Slashdot Mirror


The Google Navy

theodp writes "Is Google preparing to launch its own Navy? In its just-published application for a patent on the Water-Based Data Center, Google envisions a world where 'computing centers are located on a ship or ships, which are then anchored in a water body from which energy from natural motion of the water may be captured, and turned into electricity and/or pumping power for cooling pumps to carry heat away from computers in the data center.' And you thought The Onion was joking when it reported on Google's Fleet of Naval Warships!"

259 comments

  1. Cooling by Uglypug · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Very good idea from a cooling point of view I suppose, the a/c bills for a big datacenter can be huge. But enough to offset the cost of operating an entire ship..?

    1. Re:Cooling by chasingsol · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Add to that wave power, custom built ships just for this purpose anchored in place, fiber connection to the mainland and it may well prove to be cheaper over the long term than a land-based air conditioned building that requires lots of power. Air conditioning is a huge part of the long term cost of a datacenter, using water cooling with abundant supplies of water seems like a very green way of doing things.

    2. Re:Cooling by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 1

      Yes, talk about a new generation of water cooling!

    3. Re:Cooling by silentbozo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not to mention that there's no property tax (being taxed to occupy real estate), if the local business or economic climate goes bad you can pick up and be towed to a different location, and you can always add more units if demand increases. The one problem I see is pirates. No, seriously - you anchor one of these away from an area patrolled by a decent navy/coast guard, and I can see someone paying you a visit late one night to haul away equipment...

    4. Re:Cooling by nategoose · · Score: 5, Funny

      Google Earth sees the pirates before they get close. I'm not sure what Google Boat does then, but it may involve ninjas.

    5. Re:Cooling by Bluecobra · · Score: 1

      Pirates? I would be more afraid of oceanographers.

      Vladimir Wolodarsky: Steve, one of the interns just fell down the stairs with the main tracking processor.
      Steve Zissou: All right, just make sure we steal the backup.

    6. Re:Cooling by Venik · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Russia's "Bazalt" naval weapons manufacturer recently proposed arming commercial vessels with automatic grenade launchers to deter pirates. There is an idea for Google! They can start with grenades and later upgrade to anti-ship missiles. Or just build an aircraft carrier and save on future operating costs and upgrades :)

    7. Re:Cooling by andrikos · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or just patrolling sharks with mounted lasers!

    8. Re:Cooling by soren42 · · Score: 1

      The problem will be global warming... talk about a way to increase oceanic temperatures and melt the polar ice caps!

      Google - bad for the environment.... I never thought I'd see the day...

      --

      "Adventure? Excitement? A Jedi craves not these things."
    9. Re:Cooling by __aaqvdr516 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Having served on a Navy ship I can point out a few problems:

      First, sea water temperatures vary greatly depending on the part of the world you're operating in. It's not uncommon for surface sea water temps to be in the 85F(30C)+ range for most areas where you're likely to moor a ship. The AC units that we used were barely able to keep the small server room that I ran cool under those conditions.

      Second, the motion of the ship caused premature drive failures due to the pitch and roll of the ship. This could be alleviated with solid state drives, but that's a bit off for a data center at the moment.

      Lastly, bandwidth and latency are problematic. Sure, Google could just buy a satellite, but they can't modify the 2000ms latency. Depending on ship size and sea conditions, keeping a satellite lock may be an issue as well due to roll.

      All I can really say to Google is, good luck with all that!

    10. Re:Cooling by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      I'm assuming Google would go more with a barge and less with a ship. The barge is going to be a bit more stable (although there will still be pitch and roll) and there would be a fiber umbilical connecting the barge to land (no satellite).

    11. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      somehow you think that it won't pollute the area that it is in?

      remember that heat can be considered pollution as well.

      i live close to San Onofre nuclear power plant, and the hot discharge from the plant has completely changed the flora and fauna along that section of the coast.

    12. Re:Cooling by DuctTape · · Score: 4, Funny

      Google Earth sees the pirates before they get close. I'm not sure what Google Boat does then, but it may involve ninjas.

      Ahem... that would be Google Ninjas(TM).

      ... but they're still in beta.

      DT

      --
      Is this thing on? Hello?
    13. Re:Cooling by Doctor+Morbius · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If the energy to power the data center comes from fossil fuels then it wouldn't matter whether it was located on land or on the ocean. The same amount of heating would occur. If they wind up using wave, solar and wind power to provide power to the oceanic data center then there would be no net increase in warming. Not only that but the oceanic data center powered by green power would reduce demand on the local power grid in a city. Using cold sea water to cool the equipment is far more efficient than using AC.

      --
      If I disagree with you it's because you are wrong.
    14. Re:Cooling by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 1
    15. Re:Cooling by Nimey · · Score: 1

      Bah. I could see a national government claiming that the ships are inside their territorial waters and therefore owe some sort of tax.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    16. Re:Cooling by Miseph · · Score: 1

      I think it can be fairly said that the heat generated by a datacenter, no matter how large or powerful, probably just doesn't compare to the heat generated by sustained nuclear fission.

      --
      Try not to take me more seriously than I take myself.
    17. Re:Cooling by Molochi · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's unpossible. More pirates would cause a corresponding drop in global climate temperature.

      Ramen.

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    18. Re:Cooling by ctetc007 · · Score: 1

      Last year it was reported that pirate attacks rose by 14%

      Does this mean that we should soon see a lowering of the global average temperature?

    19. Re:Cooling by Molochi · · Score: 1

      It'll probably be less of a ship and more of a stabilized floating platform, like an oil rig, if they plan to use "wave power". But cooling would be more efficient off the coast of California, Northern Europe, and Japan than places with bathwater seas like India.

      --
      "The Adobe Updater must update itself before it can check for updates. Would you like to update the Adobe Updater now?"
    20. Re:Cooling by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

      Google® Mercenaries (beta)?

    21. Re:Cooling by kdemetter · · Score: 1

      Water serves as a buffer , it can take in a lot of heat.

      I don't think a few datacenters in the ocean is going to make any difference. When exposed to air it's the same amount anyway. And if they can save on energy this way , it will probably reduce pollution in the long run.

    22. Re:Cooling by ctetc007 · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Also, powering the data center using tidal power would be taking energy out of the ocean. While the water cooling would be dumping energy back into the ocean, it will be dumping in less energy than was taken out, so there should actually be a net cooling of the ocean.

    23. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Im so down. I just got out of the navy. Hook me up google I needz a j-o-b!

    24. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The one problem I see is pirates. No, seriously - you anchor one of these away from an area patrolled by a decent navy/coast guard, and I can see someone paying you a visit late one night to haul away equipment...

      The weak link would be the fiber cable. They'll start getting blackmailed into pay for "protection" against it getting cut.

    25. Re:Cooling by Tailsfan · · Score: 1

      Who the fudge would wantr to steal data. and fiber optics. how about a Google Sat(TM) to use its Google Beam (TM) to Google Transmit (TM) its Google data (TM)

    26. Re:Cooling by StarfishOne · · Score: 1

      You don't want to mess with those. They've got spiders that will ultimately find you, no matter what your URL is.

    27. Re:Cooling by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Have you considered mounting the drives vertically, with the axis pointing along the ship's longitudinal axis? I imagine that 7200 or 10,000 RPM disks would have quite a bit of precession, so maybe mounting them such that the axis with the greater perturbation is the same as the disk's axis would mitigate that a little.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    28. Re:Cooling by BraksDad · · Score: 1

      Protection is the first thing a government is responsible for.

      That is what the taxes are supposed to pay for, not health care.

      Ditch the taxes and you are on your own.

      --
      Slowly waving my hand - "This is not the sig you are looking for."
    29. Re:Cooling by BraksDad · · Score: 1

      The navy ship probably devoted a lot of its resources to things other than data center AC. Divert some of that power to the HVAC units and I think the power issue is gone.

      Navy ships use surface water for cooling because the sea trunks need to be on the side of a mobile vessel. A google server boat could get the coolant from 200' below the surface where temps are a bit more condusive to cooling.

      The latency could be solved with cables instead of satelites, but I agree in general that it is a technical and physical issue. keeping a lock on a satelite is only a technical issue and surely solvable.

      A server boat would not need a round bottom with a pointy front for skimming along the surface at 30 knots so... pitch and roll issues should be solvable with a design more comparable to a off shore oil platform.

      The comparison should be with the oil platforms, not a USN Frigate.

      --
      Slowly waving my hand - "This is not the sig you are looking for."
    30. Re:Cooling by mrsteveman1 · · Score: 1

      You can do the same thing by building a datacenter near water. You don't get the wave motion stuff but you would get the ability to use seawater as coolant.

    31. Re:Cooling by zunicron · · Score: 1

      It would warm up the ocean drastically and help global warming. Notify Al.

    32. Re:Cooling by aurispector · · Score: 1

      The other side of the coin is regulation. If they moor outside national territorial waters, they could set up a data haven free from any government interference. Kinakuta anyone?

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    33. Re:Cooling by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Funny

      "Ahem...that would be Google Ninjas(TM)....but they're still in beta"

      Ahem...that would be Google Grasshoppers(TM).

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    34. Re:Cooling by __aaqvdr516 · · Score: 1
      Actually my experience stems from submarines.

      I wasn't making an apples to apples comparison, simply pointing out a few problems that your average landlubber may not consider.

    35. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Ask and you shall receive

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7329799.stm

      Blessed be the Noodly One in all his glory.

    36. Re:Cooling by eonlabs · · Score: 0

      So still better quality than Microsoft Ninjas (TM) Release SP2? (aka, beta)

      --
      I wouldn't consider the mad hatter mad. Just reality impaired. He sure can make a mean cup of tea.
    37. Re:Cooling by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      What happens if it sinks?

      Thats one expensive chunk of ice.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    38. Re:Cooling by Kz · · Score: 1

      tidal power isn't thermal energy.

      a massive use of tidal energy doesn't cool the oceans, the effect would be slowing earth's rotation. i don't know how to calculate the effect; but i would bet even turning all of the world's energy production to tidal wouldn't have any effect perceptible without atomic clocks and quasar-based astrometry.

      --
      -Kz-
    39. Re:Cooling by jimdread · · Score: 1

      So the navy already has data centers mounted in ships, cooled by the ocean. That sounds like prior art to me. Sorry Google, no patent for you.

    40. Re:Cooling by Fourier404 · · Score: 1

      Except they have to connect to a mainland internet company, through whom the government can regulate what data enters and leaves google navy.

    41. Re:Cooling by gazita123 · · Score: 1

      Enron had something like this back in the day. It was a barge that was anchored in a port town on the Pacific in Guatemala which was connected to the grid by a handful of large power cables. It powered about half of the grid of the country, and was able to be removed quickly in case of civil unrest.

    42. Re:Cooling by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      Correct,
      that's where Ninjas, trained in the art of Google-Fu jump in.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    43. Re:Cooling by pseudochaos · · Score: 0

      So I'm curious: Where would I submit a resumé to join a merry band of pirates?

      --
      "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." - Aristotle
    44. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is pirates a problem?
      Them coming will help the cooling of data centers, right?

    45. Re:Cooling by BraksDad · · Score: 1

      6 years USS Longbeach CGN-9 for me.

      Thanks for your service.

      --
      Slowly waving my hand - "This is not the sig you are looking for."
    46. Re:Cooling by rjames13 · · Score: 1

      Wait are you saying that if I google for britney spears pictures then the earth will spin down?

    47. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OH, so i can just use a magnifying glass on them then?

      Google Google Google... best fix that bug there, that's a really nasty one.

    48. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but see, as soon as those guys get onto ground, the Ninjas are screwed because Google refuses to update them to work with Ground.

    49. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, direct water cooling is/could be very bad. If you pump this kind of heat into the deep ocean, it's worse than warming the surface waters by the same amount. More likely to interfere with the deep current flows that depend on salinity and temperature.

    50. Re:Cooling by aurispector · · Score: 1

      Looking to the future, a long-ranged wireless and/or satellite based ISP could negate all that.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    51. Re:Cooling by jonnyt886 · · Score: 1

      You weren't trying to imply that this could have an impact, were you? Your argument is logical, but the ocean is warmed by the sun. Depending on the number of boats Google would plan to deploy, I very much doubt this net cooling effect would make any difference to the temperature of the ocean in the long run (changes in ocean currents and other such phenomena will have a much more lasting impact). At least, no more so than in existing ships, that use water cooling systems in their engines.

    52. Re:Cooling by cyngus · · Score: 1

      What you're talking about are all solvable problems, and pretty simple ones at that.

      Warm surface water? There's nothing to say that water for cooling has to be taken from the surface.

      Premature drive failure from gentle rocking? Really? You need pretty sudden motions to really cause a drive harm. I have a hard time buying this, salt in the air would be a more likely culprit, but then the air just needs to be filtered. If rocking really is an issue, just design your data center room or racks to essentially float within the ship to reduce motion of the drives themselves. Some of the systems for constructing buildings in earthquake zones are probably relevant here.

      Bandwidth latency? Weak sauce on your part if this seems like an issue to you. Just connect to undersea cables. Hey, isn't Google partnering in a trans-Pacific cable venture...

    53. Re:Cooling by mrwolf007 · · Score: 1

      And i allways thought the fsm cultists were joking when they said pirates reduce co2 emissions, but in this case ....

    54. Re:Cooling by ctetc007 · · Score: 1

      Realistic impact, no. I was going more along the lines that we wouldn't be contributing to global warming, and to an infinitesimal degree, helping reduce it. On the point of existing ships that use water cooling systems in their engines, those systems are still causing a net heating because the heat produced by the engines came from energy given off from burning fossil fuels, not using mechanical energy from the ocean.

    55. Re:Cooling by Fourier404 · · Score: 1

      At some point data has to enter my house, be it through a cable buried in US territory, or via radio waves traveling through US airspace, so no matter how much long range wireless equipment and satellites google gets their hands on, the government still has the power to regulate (to some extent) what I get to see as long as I'm living in the country. I'm not saying it's a good thing, it's just a fact.

    56. Re:Cooling by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Well, there was an article about that Google Sattelite being launched not long ago... so maybe Google Orbital Death Beam?

    57. Re:Cooling by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Or just build an aircraft carrier and save on future operating costs and upgrades

      Yes, but will it run MapReduce?

    58. Re:Cooling by aurispector · · Score: 1

      Yep. They could always just jam a wireless signal, too. No way around it.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    59. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe that will counter global warming!

    60. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    61. Re:Cooling by starrsoft · · Score: 1

      Nothing appreciable.

      --
      Read my blog: HansMast.com
    62. Re:Cooling by Keith_Beef · · Score: 1

      Sealand.

      K.

    63. Re:Cooling by __aaqvdr516 · · Score: 1

      And thanks for yours! 4.5 years USS Miami (SSN-755) 3.5 years Charleston Prototype 1.5 years USS Providence (SSN-719)

    64. Re:Cooling by BraksDad · · Score: 1

      What model Star Car?

      --
      Slowly waving my hand - "This is not the sig you are looking for."
    65. Re:Cooling by BraksDad · · Score: 1

      What I do not really understand about the plan is that they are putting the boats in national waters 12 miles. Would that not put them within the protection of the nation in question? That would lead me to believe taxes would quickly follow any plan to profit from that.

      How do oil wells manage that aspect when they are in national waters?

      --
      Slowly waving my hand - "This is not the sig you are looking for."
  2. Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Adambomb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Now focus on that apart from the fact that it would also allow them to shift the jurisdiction of their operations when laws change in specific regions.

    Hell, fill them with enough guns and they could just put them in international waters. If any of these are launched, shall we start the pool on how long until the "Google fighting Piracy" joke headlines?

    --
    Ice Cream has no bones.
    1. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by e2d2 · · Score: 1

      Google could never bring enough might to bear to claim complete and utter isolation from national laws just by motoring into international waters. Any country with might would simply seize control if provoked. It's really hard to fall back on "law" when you are facing the very same people that write them.

    2. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by SUB7IME · · Score: 1

      I think he means to defend the ship vs actual ocean pirates, not sovereign powers.

    3. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Adambomb · · Score: 1

      Yes, but they can still up-anchor and leave the current port of call when it becomes obvious that the current locations laws are not as amenable as somewhere else (taking into account cost of moving the ship of course). For international waters, i dont see them thumbing their noses at any super powers but they can avoid quite a bit of red-tape (sometimes justified red-tape) by stationing in international waters.

      As long as they dont step on big toes, then the worst they have to worry about would be actual piracy. Course, I doubt they'd be positioning these near the phillipines or anything like that. For fun with forward thinking, keep in mind that "We employ N% of your population and provide M% of your GDP" is a powerful leveraging point that google could theoretically use if they got massive enough.

      Heres hoping Google isn't to be zOrg of the future.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    4. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Hell, fill them with enough guns and they could just put them in international waters.

      That's one long fiber-optic cord you are proposing. Somehow I doubt people would put up with satellite's latency.

    5. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Sovereign powers have a long history of piracy, amongst other things.

    6. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by hedwards · · Score: 1

      Or they could just anchor out in international waters and not be under anybody's jurisdiction. The only fuzzy bit would be where the cables connected to, but if they anchored in the right spot, they could probably connect to several nations simultaneously.

    7. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Adambomb · · Score: 1

      Depends on the distance and the location. Could always work out a series of GoogleBuoys with permanent landlines as underwater cable that they alternate between. or perhaps a high power microwave bridge in a region where theres little issue with native fauna.

      Just because the direct land->ship link is what they're describing doesn't mean it's the only option.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    8. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Adambomb · · Score: 1

      So:

      Hell, fill them with enough guns and they could just put them in international waters.

      That and..

      Could always work out a series of GoogleBuoys with permanent landlines as underwater cable that they alternate between

      I hear ya. ... well.. read ya.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    9. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Adambomb · · Score: 2, Funny

      Ohhhh the year was 1778

      How i wish i was in sherbrooke nowwww.

      A letter of marque came from the king for the scummiest vessel i'd ever seen!

      wait ... Topic....

      True but government sanction piracy would have to consist of smaller forces to maintain plausible deniability. The kind of piracy you're describing is the kind i can see getting it's ass kicked if google hired a security force with the kind of revenue they'd have to be making to justify these kinds of ships to begin with.

      The only question after that would be when it becomes profitable to do so despite considering those costs.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    10. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by SEE · · Score: 1

      International waters?

      International waters are not free of the jurisdiction of governments; they are free of the exclusive jurisdiction of any one government, which is very different.

      Either you're on a flagged vessel, or you're not. If you're flagged, you're subject to the laws of the country where you're registered. If you're flagless, you are subject to arbitrary boarding by any country that decides to do so. (And if you change flags according to convenience, you're legally flagless.)

    11. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Anubis350 · · Score: 1

      "Goddamn them all, I was told we sail the seas for american gold"? All things considered might be true, what's more valuable than information if you have the tools to use it /btw, that's one of my favorite songs

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    12. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    13. Re:Hey everyone they're GREEN! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google should just buy some depleted oil rigs
      and setup the hardware and crew there.

      Old non-moveable oil rigs should be "cheap" to buy and would be suitable since its possible to find rigs located in international waters.

  3. A better name for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The motion of the ocean ;-)

    1. Re:A better name for it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I joined the navy,
      to see the world,
      but what did I see,
      lots of porn.

  4. More reason? by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

    Is there more than just being eco-friendly to this? I can see this being used to avoid taxes, censorship laws, etc.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:More reason? by cryptodan · · Score: 1

      Is there more than just being eco-friendly to this? I can see this being used to avoid taxes, censorship laws, etc.

      Theyd have to be located 12nm from any shore to be in international waters.

    2. Re:More reason? by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but if these boats are movable Google can easily say: Let us do *insert thing here* or we will move to *insert country here* that will let us do that and you lose our tax dollars.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    3. Re:More reason? by xednieht · · Score: 1

      Eh semantics really. Taxes would be replaced by patent royalty fees, censorship by terms of service - the violation of which would invalidate the license to float... etc....

      --

      Hope is the currency of fools
    4. Re:More reason? by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      But Google won't have to pay patent fees in international jurisdiction and Google wants to fight censorship as much as the average /.er, it makes ads better.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    5. Re:More reason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      No problem, 120 angstrom is a really really short distance.

    6. Re:More reason? by maxume · · Score: 1

      I would just start taxing bandwidth.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    7. Re:More reason? by sakdoctor · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think they can manage 12 nano meters

    8. Re:More reason? by The+Second+Horseman · · Score: 1

      Oh, I think they'll be more likely to attempt to avoid taxes than censorship. Based on past performance.

    9. Re:More reason? by cryptodan · · Score: 1

      I think they can manage 12 nano meters

      NM = Nautical Miles.

    10. Re:More reason? by superphreak · · Score: 1

      I thought part of the point was avoiding tax dollars...?

      --
      Evolution is a state-sponsored, state-protected religion.
    11. Re:More reason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woosh...

    12. Re:More reason? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i hope you mean nautical miles(knot) not nano meters(nm).

    13. Re:More reason? by BarefootClown · · Score: 1

      Oh, I think they'll be more likely to attempt to avoid taxes than censorship. Based on past performance.

      Good on them! A little competition is good for all involved.

      --

      "Make it ten--I am only a poor corrupt official."
      --Captain Louis Renault (Claude Rains), Casablanca

    14. Re:More reason? by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      Is there more than just being eco-friendly to this? I can see this being used to avoid taxes, censorship laws, etc.

      Theyd have to be located 12nm from any shore to be in international waters.

      Twelve nanometres? Thats not too bad.

    15. Re:More reason? by oiron · · Score: 1

      Well, you'd have to take quantum effects into account, I guess. That's nearly atomic size

  5. Isn't that bad for electronics? by bigtallmofo · · Score: 5, Informative

    Google envisions a world where 'computing centers are located on a ship or ships

    My father-in-law worked as a linesman for AT&T about 30 years at a beach town in southern New Jersey. He told me that they had to replace electrnoic components almost twice as quickly as more inland areas because of the more corrosive saltwater air.

    If this is a real effect, I imagine that it will be difficult to prevent on a ship in the ocean.

    --
    I'm a big tall mofo.
    1. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by the_womble · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Computers can go in a matter of months in a location really close to the sea.

      On the other hand, I know people, in the town I have just moved to, who live only tens of meters from the sea who have had no problems - but they have a massive rampart between them and the sea that (I think) blocks the spray.

      Ships are going to be tricky but designs meant to keep salt spray out may be workable.

    2. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Mad+Merlin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I doubt Google cares, they throw away any servers older than 3 years or so (dead or not).

    3. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WIth technological advances in today's environmental control systems I'm sure corrosive atmospheric compounds can be sifted out of enclosed spaces.

    4. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its not a real effect. :p

    5. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      [citation needed]

    6. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by rtaylor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Google datacenters are pretty much disposable today. Build it once, run it for X years, then dump the entire thing. Repairs are less and less useful.

      Each rack could be an independently sealed bubble (airtight) with a few wires coming out the top for power and network connectivity, then hang the entire rack into a flooded compartment of the boat -- say a catamaran with a protective mesh bottom.

      With cooling requirements taken care of, powering the computers becomes quite a bit easier.

      --
      Rod Taylor
    7. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by barzok · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ships are going to be tricky but designs meant to keep salt spray out may be workable.

      It's not like the US Navy, every cruise line, and countless shipbuilders haven't ever put a computer on a seagoing vessel before.

      "May be workable"? I'd say it's been solved many times over.

    8. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by maxume · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Navy isn't comparing the costs of those computers to computers in a data center somewhere on land.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    9. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by jack2000 · · Score: 0

      Why? They can seal the datacenters airtight, nothing is going in or out of that room... Except the cables that is...

    10. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      That's possible, but that's definitely something which can be dealt with.

      If that were really that kind of a problem, the Navy would have real issues. Just seal up the room and clean the air when people go in. Cooling isn't an issue because they'd be doing water cooling anyways, and that's through sealed piping.

      It would probably cost less than what it currently costs to keep the temperature down. More likely than not doing all that would be overkill anyways.

    11. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a real effect, however, on a boat it may actually be feasible to watercool an entire data center. And once you do that you can simply pump all the air out of the room or replace it with something that isn't as corrosive as air (strait nitrogen comes to mind, bonus that it eliminates the possibility of fires). The real trick would be keeping the water filters clean. But considering some of the problems google has solved I'm not really worried about this one.

      But you're right, if they end up sticking with air cooling keeping the air filters that keep corrosion away clean will be difficult.

    12. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Ex-MislTech · · Score: 1

      Bizarre idea I had was to seal the data center on the ship,
      and have the equivalent of decontamination chambers to enter
      the room.

      Then lower a deep sea intake line down to where the water is
      about 5 degree celsius, and pumps it in to heat exchangers
      to cool the server room.

      I used to work on heat exchangers when I worked on RADAR in
      the Navy, we used it to cool our RADAR but we didn't go for
      the deep much colder water.

      In theory the server room could be devoid of oxygen so oxidation
      of contacts could not take place, and give the server techs
      small oxygen tanks and masks to work like the small walk
      around device that emphysema patients use.

      Could make it a sterile environment that could make the servers
      actually last longer.

      On US Navy warships special door seals were used so that ships
      would not sink if they had a hole blowing the side of them just
      like the Cole in Yemen.

      It had a huge hole, but did not sink due to these door seals.

      Shifting the fuel storage tanks levels kept the Cole mostly vertical.

      For power they could mount Wind Turbines and Solar Panels on
      Main Deck and even use them for shade on Main Deck.

      If they Anchored out in a strong current like the Florida
      Current they could tap it by lower Aquanators over the side.

      http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/26/1096137100758.html?oneclick=true

      The Florida Straits alone has about 30 times the flow of
      all the rivers of the world combined.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_stream#Normal_behavior_of_the_Gulf_Stream

      --
      google "32 trillion offshore needs IRS attention"
    13. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would presume there is a way to run incoming air through filters or some such to remove the salt. You'd need an airtight ship though in order for that to work.

    14. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong.

      They use every single freaking box they deploy until they implode. That's why they have half a million of them and systems in place that can scale their data and algorithms automatically (GFS, BigTable and MapReduce).

    15. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1

      With cooling requirements taken care of

      Except they aren't - you're going to need a hell of a lot more surface (heat exchange) area than what your 'bubble' will provide.

    16. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by the_womble · · Score: 1

      It's not like the US Navy, every cruise line, and countless shipbuilders haven't ever put a computer on a seagoing vessel before.

      Not to mention every other navy in the world! true, and I am sure it is technically possible. However, doing whatever they do to protect electronics for sea water might be too expensive do to for a whole data centre for it to be economically feasible.

    17. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by tomhath · · Score: 1

      Computers not only work on ships where there's spray, they work on submarines under the water!

    18. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by barzok · · Score: 1

      There's no spray on a sub.

    19. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That does sound reasonable, given that most vendors do three year on-site-service deals, and it's not like Google don't have enough money to throw on the problem.

      I imagine cooling and power are the constraining factors for their data centers, not server price.

      Captcha: "bloated".. Well, that was obvious, wasn't it?

    20. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by acb · · Score: 1

      Besides which, huge data centres like Google's swap out and junk dead components all the time. If conditions cause component lifespans to be halved, I'm sure Google's cost/benefit analysis will have factored this in.

      Perhaps if they put the ships in the middle of the Pacific and have some kind of cargo docking facility, shipping replacements in from China will cost less.

    21. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Before the breakup AT&T had something like the 5th largest navy in the world.

    22. Re:Isn't that bad for electronics? by starrsoft · · Score: 1

      No, citation not needed. I can think of several computer systems ruggedized for salt water spray off the top of my head. The AEGIS combat system is one of the most advanced computer systems in the world on a ship. If you remember in Red Storm Rising, in the sneak attack on Iceland, many of the Soviet SAMs' computerized guidance systems got ruined because they were the land variant instead of the ruggedized-against-salt-water naval variant. I'm sure many more examples can be found.

      It's common knowledge that complex computer systems are used every day on USN, cruises, oil tankers, cargo ships, etc, etc, just like the grandparent said. It's like asking for a citation that Obama is the Dem's nominee.

      --
      Read my blog: HansMast.com
  6. SS Google by escay · · Score: 3, Interesting

    are these going to be stationed more than 12 nautical miles away from the coast? 'cause, you know, then they wouldn't be under US jurisdiction.

    1. Re:SS Google by hedwards · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Sigh, I really wish people would stop with this meme. Compared to a lot of other countries, we're not that bad. I mean try posting history lessons about WWII in Europe or Japan. Or anything which isn't particularly flattering to the government in China. I'm sure that's not even a comprehensive list.

      But, the suggestion that the US is worse than other countries, is naive at best. Realistically, the US government just gets more focus than other nations do.

    2. Re:SS Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the 12 miles boundary defined by the Law of the Sea, which the US has *not* signed up to?

    3. Re:SS Google by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      It does not matter if the US has signed the Law of the Sea treaty or not. They would just break it or bend it until it is was unrecognizable as they usually do.

    4. Re:SS Google by kestasjk · · Score: 1

      This must be some kind of karma whoring bot?

      --
      // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    5. Re:SS Google by Adambomb · · Score: 2, Insightful

      First off, you're exactly right that compared to many many countries, America is not THAT bad. Also, you're exactly right that the reason the US receives so much focus is the fact that America has been a huge influence on the world at large this past century or so.

      What saddens me is America used to be a place that believed in certain values as being sacrosanct and would fight to the death to defend those values. The americans at those times would follow their values regardless of what was thought of them or how it compared to other countries. It's sad to see that giving way to the apathy of "at least better than the worst".

      Comparing your achievements to your goals is the only metric worth having. Comparing your achievements to the achievements of others is the beginning of the path to obscurity.

      Basically, ever since vietnam america has backpedaled from the original ideals to a state of doing just enough to still be considered good while doing anything possible to reach the desired goals. Many people like to blame Bush for the current state of american foreign policy and corporate/environmental policies but the seeds of this began way back spanning both sides. The democrats slowly degenerated into nanny-statists and the republicans seems to have shifted to a complete opposite of the original states-rights conservatives where they want a monolithic powerful executive branch.

      On the plus side though, the way america is arranged this can always change again. This is exactly because certain atrocities are still impossible within america and certain liberties are available that are not available in all other countries.

      I'm glad the founding fathers had ink though, at least that can keep people fighting against the more ridiculous of interpretations or even downright ignoring of the constitution. Obviously i'm not american myself, although i have lived there about as long as i've lived here in canada overall so i think i have a pretty good picture of the kinds of mindsets exist in new england, maryland, and colorado at least.

      Please note that with the generalizations concerning political parties, I'm only meaning that they seem that way >51%. There are always exceptions.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
    6. Re:SS Google by jopsen · · Score: 1

      That was my first thought too...
      1) Built very large ship
      2) Sink it in international waters
      3) Declare it a new nation and get Google fans to defend it...
      4) Stop giving a **** about US and European privacy laws.

      I guess step 2-3 could be skipped, but really wouldn't the courts block their domain if they seriously did not comply with court orders?

      And if that's not the case why in the world would you want a floating datacenter? The connection has got to be unstable, yes they could probably do with downtime since they have everything 2-3 times different places...
      But really... Wouldn't it be better to use the heat from the datacenter to generate power?

    7. Re:SS Google by CodeBuster · · Score: 1

      In practice US jurisdiction extends to anywhere our carrier battle groups are. If you want to plant your flag somewhere on this earth then you have to be able to defend it as well, because governments hate competition. Did the shool bully stop at the edge or his lawn when you were thumbing your nose at him on the other side or did he cross the street and kick your butt?

    8. Re:SS Google by jabithew · · Score: 1

      Be careful when swinging around allegations about Europe. I can't think of any large, western European country subject to revisionism (unless you're a holocaust denier, in which case I'd class you as the revisionist). In Britain if anything our history lessons are more an extended rant on how crappy we were to everyone else and ourselves.

      This is the continent with the Netherlands and Scandinavia on it, remember. While Britain, France and Germany have their foibles, you don't get anything like you get with Japan and WWII.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    9. Re:SS Google by IanHurst · · Score: 1

      "Basically, ever since vietnam america has backpedaled from the original ideals to a state of doing just enough to still be considered good while doing anything possible to reach the desired goals."

      Oh nonsense. To believe that you have to ignore the entire history of the United States. From the moment this country was conceived, we've justified violence against our neighbors with the same axiom: that our way of life is better than yours.

      Where you go wrong is ignoring this basic fact. Just about every war in American history - and there have been a fuck of a lot of them - can be traced back to this same idea. Our way is better.

      The idea that we used to just leave people alone is complete bullshit. The only people we've ever "left alone" fall in to three categories: (1) people who live just about exactly like us, (2) people who're strong enough to thoroughly deter us, or (3) people who make us enough money that we look the other way.

      If that sounds terrible to you, here's a bigger shock: it works. That's either the worst or the best part, depending on your morals - that we can keep doing this and it keeps working. Listen up rising powers (seriously): We got here by fighting for the principle of "our way is better", and that principle has generally been right.

    10. Re:SS Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, unless they were U.S. Flagged ships. But more likely it will be the usual suspects like Liberia, Panama and Bolivia.

      Time to re-read Cryptonomicon. I forget if this is just stealing Neal Stephenson's material on data havens or if those guys were still looking for a piece of land to plop their data center.

    11. Re:SS Google by TheSencho · · Score: 1

      Nor enjoy US Navy protection.

    12. Re:SS Google by walshy007 · · Score: 1

      more references needed, but still nice post

  7. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  8. Great! by Urger · · Score: 0

    Great, so now not only will Google have my private data, but so will the Pirates who will take Google over. They better invest in some ninjas just in case.

  9. Old aircraft carriers would work by Nyckname · · Score: 4, Funny

    But there's the matter of pizza delivery.

    1. Re:Old aircraft carriers would work by barista · · Score: 3, Funny

      I'm sure they'll listen to Reason.

    2. Re:Old aircraft carriers would work by newr00tic · · Score: 0

      I'm sure they'll listen to Reason.

      ..or GarageBand.

      *)

      --
      A horse can't be sick, you know, even if he wants to.
    3. Re:Old aircraft carriers would work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, if you have an aircraft carrier, you could build a pizzeria on the boat (hell, make that five of them)

    4. Re:Old aircraft carriers would work by magus_melchior · · Score: 1

      I doubt they'd gut the kitchen; in fact, I can imagine them inviting Emeril and/or Alton Brown.

      --
      "We are Microsoft. You shall be assimilated. Competition is futile."
    5. Re:Old aircraft carriers would work by TimothyDavis · · Score: 2, Informative

      I am sure that Uncle Enzo can get a pizza out to your aircraft carrier.

    6. Re:Old aircraft carriers would work by starrsoft · · Score: 1

      I'm sure some young entrepreneur would do paraplane deliveries. At $5000-20,000, paraplanes aren't that much more than a car. At speeds of 35 mph, 12 mi offshore is 20 minutes.

      --
      Read my blog: HansMast.com
  10. A great idea! by Hawthorne01 · · Score: 1

    And then let the ships circle around the edge of the Pacific ocean, picking up IT workers along the way to drop off in America.

    Hmmmmn...

    Where have I heard that before?

    --
    "Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former."
    1. Re:A great idea! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a new slave trade to me.

  11. how is using sea water for cooling cool??? by way2trivial · · Score: 0
    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:how is using sea water for cooling cool??? by shaitand · · Score: 1

      First of all, so what?

      Second of all, I don't think you'll find a google data center to be on par with a nuclear power plant. They might have some heat to dissipate but the water isn't exactly going to be boiling.

    2. Re:how is using sea water for cooling cool??? by iknowcss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So far this is the only comment that asks the first question that popped into my head. That heat does have to go somewhere.

      --
      Life is rarely fair. Cherish the moments when there is a right answer.
    3. Re:how is using sea water for cooling cool??? by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      You pump really cold water up from a few thousand feet and pump the warm water,the heat, over the side and it just 'floats' away. No problem really.

    4. Re:how is using sea water for cooling cool??? by ctetc007 · · Score: 1

      Well, the heat being given off by the servers would have come from the mechanical energy that was initially taken out of the ocean. The heat is being dumped back into the ocean, so actually, there will be a net heat loss in the water because energy is being used to run the servers.

    5. Re:how is using sea water for cooling cool??? by Christian+Linhart · · Score: 1

      Since servers convert all energy to heat, there will neither be a net heat loss nor a net heat increase. So the ship will be neutral to the ocean with respect to heat.

      This assumes that no heat is released to the athmosphere which is not 100% the case. So in total we can expect a very small cooling effect on the ocean and a very small heating effect of the athmosphere. I think that even that small effect can be mitigated or compensated by proper technology. ( but it won't probably be worth the effort )

      Also, when we talk about heat, the effect of sunlight on the ship has to be taken into account. But I guess that by choosing a suitable color for the ship, the effect of the sunlight on the total heat budget can be geared towards neutral, i.e. to have the same effect on the ocean as if the ship were not there.

      So, actually, such a ship can be very environmently friendly if properly designed.

    6. Re:how is using sea water for cooling cool??? by ctetc007 · · Score: 1

      Since servers convert all energy to heat,

      Is that true? I'm not well versed in the actual workings of a server, but isn't part of the energy put into the mechanical energy of spinning hard drives? Granted, all of that energy will then turn into heat once the whole ship is shut down, but I would've figured that wouldn't happen until way in the future.

      the effect of sunlight on the ship has to be taken into account.

      True, but the heat from the sun would've gone into the ocean anyway, so having anything out in the ocean at all will still be neutral (from a sunlight standpoint).

  12. Environmental Disaster! by pugs · · Score: 0

    What happens if one of those ships breaks lose?
    Bits will be washing up all over the beaches of the world!

    Think of the seabirds struggling to regain their natural analog resolution after being covered in bits!

  13. Overreaching? by andy1307 · · Score: 1

    Am I the only one who thinks google is overreaching? Doing stuff just because they have tons of cash..for now..

    1. Re:Overreaching? by shaitand · · Score: 1

      No this is brilliant. First, the cooling and power center will probably save Google massive amounts of money. Second and more importantly, this will allow Google to put its data centers in international waters and outside prying U.S. or other eyes.

    2. Re:Overreaching? by Singularitarian2048 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Every company dies. But not every company truly lives.

    3. Re:Overreaching? by Digital+End · · Score: 1

      Epic post is epic

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master.
    4. Re:Overreaching? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Epic post is epic

      Isn't it a bit late for you sonny? Off to 4chan with you!

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. Re:Overreaching? by Digital+End · · Score: 1

      haha, yeah given the current state of 4chan I can understand where you're comming from. Place went to hell about 2-3 years ago. Was fun while it lasted though.

      The biggest problem was when it went from "Normal people acting stupid" to "Stupid people acting stupid". Once the stupidity was real, it crashed.

      I stand by my statement though, that was funny as hell :P

      --
      Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master.
  14. Arsenal Gear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  15. This gives a whole new meaning to offshoring by colinmcnamara · · Score: 2, Interesting

    In all seriousness, there may be interesting tax implications if these datacenters are put outside of US waters.

    --
    Colin McNamara - CCIE #18233 "The difficult we do immediately, the impossible just takes a little longer"
    1. Re:This gives a whole new meaning to offshoring by mysidia · · Score: 1

      It all seems rather perilous. A problem is the risk that the ship sinks. Think of the insurance premiums!

      Do you want your data at the bottom of the sea?

      Sure you may have backups... but you had that datacenter for a reason, right?

      And the risk of espionage... an internatonal competitor could hire thugs to sneak abord your ship in international waters, and take control of the ship and the datacenter at gunpoint, while cutting off your servers' satellite link to the world.

      Or damage to your ship may cause it to have to be evacuated, and a shipman from another country salvages it... selling off your unharmed servers & all their data for profit.

    2. Re:This gives a whole new meaning to offshoring by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      In all seriousness, there may be interesting tax implications if these datacenters are put outside of US waters.

      http://www.resources.ca.gov/ocean/html/chapt_3.html

      Exclusive Economic Zone (3 nautical miles to 200 miles offshore): pursuant to a 1983 proclamation by President Reagan (Proclamation No. 5030), the United States now asserts jurisdiction over the living and non-living resources within the exclusive economic zone (EEZ).

      Whether "living and non-living resources" includes a business within the EEZ would remain to be seen, but it seems to me that the jurisdiction already exists to claim so.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:This gives a whole new meaning to offshoring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In all seriousness, there may be interesting tax implications if these datacenters are put outside of US waters.

      You also don't have to worry about the PATRIOT Act / national security letters. Many other countries also have better personal security laws (e.g., PIPEDA in Canada).

  16. It's been tried before by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With less than stellar results

    Sea Org

  17. Google Earth? by Smivs · · Score: 4, Funny

    So presumably these ships will connect through a series of Google-Sats in geo-stationary orbits, linking to a Google-hub in each country. And behold, Google shall inherit the Earth. Thankfully, a network of Microsoft terrorists will be able to track then using Virtual Earth and infect the servers with Windows, thus rendering them useless and saving us all.

    1. Re:Google Earth? by poopdeville · · Score: 1

      Thankfully, a network of Microsoft terrorists will be able to track then using Virtual Earth and infect the servers with Windows, thus rendering them useless and saving us all.

      Freedom fighters.

      --
      After all, I am strangely colored.
    2. Re:Google Earth? by Colz+Grigor · · Score: 1

      O-ho! You thought you were just being funny, eh big guy?

      http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10034476-93.html

      That launch was today.

    3. Re:Google Earth? by Smivs · · Score: 1

      Oh God! It's true then. Now where are those Microsoft terrorists/freedom fighters?

  18. Okay, it's a neat idea ... by Daniel+Dvorkin · · Score: 0, Troll

    ... but patenting it? WTF?

    Sorry, Google, but the patent really doesn't fit with "don't be evil." Do you guys remember that phrase?

    --
    The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
    1. Re:Okay, it's a neat idea ... by hexapodium · · Score: 0

      I get the feeling they're patenting it in order to avoid being trolled by it in future: it's exactly the kind of thing that they would get trolled with (well, anything Google does is the kind of thing that gets trolled, by dint of Google doing it) and the fact that you hold a patent doesn't mean you have to enforce that patent.
      It's a shame we live in the era where this is not just acceptable, but necessary, but that's where we are.

    2. Re:Okay, it's a neat idea ... by pushing-robot · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If Google (or Microsoft, or Apple, or..) doesn't patent every single idea they come up with now, someone else will sue them for it later on. If you were sued as often as Google, you'd learn to CYA every chance you could get. Such insanity is the price of doing business in the USA.

      So owning patents (frivolous or not) is neutral. Releasing patents to the public is good. Suing others over frivolous patents is evil.

      Google may not be doing "good", but they're still following their mantra.

      --
      How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
    3. Re:Okay, it's a neat idea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      ... but patenting it? WTF?

      Sorry, Google, but the patent really doesn't fit with "don't be evil." Do you guys remember that phrase?

      even worse, it's a submarine patent!

    4. Re:Okay, it's a neat idea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Google forgot the part about not being evil some time ago.

    5. Re:Okay, it's a neat idea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how can you be sued for pattent infringement when the patent you're being sued over is based on the prior art you developed?

  19. It will need to work better then windows for warsh by Joe+The+Dragon · · Score: 1

    It will need to work better then windows for warships to be a good idea.

  20. My tickets are bought by Xamusk · · Score: 1

    If the the Onion is right then my tickets to get out of Sri-Lanka are already bought.

  21. Not only will your data be logged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    It will be water logged!

  22. Neal Stephenson by Lt.Hawkins · · Score: 1

    I'm not sure which reference is more appropriate: Crytponomicon data haven, or The Raft in Snowcrash...

    --
    -- My Sig is a P228.
  23. Sounds like Pirate Radio by Talen317 · · Score: 1

    Sounds like they might be attempting the equivalent of Pirate Radio and could be a way to avoid a lot of different national laws and regulations. I'm sure there is not a lot of copyright or patent protection in Maritime Law.

    1. Re:Sounds like Pirate Radio by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      I was just thinking the same thing. By keeping their data centers on international waters, they need to stop worrying about DMCA takedown letters, in a way. They'll just filter the corresponding country's IPs from accessing the corresponding content.

      Alright, mateys, let's Go on the account and raise the Jolly Roger. Yarrr!!

  24. Re:Sea-Code? by firmamentalfalcon · · Score: 1

    What if Google actually wants to harness the power from the waves? It isn't possible that anything offshore can be in good intention? There aren't much waves inland.

  25. ARRRRRR! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Google will just have to watch out for pirates in more ways then one.

  26. Fluid Karma by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dr. Linda Lao: Have you built the world's first perpetual motion machine?
    Baron Von Westphalen: The ocean is a perpetual motion machine. Fluid Karma is a simulation of the principles you see working right here. As long as the waves continue to crash, Fluid Karma will exist.
    Dr. Katarina Kuntzler: Quantum teleportation.
    Dr. Linda Lao: Explain the transport mechanism, that's all I'm asking.
    Dr. Soberin Exx: Uh, Fluid Karma works via the principle of quantum entanglement. Particles thus entangled will behave identically.

  27. GoogleWay by newr00tic · · Score: 5, Funny

    No.

    GoogleBoat will GoogleFloat to a (Google)Safe (Google)Location.

    --
    A horse can't be sick, you know, even if he wants to.
    1. Re:GoogleWay by sketerpot · · Score: 1

      Please tell me you're not dusting off the old GNU/Jokes and writing "Google" on them to disguise their dubious origins.

    2. Re:GoogleWay by finity · · Score: 1

      Please tell me you know that's from Adam West's Batman. Dunnuhnuhnuhnuhnuhnuhnah --- BATMAN!!!

  28. Science fiction reality by MadMan2 · · Score: 1

    Hi, Actually this idea is not new!

    The 1st time I read about this idea, was in a book from Bruce Sterling (which title I unfortunately can not remember - could be Islands in the Net or one of his short stories). I vaguely remember that William Gibson also mentioned floating data centers in a short story (sorry, must be the old age that prohibits my memory from spewing the titles: maybe I should start rereading? I am sure that some or other of you youngster geeks will find the relevant title :) ).
    A more recent mention and variation on this idea, is from Peter F. Hamilton in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindstar_Rising, where they have huge floating factories (offshore for tax purposes :)) and space launching sites. Expanding on that idea, Hamilton even has the Evans corporation own space factories which have their own cybernetic data-cores.

    It is a public secret that Page & Brin are still in charge of Google's executive ideas and experiments. Those ships prove that those guys read their portion of SF and sometimes try out a few of them. So how long before we see Google's first orbital data-center?

    --

    Peace & Long Life,
    MadMan-2
    1. Re:Science fiction reality by volsung · · Score: 1

      The cosmic rays in orbit are way, way worse than any problems you run into putting a data center at sea. The magnetic domains on a hard disk platter might survive that kind of radiation (or maybe not...), but the silicon will go bonkers unless you have fat transistors and a large amount of error-correction circuitry in place. A fleet of super-expensive Pentium Pros in orbit just doesn't sound that appealing. :)

      An underground data center on the Moon is almost easier to do... (Even better if you can put your device fabrication nearby.)

  29. Power from the tides by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    AC at 2 cycles per day.

  30. Heat pollution by Toe,+The · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ocean-water-cooling would just move the heat pollution of data centers from an urban area to the ocean. I am not sure that is an improvement. Substantial temperature changes have major effects on ocean microecosystems.

    1. Re:Heat pollution by willy_me · · Score: 1

      Yes, but it would do so more efficiently. For example, it can take 1 watt to dissipate 2 watts of heat using a heat pump. So that's equal to 3 watts of energy placed into our environment for every 2 watts of work. Now by just pumping ocean water you can likely get away with only 0.1 watts used to dissipate every 2 watts of heat. So the difference is 2.1 watts vs 3 watts of energy placed into the environment - ocean cooling is better.

      Now there is one other point to consider. With ocean cooling you can not make use of the lost heat. When a data centre is on land that heat can be used for other purposes - like heating residential water or running greenhouses. So while ocean based cooling is not optimal, it is an improvement over how we do things right now (at least in North America - we typically do not make use of the waste heat).

    2. Re:Heat pollution by Toe,+The · · Score: 1

      Yes, in terms of overall heat production, that makes sense. However, pouring heat into an urban environment sounds relatively less locally harmful than pouring it into an ocean ecosystem.

    3. Re:Heat pollution by Kz · · Score: 1

      heat pollution has to be taken seriously, nobody wants to destroy ecosystems left and right.

      that said, the advantage of dumping waste heat into the oceans instead of the atmosphere has at least two advantages to ecologists (an several more to engineers):

      1: the oceans are a MUCH bigger heat sink than the atmosphere. any given quantity of waste heat is (in the big picture) less significant to the oceans than to the atmosphere.

      2: water carries heat a lot faster than air, making it harder to significantly overheat an area, especially if you tap into a stable body of water circulation.

      --
      -Kz-
  31. No, William Gibson by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 1

    Stephenson? Pfft!

    A better reference might be to Maas-Neotek from Mona Lisa Overdrive and other books.

    --
    Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
    1. Re:No, William Gibson by prator · · Score: 1

      Google is just weird sometimes. Somehow, your comment shows up at #6 for "wikipedia maas neotek".

      Anyway, I'm kinda hazy on how Maas-Neotek relates to a conglomeration of boats tied together out somewhere in the ocean. I don't recall it from the Gibson books I've read, and Google doesn't seem to be helping.

    2. Re:No, William Gibson by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I was kind of short on the details of my private association. I was thinking of a prominent first appearance in fiction of the notion of high-tech corporations having their own armed forces. Google Navy -> Maas-Neotek extraction team, blah blah blah.

      The fact that my comment is in Google's index only supports the idea that I'm on to them.... :)

      --
      Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
  32. Pirates? by Toe,+The · · Score: 1

    That's why Google is also developing the ED-209.

  33. I, for one, welcome... by rdwald · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But seriously, am I the only one who sees an inevitable path from "offshore datacenters" to "cyberpunk future where major corporations like Google declare sovereignty"?

    1. Re:I, for one, welcome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering how well nation-states have done in the last 100 years, I don't necessarily have a problem with this.

    2. Re:I, for one, welcome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Considering how well nation-states have done in the last 100 years, I don't necessarily have a problem with this.

      Considering what corporations get away with while being regulated by nation-states, the thought of sovereign corporations makes me wish for a nanny-state.

  34. US Navy ...Echelon? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My guess is that stuff like this is already being done via NSA or something. I'm sure they don't mind tapping sea fibers in international waters.

  35. LOL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All this energy we're wasting is wasting is heating up the atmosphere and making people angry. What to do? I know it! Let's pour it into the oceans instead!

  36. Re:12 mile note... by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    The ship may not be teritorial waters but the fiber connection surely is....

  37. They're not the first ... by miller60 · · Score: 2, Informative

    A San Francisco startup is working on a fleet of data centers on cargo ships, as discussed here on Slashdot earlier this year..

    1. Re:They're not the first ... by stairs_and_flowers · · Score: 1

      Google will have some of the same issues as that "other startup",
      and lots that are different. A floating oil platform
      (to me) works better than a ship based datacenter.

      _IF_ Google was to do a floating datacenter, I'd love to see
      them take one of the old nuke flat-tops, and use that...
      The big E as a datacenter would be killer, better than a pile of scrap.
      http://www.defensetech.org/archives/003578.html
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Enterprise_(CVN-65)
      http://www.nvr.navy.mil/nvrships/details/CV64.htm

      EACH of the A2W power plants can deliver over 26,000 kw
      (over 200,000 kw total) , and if you combine the reactor
      hot water output, with an amonia based cooling system,
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein_refrigerator
      http://www.nh3tech.org/absorption.html
      can give low cost cooling.

      Here is a letter that I sent to one of the VARS for the "other startup",
      strangely enough, I never got an answer back. Perhaps it just got spam filtered out.

      The questions remain unanswered....

      *********** Mon Feb 4 11:23:17 2008
      Received: from [****************.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 04 Feb 2008 11:23:17 PST
      Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2008 11:23:17 -0800 (PST)
      **********************
      Subject: Floating Data Centers?!?
      To: ken@teamsilverback.com
      MIME-Version: 1.0
      Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
      Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
      Content-Length: 8789

      I saw your article about floating datacenters, and since you asked for
      input, I thought I would chime in. Let me start off by saying I like the idea,
      I know that there is great room for delivering a good product, at a good price point.

      Now before I put my racks in a floating data center, here are some of my
      concerns and references to real world issues. (I have a lot more, but
      that depends on the ship and configuration.),

      1) ""using sea water for their chill water"". Having seawater around is
      a good heat sink, and since the ships are at dock most of the time, a long
      pipe can be run to the cooler water zones to draw in water that is
      close to freezing.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_lake_water_cooling
      Using colder sea water (after a standard air heat exchanger) can result in
      good economies, if the heat exchangers can stand up to the corrosive environment.

      2) ""All generators will have access to the ships fuel storage during disaster scenarios, which
      allows them to operate for nearly a month without the need to refuel.""
      Traditional fuel for gen sets and large ship engines are very different. An
      onboard gen set is like a modern rail road locomotive engine
      (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:3000hp_curve_ver2.jpg ), and it runs on diesel,
      a main power plant for a ship (also a diesel) traditionally runs on Heavy Fuel Oil
      (HFO). Without modifications to either the main power plant, or the gen sets, both
      engines can not share the same fuel source. Please note the differences between #2
      (the traditional fuel for ship board gen sets) , and #6 (Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO), AKA
      Bunker C, the traditional fuel for ships manufactured in the 1980's). #6 is almost
      a jelly at cold temperatures, and must be heated (to around 100c ) for efficient
      movement, and burning. The main engine on a large cargo vessel is also much more
      efficient (up to %50) in its use of fuel, making them more economical than the
      smaller generators. Gen sets use a small amount of diesel per day, (compared
      to the main engine) a 3100 kw gen set will use 4253 gallons of fuel per day
      (http://www.antarctica.ac.uk/living_and_working/diaries/rrs_james

  38. Slashdot, get a grip by marco.antonio.costa · · Score: 1

    People are always ranting about patent abuse over here, now Google is filing a patent on basically "computing on a ship" and nobody's screaming about it????

    This is a good _idea_, but that's it! It's not a patenteable invention.

    As a person interested in seasteading I am quite concerned over paying royalties to Google over running a server in my future home.

    --
    Send your spendthrift head of state this
    1. Re:Slashdot, get a grip by dwye · · Score: 1

      > As a person interested in seasteading I am quite
      > concerned over paying royalties to Google over
      > running a server in my future home.

      Only if you power it via wave or tidal action, and have your seastead flagged in a country that recognizes this patent.

      Frankly, I think that if you want to power a data center consisting of more than a few microcontrollers, you had better locate it in the Bay of Fundy or mouth of the Amazon to get those 6 foot or higher tidal bores, or near a fault which you manipulate to produce regular tsumanis (which probably violates the "Don't Be Evil" mantra).

      This patent is possibly the Google equivalent of an April 1 RFC.

    2. Re:Slashdot, get a grip by marco.antonio.costa · · Score: 1

      Oh, the patent is only valid when powered by tidal or wave power? How unusual.

      --
      Send your spendthrift head of state this
  39. Right next to.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..surplus nuclear powered submarines that can supply enough juice to run the thing.

  40. Prior-Art by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    Ships - been done

    Wave motion electrical generation - been done

    Data Center - been done

    Marine Cables - been done

    Self contained electrical generating stations connected to shore by cables and monitored by onboard computers that also store info - been done

    Do I detect the filing patents for the purposes of doing EVIL??

  41. they still largely would be by Trepidity · · Score: 1

    Assuming Google remains a United States company, has U.S. bank accounts, does business in the U.S., has its employees and managers on U.S. soil instead of moving them all to the boat too, and so on, it'll be pretty easily subject to U.S. laws.

  42. Right Direction maybe better idea by WillRobinson · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Point taken on water temp, security and connections. Why not just have a submersible barge, and drop down to the ocean floor.

    Makes it easy to moor. Fiber just lays on the ocean floor. Improved Security, and the water will be much cooler. Sort of a barge made like a giant heatsink. Mount the processors to the hull.

    When the barge looses enough hardware, just raise it back up, service it and drop it back down.

    Also reduced problems with being pitched around causing lost disk drives. Hurricanes? No problem.

  43. Ghost in a Shell Movie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did any of you guys watch the Ghost in the Shell Movie (I think the 2nd one)? The end of the movie has basically a futuristic data center that was based on a WARship on the high seas. One of the reasons for this ship was so that it was located on international waters and therefore in a legal limbo. So no government can come after them (for whatever reasons - pick privacy, pick dissenting citizen, etc.) due to the international waters. And with the added battleship-type guns, it would be more reason not to go after them. Unless you have some awesome hacking abilities plus a cybernetic arm that turns into a shotgun =)

  44. Re:Sea-Code? by kestasjk · · Score: 1

    Why not put them underground instead? Or tethered to a balloon filled with helium? Why not?

    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
  45. My guess why they're computing offshore: No laws! by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    Seriously. I would not want to work 1000 miles from my home on that "ship" and outside of any laws, because if anyone complains about payment or freedom, they could shoot him and dump him in the water. (Look for sharks first, so there's no body floating on the sea... or edit Google earth ;)

    And only the US navy (thinking the world is theirs anyway, which it probably is... :( ) could stop them. But would they? I mean Google has money... and power... and soon it's own country with its own laws.

    I guess first they have to become a new point in the axis of evil. But I fear they will become an ally... one of the axis of doubleminusgood.

    Oh well... I'm drifting away...

    P.S.: Yeah, my English is that bad. How good is your Luxemburgish? :P

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  46. Dry land is a myth!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dry land is a myth!!!

  47. taxes are not the first. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There are many pesky laws that get in the way.

    Including PRIVACY laws.

    If Google has a barge out there with a data center - to whom does that data belong? What laws are they subject to? How is the US going to enforce the law? Of course there will be pirates and that means security for Google, by Google. Their own private army.

    When/IF the US finally has had enough violations, they'll cut them off and instantly the data is no longer under the control of a government. Only Google.

  48. I'm going to be a pirate! by tjstork · · Score: 1

    Wow, I sank Google! :-)

    --
    This is my sig.
  49. No enforcement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What does patenting really do for Google anyways since you can build a ship in international waters that does would not have enforsable jurisdiction in the U.S.

  50. wake me up when they get an actualy NAVY by seyyah · · Score: 1

    Floating data centres... fine that's cool. But when they have navies patrolling the waters to protect the servers. That'll be the real story.

  51. Prior Art by BuffaloBill · · Score: 1

    Uh...sorry to report us sailors have been using the wave action captured in the sink seacock fitting and the wave action to power the fridge for some time. Google marine refrigeration and sniff around and you will find out who sells it. I can't just remember but my impression was that it wasn't one of the cheaper suppliers.

  52. Useful? by neurogeek · · Score: 1

    Does this mean they have a functioning model of such a data center? I imagine they'd need one to get a patent on this...

  53. Sun Server Containers by 9mm+Censor · · Score: 1

    Wasn't it Sun that had a setup with shipping container filled with servers and networking gear. Converting an cargoship into a data center could be as simple as loading the containers, networking them, and voila instant sea based cluster. Lots of power options as well, nuclear, solar, wind, wave...

  54. Re:My guess why they're computing offshore: No law by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    >P.S.: Yeah, my English is that bad. How good is your Luxemburgish? :P

    Ganz gutt, firwat?

  55. Confirmed: Google DOES Have Containers by 1sockchuck · · Score: 1

    The patent application confirms that Google has data center containers. The company patented the concept several years ago, but some developers of the Google container have said they abandoned the project. But the filing describes containers being lifted on and off ships by cranes.

  56. Ripe for *real* piracy by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Sounds like easy pickings for a band of real pirates.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  57. Re:My guess why they're computing offshore: No law by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    There are still laws, even in international waters.

    plus countries are extending their 'boundaries' more and more, to the point there will be no true international waters left.

    And don't forget if you are in International waters, you are on your own. Don't expect the coast guard to drop by to help when you get attacked.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  58. Re:12 mile note... by sirsnork · · Score: 1

    They hardly need to connect a fibre cable to any particular country. Hell they could anchor on top of one of the undersea cables and just tap straight in and rent the bandwidth directly from the people that own the cable. Hell it's google, they could lay their own damn cable. What more os a concern is if you're using sea water to cool your server you need to filter that water VERY well unless you want the try dealing with the corrosion inside your water blocks.

    --

    Normal people worry me!
  59. Reading between the lines by PPH · · Score: 1

    Google envisions a world where 'computing centers are located on a ship or ships, which are then anchored in a water body

    ...outside the jurisdiction of national intelligence services,...

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  60. A patent means.... nada. the math by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Something like 99.4% of patents never make a cent.

    This one is particularly loopy.

    Let's do the math. Let's say Google buys the Queen Mary. 80,000 tons. Let's say they anchor it someplace with an average wave height of 20 feet, wave period of 10 seconds. Raising 80,000 tons at 2 feet per second takes about 160,000 horsepower. Hmmm, that's very close to the original steaming capacity of the QM. In watts, that's about 120 megawatts, about ten times more than you'd need if you packed the ship with servers. Okay, so that looks easily doable.

    Problem is, buying the electricity would be much cheaper. 12 megawatts will cost you about $700 an hour. Can you run and maintain and pay on the principal and pay salaries and insurance on $700/hour? No, not a couple of powers of ten.

  61. Pirate Internet by ozbird · · Score: 1

    Arr, this be like Pirate Radio in days of yore.

  62. No, Google will never launch its own Navy by Jackyshadow · · Score: 1

    Instead, Google will provide target search service for the Navy. Of course, the Navy men could also use the classic tools from Google such as "I am feeling lucky" and "sponsored links". The latter one is full of targets nominated by whoever pays the most for the particular keyword.

  63. Re:12 mile note... by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    Regardless of who owns that cable reaches a country it and the signals are under their the countries control. The only real way to get around the whole thing is to launch your own internet communications satilite.

    Not really you just use a fresh water cooling coil in the cold sea water.

  64. Re:My guess why they're computing offshore: No law by The+Iso · · Score: 1

    Whoa, I used to jokingly tell people that Luxembourgish was my native language. I didn't think I would ever meet someone who spoke it.

    --
    "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." - Bob Dylan
  65. In 3-5 years, they can hire Admiral Ackbar by unity100 · · Score: 1

    and put him in command of the fleet. there wont be any pirate problems after that.

    1. Re:In 3-5 years, they can hire Admiral Ackbar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dear Google,

      Please do not take unity100's adivice.

      It's a trap.

      V/r
      AC

  66. Sea org by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

    I guess this means that the sea org finally has an enemy.

  67. how would the patent apply? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

    I suppose the patent would still be valid in the U.S. but what are the ramifications if they are doing this outside of U.s. waters? Never mind the fact that this sounds like another bullshit patent anyway.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  68. Offshore platforms, not ships by Junior+J.+Junior+III · · Score: 1

    Rather than put it on a ship, why not put it on a stable platform, similar to an offshore oil rig?

    You could still generate energy via wave power, but the platform would be stable enough that premature hard drive failure wouldn't be a problem.

    Air in the datacenter rooms would need to be kept free of salt and spray, but this is do-able with proper filtration.

    --
    You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
    1. Re:Offshore platforms, not ships by AlXtreme · · Score: 1

      This was attempted by HavenCo on the Sealand platform. They weren't self-sufficient, but they had a datacenter running (barely).

      It sounded like a good idea, but in practice things were a lot more difficult than they imagined. The wikipedia-articles are a great read though, as are the articles referenced.

      --
      This sig is intentionally left blank
  69. W3C Navy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    #000080

  70. Re:Sea-Code? by Hucko · · Score: 1

    Not many waves underground or in the air?

    --
    Semi-automatic amateur armchair Australian philosopher; conjecture ready at any moment...
  71. U.A.E. might be able to utilize this. by xclr8r · · Score: 1

    I can see this idea being utilized in Dubai/ United Arab Emirates. They're actually building tons of small islands/islettes. There was a special regarding this on CNBC with Maria Bartiromo. I could see a huge datacenter on a ship/platform serving this future community utilizing sea water as a chiller and saving money on the energy bill. I think an environmental impact study might need to be done if the bay will be absorbing all that heat though.

    --
    Beware of those who profit off the docile and persecute the unbelievers.
  72. In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Reports of Google staff being forced to sign a "billion year contract" or else pay for their expensive training remain unconfirmed. Posted anonymously, for fear of retribution.

  73. So what happens by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From time to time even the ocean can be becalmed - perfectly flat without any motion at all. Are there backup power supply systems or does the whole operation come to a screeching halt?

  74. Sounds like another organization by Steve+Franklin · · Score: 1

    Google is starting to sound like Scientology with their Sea Org. Next they'll start charging to have your surfing records "cleared."

    --
    Hic iacet Arthurus, rex quondam rexque futurus.
  75. You forgot the inputs by DrSkwid · · Score: 1

    If they are using the energy of the sea to power electronic equipment then even if it was 100% efficient there is no net gain of heat for the water.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  76. I Can't GoogleResist by pragma_x · · Score: 1

    "Will our daring data-center defy destruction by deluge?
    Or will the evil BandwidthCzar blow them beyond all believable bounds?
    Tune in next week,
    Same GoogleTime,
    Same GoogleChannel."

  77. Re:My guess why they're computing offshore: No law by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    Ohh... nach e Letzeburger! E wonner! :D
    An ech haat geduert ech wier eleng hei!
    Ech sin vu Mutfert (bei Sandweiler), mee ech wunnen elo an DÃitschland.
    Wou kenns du hier?

    P.S.: Schued, Slashdot ka keen Unicode. :(

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  78. Re:My guess why they're computing offshore: No law by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    There are only 484,000 of us. And only 70% of them speak Luxemburgish. Aaand... 42.6% are aliens (from earth! I don't mean the bankers there. ;)
    Interestingly, there is even a native Luxemburgish community in the USA. :)

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  79. Re:My guess why they're computing offshore: No law by Hurricane78 · · Score: 1

    What laws are there in these waters?
    And who defines them?
    I don't think that anybody has those rights.

    of course if you put some gunships there, you define the laws. But else?
    What if I want to create my own friendly country, where it's illegal to wear clothes, and populating trough reproduction is the highest of our values, to be practiced in big fuckfests 9-monthly? Oh and if you don't keep your body and mindin shape, you will be expelled from the country. (Which will be our only legal punishment.)

    There will be no blackjack. And no need for hookers. But it will be our own island. :D

    One more idea: You're entitled to a fuckathon for nationalizing and obeying our laws for at least 10 years.

    I bet it will be a huge success! :D

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
  80. Google Failboat by bandersnatch · · Score: 1

    So when can we get on board?

  81. Re:My guess why they're computing offshore: No law by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    >Ech sin vu Mutfert (bei Sandweiler), mee ech wunnen elo an DÃitschland.

    Merziger schmeckt herziger? ;-)

    >Wou kenns du hier?

    Diddeléng.

  82. TPB by Wolfger · · Score: 1

    Soon, The Pirate Bay will have a new home in international waters....

  83. Joining things by ghostbar38 · · Score: 0

    They just joint things that are already in the market with a boat and said that qualifies for a patent?

    Great! Patents sucks a lot more then! w00t!

    --
    ghostbar page.
  84. You are right by RichiH · · Score: 1

    Everyone knows that waves heat water. Common knowledge, that. /me heads of to cook spaghetti by shaking the pot.

  85. GoogleBoat is in production... by Hirsch · · Score: 1

    The Unmanned Pirate-Hunting boat is old news from 2006 but I didn't know Google was involved! But you can be certain Google knows about it... because I googled to find that article again.