• Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    “Fascists moron uses only succesful company to prop up failing ones”.

    Everything must make way for the CSAM-factory to keep running and stroking his ego.

  • Lubu@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    This is very sad… the Nazi CEO doesn’t actually care about space exploration. The Mars missions will probably not happen, and at this rate, he might even manage to kill his cash cow SpaceX.

    Imagine that, thousands and thousands of employees gave it their best only for the dream to go up in smoke like that. Instead, they’ll work for dumb space groklinks, so that Musk can fill his deep pockets while spreading fascism on Twitter and funding his bigoted LLM.

    What a sad reality we live in.

    • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.worksM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      All of Twitter, or just the AI portion?

      Edit: Huh, it looks like xAI is the shell company that owns 𝕏, formerly Twitter. So I guess SpaceX do own Twitter now. That is weird.

  • burble@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    10 hours ago

    This paragraph pretty much sums up where I’m at:

    Musk’s plan for the merged companies is predicated on several assumptions, including that AI is not a bubble, but rather a technology that will be fully embraced in the future; that orbital data centers are cost-competitive compared to ground-based data centers; and that compute is the essential roadblock that must be solved for widespread adoption of AI by society.

    I guess I just disagree with the CEO on all of those.

    • Tar_Alcaran@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      that orbital data centers are cost-competitive compared to ground-based data centers

      Might as well work off of the assumptions that magical math-faeries will do all the computing in orbit, in exchange for candy canes. It’s about as realistic.

      Solar irradiance is only about 25-30% more efficient in orbit, so with 40% efficiency (VERY optimistic, ISS does about 14%) a 1GW orbital datacenter would require a mere 0.4 x 10^8 / 1300 m2 worth of solar panels, or a square 550m to a side.

      If we use ISS-style solar arrays, which generate ~7.5w/kg, and double the efficiency, it would weigh 66000 tons, which translates to 3800 Falcon 9 launches. Just to power it. That includes zero frames, zero GPU’s, and most importantly, zero cooling.

    • threelonmusketeers@sh.itjust.worksM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      AI is not a bubble

      orbital data centers are cost-competitive compared to ground-based data

      Press 𝕏 to doubt. Or maybe stay off of 𝕏 entirely :)