Slashdot Mirror
Google Patents Shipping-Container Data Centers
theodp writes "Two years ago, Robert X. Cringely wrote that Google was experimenting with portable data centers built in standard shipping containers. The idea, Cringely explained, wasn't new and wasn't even Google's, backing up his claim with a link to an Internet-Archive-in-a-Shipping-Container presentation (PDF, dated 11-8-2003) that was reportedly pitched to Larry Page. Google filed for a patent on essentially the same concept on 12-30-2003. And on Tuesday, the USPTO issued the search giant a patent for Modular Data Centers housed in shipping containers, which Google curiously notes facilitate 'rapid and easy relocation to another site depending on changing economic factors'. That's a statement that may make those tax-abating NC officials a tad uneasy."
This doesn't look good for Sun's Blackbox project.
That's not going to make Sun very happy.
you had me at #!
I know this popped into lots of peoples' minds, but...
Could someone please remind me how patenting something obvious is not evil?
Basically it reduces the freedom of all law-abiding citizens to do something that's fairly obvious.
I wouldn't mind driving off with 5000 Opteron processors. Seriously, there's a downside to portability.
So if I have a bunch of servers in a trailer and an ethernet cable sticking out of the door, I'm violating this patent?
I'm sorry, but white trash nerds have been doing this for a long time.
"If you are a dreamer, a wisher, a liar, A hope-er, a pray-er, a magic bean buyer
1967: in the event of nuclear war, arpanet will route around damaged nodes, so that communication remains uninterrupted. nothing can stop us now
1987: first worm made. internet communication not guaranteed anymore
2007: in the event of communication problems, one of the world's most powerful companies will mobilize their TPT (trail park technology) army
2027: warhol virus takes out entire web, needs to rebuilt from scratch with ipv8
2047: in the event of worldwide internet outage, GoogleMicrosoftApple will deploy nuclear warheads to silence virus spewing nodes. the circle is complete
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
The military has been building and using that concept for decades. Portable satellite ground stations, portable phone switches, portable power generation, portable communication centers, portable damned near anything else you can think of that would be needed in a theater of operation. All built in a container like structure for easy transportation via land, sea and/or air.
I worked in one such container that housed a full Digital Subscriber Terminal Equipment (DSTE) suite with a second container of backup equipment while Saudi Arabia in 1986. (oops, that really showed my age.)
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, For you are crunchy and go well with ketchup.
Considering the rapid advance of technology, anything that's stood in one place for more than a year or two at most is probably not worth moving. A new one would prove cheaper, faster, at least double the capacity, and all within the same energy budget, or less -- which is what I expect will be the controlling factor for all new data centers.
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Back in the late 70's I worked with Marine Air Group 24 over at K-Bay, HI and the group's data center was contained in two big metal containers each about the size of a small semi-trailer - when they needed to move they popped them on a trailer, shoved them in the back of a plane, or whatever.
Each data center was made up of a Univac 1218 processor, an online card reader-punch unit, a drum printer, and a bunch of tape drives.
Seems like the same concept to me.
MOBIDIC was one such project and was a part of Operation FRELOC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOBIDIC
I read Slashdot for the headlines, because the headlines, unlike the articles, are usually original and never duplicated
If Google wanted to keep from being attacked by another party for using this idea, they could simply (and cheaply!) publish an article describing every facet of the idea the patent application covers (which, after all, is what happens when you file a patent application; when the patent is granted, the idea is published).
Publication of the idea makes it unpatentable "prior art;" once published, the idea can never be patented by anyone. So, if Google's intent were strictly defensive, to prevent someone else from patenting the idea and using it against them, publication would suffice. Thus, the idea that they are "merely protecting themselves" is a bit less persuasive. Of course, there are other reasons for patenting something; looks good on the resume, provides ammunition for cross-licensing battles, and so on, but most of them involve "offense" rather than "defense."
This is not to say that Google has evil intent, just to point out that preemptively patenting something isn't the only way to avoid patent exposure.
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."