Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | aunty_helen's commentslogin

The equation has a ^4 to the temperature. If you raise the temperature of your radiator by ~50 degrees you double its emission capacity. This is well within the range of specialised phase change compressors, aka fancy air conditioning pumps.

Next up in the equation is surface emissivity which we’ve got a lot of experience in the automotive sector.

And finally surface area, once again, getting quite good here with nanotechnology.

Yes he’s distracting, no it’s not as impossible as many people think.


> And finally surface area, once again, getting quite good here with nanotechnology.

So your hot thing is radiating directly onto the next hot thing over, the one that also needs to cool down?


> aka fancy air conditioning pumps

Yeah, pumps, tubes, and fluids are some of the worst things to add to a satellite. It's probably cheaper to use more radiators.

Maybe it's possible to make something economical with Peltier elements. But it's still not even a budget problem yet, it's not plainly not viable.

> getting quite good here with nanotechnology

Small features and fractal surfaces are useless here.


Peltiers and heat pipes don't remove heat, they just move it. You still need the radiator.

My dude, heat pipes were invented for satellites and there’s people walking around with piezo pumps in their phones these days. We’re getting close.

Peltiers generate a lot of heat to get the job done so even though electricity is pretty much free, probably not a sure bet.


Raise the temperature of your radiator by 50 degrees and you double its emission capacity. Or put your radiator in the atmosphere and multiply its heat exchange capacity by a factor of a thousand.

It's not physically impossible. Of course not. It's been done thousands of times already. But it doesn't make any economic sense. It's like putting a McDonald's at the top of Everest. Is it possible? Of course. Is it worth the enormous difficulty and expense to put one there? Not even a little.


For thousands of years we never even looked to Mount Everest, then some bloke on the fiver said he’d give it a shot. Nowadays anyone with the cash and commitment can get the job done.

Same with datacenters in space, not today, but in 1000 years definitely, 100 surely, 10?

As for the economics, it makes about as much sense as running jet engines at full tilt to power them.


Even if you create a material with surface emissivity of 1.0:

- let's say 8x 800W GPUs and neglect the CPU, that's 6400W

- let's further assume the PSU is 100% efficient

- let's also assume that you allow the server hardware to run at 77 degrees C, or 350K, which is already pretty hot for modern datacenter chips.

Your radiator would need to dissipate those 6400W, requiring it to be almost 8 square meters in size. That's a lot of launch mass. Adding 50 degrees will reduce your required area to only about 4.4 square meters with the consequence that chip temps will rise by 50 degrees also, putting them at 127 degrees C.

No CPU I'm aware of can run at those temps for very long and most modern chips will start to self throttle above about 100


Hence the fancy air conditioning pumps

... on satellites?

Yes, that’s what we’re talking about. Data centers in space.

You put the cold side of the phase change on the internal cooling loop, step up the external cooling loop as high temp as you can and then circulate that through the radiators. You might even do this step up more than once.

Imagine the data center like a box, you want it to be cold inside, and there’s a compressor, you use to transfer heat from inside to outside, the outside gets hot, inside cold. You then put a radiator on the back of the box and radiate the heat to the darkness of space.

This is all very dependent on the biggest and cheapest rockets in the world but it’s a tradeoff of convenience and serviceability for unlimited free energy.


Why not use the unlimited free energy on terrestrial data centers then? You can use solar power as we speak, no?

This makes zero sense.

> Next up in the equation is surface emissivity which we’ve got a lot of experience in the automotive sector.

My car doesn't spend too much time driving in vacuum, does yours?


Engine bays have a lot of design go into where to keep heat and where to get rid of it. You can look up thermal coatings and ceramics etc.

Sure and it all routes to dump the heat to...where again? A vacuum? Or to a radiator with a fan with some kind of cooler fluid/gas from the environment constantly flowing through it?

Seems like quite a massive difference to ignore.


Let's just hope the person you are responding to isn't Elon Musk!

I wouldn't say that roadster isn't doing much driving but dang is it drifting!

Hyper custom software can allow your business flows to sync together a lot better than the alternative, using zapier to glue a bunch of mostly poor fits and ending up with Frankenstein processes.

Also, it allows you to pick and choose what you want from where.

We’ve just completed the first month of our internal CRM that has replaced about 500$ a month in subs with something that flows much better and enforces our own internal processes.


I hope all the Tesla shareholders understand that they’re about to get hosed.

Musks making Tesla seem like a good fit into the portfolio.


The market for humanoid robots hasn’t been established like the market for $40,000 personal transport.

Saying that, I wouldn’t be too surprised if robotaxi replaces 90% of taxis and Ubers in the next 5-7 years.

But yea, stepping from sinking raft to the next…


> Saying that, I wouldn’t be too surprised if robotaxi replaces 90% of taxis and Ubers in the next 5-7 years.

How about we start with 0.00076% first before we start throwing insane numbers like 90% (chance of which happening are in-line with me marrying Beyonce)


Potentially in a few cities with high cost of living and nice weather, but certainly not worldwide. Not even the best can handle bad weather yet.

Waymo is launching in Detroit.

And hit a child today

Waymo said its robotaxi struck the child at six miles per hour, after braking “hard” from around 17 miles per hour. The young pedestrian “suddenly entered the roadway from behind a tall SUV, moving directly into our vehicle’s path,” the company said in its blog post. Waymo said its vehicle “immediately detected the individual as soon as they began to emerge from behind the stopped vehicle.”

“Following contact, the pedestrian stood up immediately, walked to the sidewalk, and we called 911. The vehicle remained stopped, moved to the side of the road, and stayed there until law enforcement cleared the vehicle to leave the scene,” Waymo wrote in the post.

If a human were driving that child could be in much worse shape. You are being disingenuous by leaving out context.


You sure are repeating PR from Waymo.

Humans can move further away from parked cars when noticing a chance of hitting a child.

This waymo did not, seemingly

It is not evident to me that a human driver would have hit the child, and hit hit harder than Waymo did.

But we are absolutely certain that Waymo hit a child.


> I wouldn’t be too surprised if robotaxi replaces 90% of taxis and Ubers in the next 5-7 years

I'd bet a kidney that doesn't happen.


Not Tesla’s version anyway

> You want initiative, and you also don't want initiative. I presume you want it when it's good and don't want it when it's bad, and if possible the people should be clairvoyant and see the future so they can tell which is which.

The word you’re looking for is skill. He wants devs to be skilled. I wouldn’t thought that to be controversial but hn never ceases to amaze


Very interesting, thanks for the insight into modern uni. It’s been a long time since I was there and struggle to imagine what it must be like now.

It does seem like they’re going the wrong way, repelling tech to keep things easy instead of embracing new tech by updating their teaching methods.

But I also think we’ve collectively fallen flat in figuring out what those methods are.


I think it's fair for the projects, since when you first write code you're learning to think like a computer. Their AI policy is it's fine to ask it questions and have it explain concepts, but the project assignments need to be done without AI.

The one requirement I think is dumb though is we're not allowed to use the language's documentation for the final project, which makes no sense. Especially since my python is rusty.

Since you mentioned failure to figure out what better teaching methods are, I feel it's my sworn duty to put a plug for https://dynamicland.org and https://folk.computer, if you haven't heard about them :)


I agree with you in part, you can’t expect to learn something like coding without the doing.

The brave new world is that you no longer have to do “coding” in our sense of the word. The doing, and what exercises you should learn with have both changed.

Now students should build whole systems, not worry about simple Boolean logic and program flow. The last programmer to ever need to write an if statement may already be in studies.


> The brave new world is that you no longer have to do “coding” in our sense of the word.

Notice how I also talked about coding being a way that you learn how computers work.

If you don't code, you have a very hard time understanding how computers work.

And while there's some evidence that programmers may not need write all of their code by hand, there's zero evidence that either they don't need to learn how to code at all (as you're claiming), or that they don't need to even know how computers work (which is a step further).

There's tons of anecdotes from senior software engineers on Hacker News (and elsewhere) about coding agents writing bad code that they need to debug and fix by hand. I've literally never seen a single story about how a coding agent built a nontrivial program by itself without the prompter looking at the code.


Doesn’t look like a F14 either but a US warship, rather than some guys in a field, still managed to pull that off and send 290 people to their graves.

But it did look like an F-14. There really was an F-14, just on the ground at an Iranian airbase. And the Vincennes was under armed attack at the time--Iran let a civilian jetliner overfly their own attack. Plenty of blame for them, also.

> But it did look like an F-14

It absolutely did not. The RCS of an F-14 v/s an Airbus A300 is an order of magnitude different (probably 2 or 3 orders).

> There really was an F-14, just on the ground at an Iranian airbase

There was, but that’s a red herring for the root cause. Each ship’s radar independently and correctly identified and tracked the Airbus separate from the Mode 2 targets, but when communicating the track information between ships, the tracks were mixed up.

Source: The US Navy’s own account: https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/about-us/l...

> There was a combat camera team aboard the Vincennes, and the footage depicts considerable confusion and even ill-discipline amongst the crew (cheering, shouting, football game atmosphere) that contributed to one of the most tragic events in U.S. Navy history


The URL you linked to results in a 503 error (Service unavailable) and the Wayback Machine returns "Error code: 403 Forbidden" with "Looks like there’s a problem with this site", for all timestamps I tried, in 2025 or 2024.

I'm outside the US so that's probably the cause. Is such information available elsewhere?


I’m outside the US too and the link works for me

But this also works: https://archive.md/XsxT8

And also this: https://web.archive.org/web/20251208110440/https://www.histo...


Can’t charge for something if you’re giving it away for free.

Data’s the only moat left. Companies like stack overflow need to build revenue streams from AI or they will cease to exist.

By banning bots and then licensing some kind of access, eBay can protect itself from merely being a listing point that no human actually visits. Tailwind and their adverts via docs model, eBay and its promoted listings model, we’re going to see businesses adapt or die on this.


Note that Stack Overflow has already ceased to exist. https://xcancel.com/marcgravell/status/1922922817143660783

> under 12 hours using consumer hardware costing less than $600 USD

Great, so someone with half a motherboard can break this hash


Or 1gb of ram, but not both


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: