all. You observed that desktop PC hardware is already fairly reliable, and that's after having every cost cut to the absolute bone. Enterprise gear largely avoids those cost tradeoffs for reliability.
True that upgrades in the satellite model are precluded, but after almost a decade of service they probably wouldn't be upgrading in any case. In an industrial datacenter, there is a lot of infrastructure in the form of buildings, facilities, and power distribution that makes ripping the racks and replacing a sensible "upgrade" path. In the satellite model, what infrastructure there is, is largely degradable (solar panels and mechanical components), so there's not much benefit to upgrading them. Additionally, since each node is self-sufficient, its entire lifespan can be monetized without sacrificing efficiency, at decreasing revenue rates over time, unlike in a data center where there's a constant need to cycle in new hardware as soon as possible to maximize electrical efficiency. Compute per watt efficiency just matters a lot less when your electrical cost is 0.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
6d ago
They're almost entirely microchips in either case. The main complication is the need for circulating coolant through passive panels, but this is not an exotic field of space engineering at all.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
6d ago
For small-scale nodes, i.e., AI1-sized, I suspect that the node would just either operate in reduced capacity or be retired. They probably would not be designed for serviceability. On the flip side, properly engineered, there would be few moving parts, and low risk of environmental damage. Something like 99.8% of Starlink satellites are operational with a median age of a little over 5 years, so it doesn't seem implausible on first impression that AI satellites would experience similarly low rates of failure.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
6d ago
Didn't he buy Cursor, and these guys were the ones who figured it out? It certainly shows a lot of political / business acumen, but I didn't get the impression that that's the sort of "it" he's supposed to have.
I disagree, that is the primary "it" that he has, and the most important one by far. It doesn't really matter how elegant your product is, how technologically advanced, how innovative. The ability to create a solid business plan and actually execute it (eventually) is the critical factor. SpaceX is the best example: none of the technologies involved are especially novel: keralox rocket engines, aluminum alloy rocket bodies, carbon fiber fairings, etc. The actual innovation of SpaceX was figuring out a way to build and operate these things in a way that made them profitable at scale. This is an unpopular view, I know, due to the implications about whig history, but is something I think is true of all the great industrialists.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
6d ago
Assuming the minimum viable product can even scale that small, what you're describing is not a lot different than what cryptominers were doing at home for a while, and their activities were often extremely unpopular with their neighbors. I'm curious how you plan to dissipate 50 KW of heat from under your basement stairs without annoying your neighbors. Not to mention, the $7.5K/month power/fiber bill takes a pretty big bite out of that after a 5 year operation cycle. After 10 years, you're probably not breaking even.
Interesting concept though: assuming you want to add, say, 2GW of inference capacity, that would be something like 40,000 1/3-size racks. Could you spread that out around the country enough that the increased load could be absorbed by the already-present electrical grid and generation capacity? The national average looks to be around 500 GW, so this seems plausible. I suspect the challenge would be getting people to sign up for having the noise in their homes.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
6d ago
I'm skeptical you have 120 KW service to your house
Please, please, pleas show me your math for this. Even use the $100 per kg to LEO price if you want to make itas favorable to your argument as possible. I would be willing to bet you $100 donated to the charity of the winner's choice if you math shows it being cheaper than a container ship (or oil platform type structure) 370 KM off the coast (i.e. in international waters) of some LNG processing hub.
First, you have to determine what is a minimally-viable node in each context. SpaceX is proposing essentially a single-rack node with 120KW power at a mass of about 2 tons. Let's assume that the same Nvidia racks would be used in an oceanic platform, so we can disregard the silicon costs. Starlink satellites are constructed at scale at a cost of about $1M/ton, so a reasonable cost estimate for Starmind satellites is about about $2M per satellite. Add $200K in launch costs and we're about $2.5M/node up front, with ~0 ongoing costs.
If we assume that solar arrays are impractical for oceanic data processing, the minimum viable node would have to be some kind of hull with active station-keeping and enough fuel storage to fuel a diesel generator and station-keeping for extended periods between refueling (30 days?). It starts getting sketchy here, but working with requirements of about 25 tons fuel capacity, it seems like you're looking at a 30-40 meter DP1 vessel. I couldn't find costs for new construction, but listings for similar class vessels decades old are around $3M (e.g., https://maritimesales.com/DAB17.htm), so that seems like a reasonable conservative estimate. And this the up-front cost only. Assuming it's autonomous, it will still need monthly fuel deliveries, regular PMCS and overhauls on engines, gensets, and thrusters, other seaworthiness maintenance like painting, cleaning, and lubrication, and you can expect substantial wear and tear and damage from environmental forces. Fuel replenishment alone is going to be at least $30K/month. And this is all for a single Nvidia rack!
Now of course as you start scaling up, the economics shift, but my point was that one of the advantages of orbital deployment is the ability to scale node sizes down.
pusher_robot
PLEASE GO STAND BY THE STAIRS
6d ago
And you don't really escape terrestrial legal jurisdictions any better than you would have by building the DC on a container ship out in the Pacific or something.
Antarctica is closed to economic exploitation by international treaty. It's the complete opposite of escaping terrestrial legal jurisdiction. As for oceanic datacenters, they have a lot of technical disadvantages compared to orbital components. Large vessels would be preferable for stability, security, and navigational control, but power generation becomes impractical unless you permit commercial maritime nuclear reactors, which seems unlikely, or plan to have LNG refueling tankers visit every few weeks, which is expensive. A constellation of small solar powered vessels scales a lot less conveniently in the ocean, given communications constraints from the ground, security difficulties, and the scale of ordinary maritime maintenance that is necessary.
So, I think you are wrong - there are other advantages. In orbit, security is a non-issue, environmental degradation is minimal, solar power is abundant, communications are easier, and in general the floor cost per node is lower, meaning that scaling down incurs fewer penalties.
Disagree. The surrogacy is the service that was induced by the promise of the payment, and it's not reasonable to expect a warranty on a baby unless explicitly agreed to. She should get the money no matter what, but they should be able to refuse delivery.
More options
Context Copy link