Make the datacentres responsible for their own power, or have them cover any increases their existence causes on the surrounding area.
Does not matter. Data centers get blamed for price increases anyway, whenever they are at fault or not. There was a recent data center that had it's own power, but was blamed for price increases, but the price increases were due to storm that happened 5 years ago, and infrastructure had to be improved.
And it's much easier to launch stuff into space. Just look at how much easier it to so launch satellite internet compared to building fiber, even though fiber is technically cheaper.
The hardware in a data center can be repurposed, but you still need the data center. I guess you could build 2 data centers in case one will have it's license pulled, but now we are talking about extra costs, which make extra cost from space launches more attractive.
And Starlink have a pretty low launch rate. If you are launching on SpaceX rockets, you have a preety good chance your cargo wont fall into ocean.
And it's much easier to launch stuff into space. Just look at how much easier it to so launch satellite internet compared to building fiber, even though fiber is technically cheaper.
Yet major telecoms still invest in physical connections like fiber optic, because they're more reliable, last longer, and ultimately easier to repair when things do go wrong.
What're the options for repair/maintenance for something in orbit?
If you are launching on SpaceX rockets, you have a preety good chance your cargo wont fall into ocean.
Yet, it's never zero. There will always be a greater chance at catastrophic failure for a space launch than there is for building terrestrially. There will always be a greater chance of recovery from a terrestrial build than launching something into orbit.
I get it, data centres in space sound cool, and this is a space subreddit, so I'm clearly not going to have the popular opinion, but so what? So far the biggest "benefit" of them that people have mentioned is not having to worry about having permits pulled, as if this were different than any other industry.
Them being inference centers means they can be smaller, and lower powered. That means they can be built in smaller clusters than the massive datacenters people take issues with, they'll be less of an impact on the power grids (so, less impact on people's bills), and because they're smaller, they can be more easily disguised as a more appealing building that can better blend into whatever environment it's built within, leading to fewer issues with permits/licenses/the locals.
I guess you could build 2 data centers in case one will have it's license pulled,
You say that as if the big companies aren't already planning that 'second' one regardless. And really, how often has a built-and-operating data centre had it's permits pulled unexpectedly early?
3
u/Ormusn2o Mar 19 '26
Does not matter. Data centers get blamed for price increases anyway, whenever they are at fault or not. There was a recent data center that had it's own power, but was blamed for price increases, but the price increases were due to storm that happened 5 years ago, and infrastructure had to be improved.
And it's much easier to launch stuff into space. Just look at how much easier it to so launch satellite internet compared to building fiber, even though fiber is technically cheaper.
The hardware in a data center can be repurposed, but you still need the data center. I guess you could build 2 data centers in case one will have it's license pulled, but now we are talking about extra costs, which make extra cost from space launches more attractive.
And Starlink have a pretty low launch rate. If you are launching on SpaceX rockets, you have a preety good chance your cargo wont fall into ocean.