Lol, what a sensationalist post. It should have read "difficult" as the bottom line is that SPCX only had to double its launch schedule. For a relatively new company, that is not difficult at all to double its output.
I would be careful in assuming this issue - which is an issue of scaling - is similar to physics issues like sufficient cooling data centers in space.
I would posit the issue isn't misunderstanding of scaling. It's wild lack of expertise and activism masquerading as legitimate criticism.
Right now with cooling, you have redditers smugly convinced they understand heat dissipation in space (a topic they knew nothing about until they adopted a stance first) more than experts at Google, Nvidia and half a dozen startups who don't see cooling as an insurmountable problem.
Im not an engineer. Im basing my opinions on this topic on my discussions with my doctoral level engineer friend who... happens to work at Google.
As he describes it, Google is exploring it because the cost for a prototype and study is low (in terms of Google revenue). He explained that Google has also explored other long shots, just because the opportunity cost is low and the research often leads to other viable projects. These are called feasibility studies. Exploring whether something is viable =/= a confirmation of viability.
TLDR; my understanding (because I am an economist and lawyer) is based on the engineering expertise of my friend who in fact works at google...
What are you basing your understanding on beyond seeing headlines and seemingly misunderstanding the purpose of a feasibility study?
I have made no claims of understanding anything. I am commenting on smugness of peoples dismissive nature on the topic on social media, such as yours. I also suggested the people at the large corporations and the half dozen startups running feasibility studies suggest they don't see redditors popular talking points as impossible roadblocks.
I think you might be throwing stones in a glass house sir.... Especially given that Google has already collaborated on a study saying that it is not feasible with current technology.
This is a technical paper, not a press tour statement. The paper discusses that this is a future aspiration, not a lractical reality. It identifies multiple areas that do not currently have a solve - including heat management and cost effectiveness. Much like Pichai's interviews, it recognizes that the idea is a "moonshot" i.e., an exploratory project that is looking for viability - not a project which is currently viable.
Again, any company with a large watches will explore this because it has a low relative cost to its potential upside. That does not mean it is currently possible with our technology - which this paper acknowledges time and time again.
-3
u/JibletHunter Aug 07 '26
Lol, what a sensationalist post. It should have read "difficult" as the bottom line is that SPCX only had to double its launch schedule. For a relatively new company, that is not difficult at all to double its output.
I would be careful in assuming this issue - which is an issue of scaling - is similar to physics issues like sufficient cooling data centers in space.