Its a pretty neat idea. Microsoft did that (is doing?) a while back, but I question the practicality. If there is a hardware failure, swapping it out is going to be much more expensive if it requires a ship.
"In 2018, it deployed [the underwater datacenter] off the coast of Scotland, submerging 855 servers and leaving them underwater for just over two years. In that time, only six underwater servers became inoperable, compared with eight of the 135 servers left to run on dry land. That's a 0.7% subsea loss compared with a 5.9% loss on land."
dekhn•6mo ago
The way I interpret that statement, it suggests they need to improve their dry land environmental conditions, not put data centers in the ocean and then not fix machines.
lbhdc•6mo ago
https://news.microsoft.com/source/features/sustainability/pr...
mtmail•6mo ago
https://www.extremetech.com/computing/microsoft-confirms-the...
"In 2018, it deployed [the underwater datacenter] off the coast of Scotland, submerging 855 servers and leaving them underwater for just over two years. In that time, only six underwater servers became inoperable, compared with eight of the 135 servers left to run on dry land. That's a 0.7% subsea loss compared with a 5.9% loss on land."
dekhn•6mo ago
fsflover•6mo ago
Not anymore: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44609305