Mind fart

[PeachGr]

i just watched some 2015 LTT system builds, along with SpaceX new starlink satelites...
In how many years do you think Google or Amazon will put their servers to the moon?
tempratures there tuns to even minus 170 C/ 280F
BTW google (or microsoft) have already thought putting their server underwater to the sea, although maintenance was a main issue, thinking that a technician now has to have diving skills as well etc etc

[Haro]

1 minute ago, yaboistar said:

we can get 1 second of ping on earth

We do ?! 

Fuck I'm getting scammed

[Spotty]

1 minute ago, PeachGr said:

In how many years do you think Google or Amazon will put their servers to the moon?

Never? The latency sucks. The moon is too far away, it takes roughly 1-1.5 seconds for light to travel between earth and to the moon.  That's why Starlink is using low orbit satellites that are considerably closer to Earth. Not comparable to putting something on the moon.

[Beerzerker]

I though there were some already there, you know, those big, black obelisk structures..... Found in 2001.

[PeachGr]

1 minute ago, Spotty said:

Never? The latency sucks. The moon is too far away, it takes roughly 1-1.5 seconds for light to travel between earth and to the moon.  That's why Starlink is using low orbit satellites that are considerably closer to Earth. Not comparable to putting something on the moon.

actualy it's about 200k km away, and if you wanna travel from USA to China its about 20k KM, so it's reasonable distance.
Light also can travel in less than a second.
Yeah i know i m a child that is thinking Cyber punk stuff

[Haro]

2 minutes ago, yaboistar said:

"wait, you guys only get one second?"

"Wait you guys have internet?"

[Drama Lama]

8 minutes ago, PeachGr said:

i just watched some 2015 LTT system builds, along with SpaceX new starlink satelites...
In how many years do you think Google or Amazon will put their servers to the moon?
tempratures there tuns to even minus 170 C/ 280F
BTW google (or microsoft) have already thought putting their server underwater to the sea, although maintenance was a main issue, thinking that a technician now has to have diving skills as well etc etc

In space there is no air to dissipate heat so unless you need servers there it’s not efficient 

[Ashleyyyy]

5 minutes ago, Spotty said:

Never? The latency sucks. The moon is too far away, it takes roughly 1-1.5 seconds for light to travel between earth and to the moon.  That's why Starlink is using low orbit satellites that are considerably closer to Earth. Not comparable to putting something on the moon.

1.5 seconds isn't too bad if you just need to send a request to a remote server being like hey i need that 30TB file, then it can just download. 

[minibois]

8 minutes ago, PeachGr said:

i just watched some 2015 LTT system builds, along with SpaceX new starlink satelites...
In how many years do you think Google or Amazon will put their servers to the moon?
tempratures there tuns to even minus 170 C/ 280F
BTW google (or microsoft) have already thought putting their server underwater to the sea, although maintenance was a main issue, thinking that a technician now has to have diving skills as well etc etc

They would first have to make sure they can get plenty of power over there, solar power is probably a thing.. But the issue with that is probably going to be the lack of redundancy they can get there.

Plus I would imagine placing some techies 'up there' for the maintenance is going to be expensive too.

6 minutes ago, yaboistar said:

we don't need another second of ping just to download R34 from a moon server

Speak for yourself!

[Haro]

1 minute ago, yaboistar said:

i demand my r34 smut with less than 100ms ping thankyou

No that's too much to ask for 

I demand csgo with less than 743ms thank you 

My average is 130

[Spotty]

1 minute ago, PeachGr said:

actualy it's about 200k km away, and if you wanna travel from USA to China its about 20k KM, so it's reasonable distance.
Light also can travel in less than a second.
Yeah i know i m a child that is thinking Cyber punk stuff

The undersea cables between USA and China are around 13,000km in length, depending on the link and where it lands. If you're on the East coast of America then that distance would be longer for obvious reasons. Though, it's probably not that often that people in America will be accessing servers in China, or vice versa. Not only for political reasons but also due to the distance. Companies such as Google try to have servers as local as possible to the countries they're serving.

 

The moon is around 385,000KM from Earth (it varies slightly). Light travels at the speed of around 300,000KM per second. It takes more than a second for light to get from Earth to the Moon. Then it will need to process the request then send it back to the ground. Also unlike low orbit satellites, you would need a considerably large transmitter to reach the moon. This means no satellite dish on your house but rather an actual large transmitter station, so you would still need a wired connection in your house to transmit the data to the station, beam it to the moon, process on the moon, transmit it back to the base station, then use good old land based network to transfer it to your house. You're looking at around - at minimum - 3 seconds (3000ms) of latency and you still require the ground infrastructure and network defeating the purpose of trying to move it to a different body in the solar system.

 

Oh, and there's also the problem with the moon not always being in the same position relative to the ground and not being able to have a connection to it at all times - unlike traditional satellites in geosynchronous orbit or an array of low orbit satellites (aka Starlink).

[Spotty]

16 minutes ago, Ashley said:

1.5 seconds isn't too bad if you just need to send a request to a remote server being like hey i need that 30TB file, then it can just download. 

1.5 seconds each way, so around 3 seconds, though for the point you're making that's irrelevant.

Signal integrity could be an issue at those distances as well. Also terrestrial weather may cause issues, such as clouds or a storm. 

 

The cost of putting something up on the moon in the first place it would just be cheaper to build a local fibre link that is capable of much faster speeds and lower latency.

I honestly can't see any scenario where it would make sense to put servers on the moon. Unless it's like a backup of all of human/Earth history just in case Earth gets destroyed in a fire

[Haro]

Just now, yaboistar said:

i'll have to wait for it to rise again before i can carry on downloading

Innovative

 

[WereCatf]

16 minutes ago, Spotty said:

Unless it's like a backup of all of human/Earth history just in case Earth gets destroyed in a fire

Well, even then, it'd make more sense to put it all on a ship that can be relocated as needed. I mean, if there was some sort of a catastrophe capable of destroying all life on Earth, it would likely also affect the Moon as well. Some sort of a spaceship could at least be sent on a lonely journey far away from both...

[kb5zue]

25 minutes ago, Spotty said:

The undersea cables between USA and China are around 13,000km in length, depending on the link and where it lands. If you're on the East coast of America then that distance would be longer for obvious reasons. Though, it's probably not that often that people in America will be accessing servers in China, or vice versa. Not only for political reasons but also due to the distance. Companies such as Google try to have servers as local as possible to the countries they're serving.

 

The moon is around 385,000KM from Earth (it varies slightly). Light travels at the speed of around 300,000KM per second. It takes more than a second for light to get from Earth to the Moon. Then it will need to process the request then send it back to the ground. Also unlike low orbit satellites, you would need a considerably large transmitter to reach the moon. This means no satellite dish on your house but rather an actual large transmitter station, so you would still need a wired connection in your house to transmit the data to the station, beam it to the moon, process on the moon, transmit it back to the base station, then use good old land based network to transfer it to your house. You're looking at around - at minimum - 3 seconds (3000ms) of latency and you still require the ground infrastructure and network defeating the purpose of trying to move it to a different body in the solar system.

 

Oh, and there's also the problem with the moon not always being in the same position relative to the ground and not being able to have a connection to it at all times - unlike traditional satellites in geosynchronous orbit or an array of low orbit satellites (aka Starlink).

 

 

Wow!  You're no fun at all.

 

[kb5zue]

Is it true that in space no one can hear you scream?

[Spotty]

Just now, WereCatf said:

Well, even then, it'd make more sense to put it all on a ship that can be relocated as needed. I mean, if there was some sort of a catastrophe capable of destroying all life on Earth, it would likely also affect the Moon as well. Some sort of a spaceship could at least be sent on a lonely journey far away from both...

The moon could just be part of a complete backup solution. It could be our "regular"/"live" backup while we have another long term "cold" backup sent off to another galaxy or something. We already have that gold record with details of humanity and Earth on it floating around the galaxy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voyager_Golden_Record