science

224m radius from the previous comment equates to 1400m circumference. With a crossbrace of another 900m (assuming an X shape). And a bit of stuff in the middle to affix the solar collector arrays (which must be stationary).

For comparison, the ISS is 109m long.

I've seen a video (maybe it was Smarter Every Day?) about a research team experimenting with the effects and acclimation potential of small-radius coriolis stations. From what I remember we can get used to the centrifugal force well enough, even though experiencing coriolis forces across the length of your body is certainly an unusual situation.

Profitability is a huge problem regardless though. The ISS is getting destroyed by the end of the decade, and no replacement is seriously planned. The ISS was born in a geopolitical context of unprecedented international cooperation in the '90s, and that era is long gone. Unless China, the EU or US (lmao) wants to finance an ISS replacement all on their lonesome, not much will happen there for the foreseeable future. There's not a whole lot "because we can" budgets going around these days.

The scale required in order to avoid side effects of the Coriolis effect is huge. For example, the running scene in 2001 could never happen. He'd be constantly falling over.

The matierals science is actually the bigger hurdle than profitability - we'd need carbon nanotubes or similar to handle the tensile stress of a rotating structure that big, since conventional materials would literally tear themselves apart at the rotation speeds needed for 1g.