QuixoticgeekFeb 1

There are currently about 12600 satellites in orbit. As a result on average every day 3 fall out of space, dumping metals and other nasties into the upper atmosphere.

If we continue that rate of satellite loss, 1 in 4200, and extrapolate it to 1,000,000. That would be ~238 satellites PER DAY, falling out of the sky and spreading the materials they are made up of in the upper atmosphere. With some more substantial chunks hitting the surface, and possibly people.

That's just bonkers

1/n

Show threadQuixoticgeekFeb 1

This of course completely overlooks all other practicalities of orbital datacentres, that makes putting high power computing in orbit. Which for a summary include: too much radiation noise making the systems unstable (see Wikipedia for "single even upset"), cooling when you have to dump heat into a vacuum, low data bandwidth (compared to a fibre on earth), latency, and shear fucking cost.

It's an absolutely fucking stupid idea. And I'm angry I have to spend my Sunday debunking this shit.

2/2

Show threadQuixoticgeekFeb 1
Postscript: and before the cult of space Karen start with the "so you're an expert in orbital computing this week are you?" Well. One of my first jobs out of uni involved designing an onboard control system for a satellite. My design has literally been to space. I know what I'm talking about on this one.
Show thread0xC0DEC0DE07EAFeb 1
@quixoticgeek uuuuggh, didn’t this debunking dance already occur like a month ago when Sam Altman or some other idiot brought it up?!
Show threadQuixoticgeek
@c0dec0dec0de welcome to tech bro whackamole
Feb 1 at 12:28pmWeb
Show thread0xC0DEC0DE07EAFeb 1
@quixoticgeek be better if it were a bit more literal, might do them a bit of good to get a bop on the head with a soft mallet
Show threadQuixoticgeekFeb 1
@c0dec0dec0de agreed.