That is just a load of bs. Heat pumps do not operate efficiently at high temperatures, and they only add more heat to the circuit. You cannot generate energy from the temperature difference, because then you would slow heat transfer significantly while generating an insignificant amount of power.

It has already been calculated, and radiators are a really big issue for “space datacenters”. Even with our current cooling technology advancements. Server hardware needs to be kept at a cool temperature (ideally not higher than 50°C), and most importantly, it needs to be constant in spite of very variable hardware load. That is really difficult to manage in space, and an issue that needs to be considered even for our non datacenter satellites.

But even if cooling was trivial, space datacenters make absolutely no sense.

For starters, it wouldn’t be possible to put any server in the market up there. Chips are very vulnerable to the radiation in space, which is why space CPUs are stupidly expensive and way slower than earth CPUs. They need to use less efficient litographies, with very special shielding that isn’t commonly available. The sheer compute and memory density of our current servers would be impossible to properly shield, even if we ignore the cost. ECC RAM and ZFS pools for drives would very quickly stop protecting your server from errors, since the bit flips would be too common, and your computations would often be incorrect.

If you ignore both cooling and space radiation, you still have the issue of accesibility. Datacenters have people always coming and going, because hardware needs maintenance. Sometimes you want to upgrade the server, change the connections, add or remove hardware, and of course, you need to replace the parts that break over time. Hardware becomes old really quickly, especially for the compute intensive workloads that are planned for those “space datacenters”.

Datacenters are kept fast and competitive through constant upgrading of the parts. Compute intensive servers also churn through parts very quickly, because even at 50-60°C temps, keeping hardware at 100% utilization isn’t the best. This is further exhacerbated by temperature fluctuations, which can prematurely kill the silicon.

Like someone else mentioned in another comment, Microsoft already tried dumping containers with servers into the ocean, and putting wind turbines on top. That’s free cooling, very stable temperatures, and free energy. Even if it was a success in every measure, Microsoft dropped it because it wasn’t accessible enough, which made it unusable for any real usecase.

The truth is, datacenters are a market where cost is very important, and solutions are already very competitive. Putting a datacenter in orbit would be stupidly costly, even if you could fix all the issues mentioned. Free electricity does not offset those costs, and that’s without taking into account the cost of the rockets for putting the datacenters in orbit.

TL;DR: There are so many issues and extra costs, even when ignoring cooling, that make datacenters in space a stupid thing to even consider.

And before you say I’m not an engineer and I don’t know what I’m talking about, server infrastructure is my field. I’ve worked with datacenters, maintained server stacks and I myself have worked on those cost calculations. I know what I’m talking about.

It has a paywall tho

Yeahhh, I never understood that. It can’t be that difficult to make a circle tool, right?

To be honest, I don’t know how difficult it would really be, and I know it can be done with plugins. I also know it’s not a tool that you end up using that much with the more advanced workflows (I myself haven’t really needed it in a long time), but it would be nice if we had it.

Rar is proprietary, so you can’t freely implement it. Only the decompression code is freeware, and you have to implement it as is. The license includes clauses against reverse engineering and rewriting the code.

Microsoft could totally pay the fees, but you know how scummy they are.

7zip is good

Afaik (and I may be wrong), RAR is a proprietary format created by the guy who made winrar. Because of it, the compression/decompression libraries are licensed, and cannot be freely written. However, in order for the format to catch on, the developer released a freeware (free as in beer, not as in freedom) decompression library. That way, anyone can easily incorporate decompression code in their software, and thus, anyone can decompress a rar.

However, the code isn’t free to rewrite, so rar decompressors (at least those that don’t make a deal and pay money to winrar) are stuck with the same implementation of the rar decompressor. If that freeware code is slower than what winrar uses, winrar will always be faster.

Imho that’s a bit anti-competitive, and is what has kept me from ever using the RAR format. Especially now that we have way better formats (both in compression and features), like 7z.

To be fair, a lot of platforms just flag any encrypted archive file (not just rar) as malware. Their argument is that those files are commonly used to get past malware detection, which is kinda true. Still a pain for everyone who has a legitimate need for the feature.

Krita is mostly for digital artists and digital painting, while GIMP is more for image editing. They aren’t made for the same purpose, even though both can do simple stuff from both worlds.

Second one from the left is obvious slop. I’ve stopped there, but I haven’t seen anything in particular with the rest of them. They still trigger my vibe check detection of AI, but I couldn’t really tell you why. But after seeing just the second one be clearly AI, I don’t trust the rest.

Yeah now it’s as easy as copying a docker-compose file from the website and running docker-compose up -d. Easier even than Plex, imo.

Wait! Don’t forget to tell it not to make any mistakes! We don’t want another Nightmare-Eclipse moment.

I can’t speak about video, but with audio, the quality isn’t defined by the bitrate. Audio can have lossless compression (FLAC is an example), and the bitrate won’t matter because the original can always be recreated from the FLAC, regardless of its bitrate.

Audio quality is measured in sample rate and bit depth. The sample rate is the amount of samples of the audio wave per second. The bit depth is the amount of bits of information for each sample.

The most common audio quality is CD quality. It’s the quality you get from CD rips, and it’s already good enough that you won’t hear a difference above it. It is 44.1 kHz of sample rate, with 16 bits of depth. Also commonly represented as 16/44.1.

The second most common audio quality is 48kHz of sample rate, with 16 bits of depth (16/48).

In terms of sample rate, you can have: 44.1, 48, 96, 192 and 384 kHz. You can have higher numbers, but they’re impractical and I’ve never seen it even with mixing material.

In terms of bit depth, you can have: 16, 24 and 32 bits of depth. Again, more is possible but impractical and never used.

Any combination of those 2 is possible, and higher numbers will yield higher bitrate. As a rule of thumb, CD quality will be ~1000-1300kbps in FLAC.

That is already more than enough for anyone, and even though there are people that claim to be able to hear a difference between it and higher quality versions, I very much doubt them. Regardless, to even have a chance at distinguishing them, you’d need an expensive setup with expensive wired headphones and an expensive external DAC (wireless headphones use lossy compression to send the audio through bluetooth, so it makes no sense to worry about audio quality with those).

IT’s NoT goINg AwAY, yOu ARe gonNA bE lEfT BehInD YoU LuDDItE!!!

You don’t need to do that with jellyfin either. It includes the website for convenience, but you can just disable it or completely remove it and have just the server.

*1 bit

How about lowering prices?

So you’re one of those “just get a job” idiots…

Easiest console to hack, PS doesn’t give a damn about it. And it has a bunch of homebrew and runs emulators

This specific scraping defense is a tarpit, probably Nepenthes. It doesn’t specifically detect AI scrapers, but it’s designed to trap them into an infinite maze of pages with bogus data. AI scrapers keep clicking the links, waiting long times for the pages to load, and getting useless data that they can’t train on.

It is, it’s just that “th” encompasses many sounds. The th in “the” is þ, while the th in “father” is closer to ð. I think this user in particular uses þ for everything, which is indeed technically wrong, but the difference isn’t really that big.