Comment Re: Article is misleading (Score 1) 165
I'll talk to my friends in Korea to see if it is overall accurate, but if it is accurate most of them will buy a different brand. Well, if they own a car anyway.
But the gripping hand is that your topic thus far has been about AI, not LLMs specifically. In response to your claim that AI vision inference systems have not been in use I gave an example that does not just exist but practical to implement at even the hobbyist level.
I don't see you demonstrating it's actually Artificial INTELLIGENCE. Why? Because nothing about this is AI. Nothing about the cameras or the backend has intelligence.
Not a datacenter in space more like a rack in space, so not as impossible as you think
Did you do the heat calculation on a SINGLE compute module. Each SINGLE compute module (2U) of the upcoming Vera Rubin is 2300 watts of heat under ideal conditions. Let's be nice and make it 2,000 watts for easier maths. A rack of Vera Rubin is 18 modules (36U) totaling out 36,000 watts of heat. The ISS can dissipate about 3,000 kWh per day so you might be thinking "HEY THAT ACTUALLY WORKS!"
Ha ha ha! No. That was SPOT heat under full load of the compute cluster versus the day load of ISS heat radiation... so the actual full load day cost 4.5 to 5.2 MWh per day versus 3 MWh per day. I mean, it's only a tiny bit off, right? Well, no. That's the equivalent of adding ANOTHER cooling array. Why? You're not accounting for the cooling of what would be an even more massive solar array to power those GPUs. Yes you need to cool the solar array as well.
So basically each compute module is more than an ISS being launched into space, that has to be assembled by humans, is only good for a couple years, is vulnerable to data corruption or even permanent circuit damage due to solar storms, and is vulnerable to even a snowflake moving a ridiculous speeds.
I'm not even going to go into the solar array sizing to power this fantasy.
Tell me again how datacenters in space make sense.
Progress means replacing a theory that is wrong with one more subtly wrong.