upvote

points

by MattDamonSpace8 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby piloto_ciego8 hours ago|
[-]
I doubt it. Like, I hate to have to be the bearer of bad news, and maybe it’s my weird arctic anarchist soul, but, the old world order, the need for these companies to follow rules at least in spirit? That’s dead now. There are no laws but the laws of physics and the the laws others force your organization to follow.

I recognize that that is distressing to people, hell, it’s been obvious to me since I was at OWS in my 20s. But we are in a new world now and the old rules don’t apply. A company that has the backing of the government to launch their spacecraft will simply do it. You think Texas is going to stop them? Or Florida? Or even California? Of course not.

A lot changes in a world where you can plan things out with AI. A lot changes in a world with abundance. If we play our cards right we could have the culture, but that means letting go of the conservative yearning to put things back to how they were. The old world is 10 light years away now, it wasn’t as great as we remember it and it ain’t coming back.

And if I had to choose, I’d much rather have datacenters in orbit than one burning hydrocarbons loudly 2 blocks from my kids’ school.

reply
upvoteby runako6 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> the old world order, the need for these companies to follow rules at least in spirit? That’s dead now

Pendulums swing. Anyone advocating for the development of more advanced technologies should be in favor of a system of fair laws enforced robustly. One need only look to countries that lack this foundation to understand why.

reply
upvoteby laughing_man5 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The history of international oil companies is instructive here. It takes many billions to build out oil infrastructure, and they're always one election/revolution away from losing it all.
reply
upvoteby piloto_ciego6 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Not arguing that this is “good” rather that this is the way things are now.
reply
upvoteby Dylan168077 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
> And if I had to choose, I’d much rather have datacenters in orbit than one burning hydrocarbons loudly 2 blocks from my kids’ school.

Yeah, but that choice is nonsense. Mandate that datacenters on the ground are on 100% green power and quiet, and they'll still be way way more cost effective than the orbital option.

reply
upvoteby piloto_ciego6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You don’t get it. Sorry, this is an “is-ought” thing. Sure we could mandate this. But are we going to? Do the systems exist that would actually mandate this?

Looking at things right now? I would say no. We will see, maybe in up my own ass on this, but I see a pretty big set of changes coming down the pike. Adapt or die (as unpalatable as that may seem).

reply
upvoteby Dylan168076 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
If you don't mandate anything, then they're going to build the dirty one.

So what kind of laws would lead to the orbital option being preferred over the ground-based clean option?

reply
upvoteby piloto_ciego6 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Well, arguably from the get go an orbital datacenter would be better. If launch costs were low enough I would say that as much industry as possible should be moved off planet, and we should make earth into a garden?
reply
upvoteby Dylan168076 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
We're still doing all the mining and manufacturing on Earth, and there's so much empty land. The final product of self-powered datacenter is among the lowest priority of things to get away from us, and not an effective place to spend environmental mitigation money. And then when they re-enter they pollute pretty badly.
reply