Slashdot Mirror
Google Patent Reveals New Data Center Innovations
miller60 writes "'Google is seeking to patent a system that provides precision cooling inside racks of servers, automatically adjusting to temperature changes while reducing the energy required to run chillers.' The cooling design uses an adjustable piping system featuring 'air wands' that provide small amounts of cold air to components within a server tray. The cooling design, which could help Google reduce the power bill for its servers, reinforces Google's focus on data center innovation as a competitive advantage. Check out the patent application and a diagram of the system."
There have been 17000 youtube searches for Natalie Portman naked in the last 450 milliseconds. We need a burst of cold air on rack 1000001, processor 304 on the second chip on the third stick of RAM.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Don't be silly, this is precisely how patents were originally meant to be used; to allow the inventor of a truly innovative technology to get some reward for their effort, so if you want to use the technology then you need to license it from the inventor, that's all. . And, yes, it *is* innovative or someone else would have already come up with the idea and patented it, the green data centre market isn't exactly short or a little competition at the moment with so many organisations competing for bragging rights over the lowest PUE ratings.
Look on the bright side, since this is Google with their mantra of "Do no evil" that we're talking about, they can hardly charge an extortionate amount for the license fee given what it might entail for the environment if they want to carry on being able to claim that with any degree of sincerity. Regardless of what they charge, you can almost guarantee it would be a lot less than what some vendors *cough* Sun *cough* have historically charged for their more bespoke cabinets.
UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
Hmmm... Is creating patents for things like this "evil"? Seeking to prevent others from saving energy (unless they pay a toll) is not good for this planet, and I'm not sure if passes for "good".
Just pretend they never had the idea at all and nothing has changed. There, feel better?
I know it's popular to bash Google around these parts, but you're really reaching.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
They can cross that off the list and carry on with other solutions to the
Error establishing a database connection
problem...
man, I feel like mold.
Engineer: Hmmm, looks like system 8323 is hot, maybe we should cool it down somehow.
Patent Attorney: Great idea! How many different ways can we cool it? When can I have a New Invention Report?
I can only hope that this straw contributes to breaking the camel's back.
The patent doesnt stop some other company from building and using a device exactly like this internally for thier own use. It only stops them from taking the idea and selling a product based on it.
Yes, it does. There is no such thing as "fair use" in patent law. The owner of a patent has the right to exclude others from making, using, importing, selling, or offering to sell the invention. Those first two stop another company from building and using a device exactly like this internally.
And yes, I am a patent agent.
I think it does pass the "evil" test with flying colors. In x years it becomes free for anyone to use, and besides who is to say that Google won't license this stuff for cheap (or free) down the road? It's not like they're charging an arm + leg for any of their other technologies as it is, and they're certainly not among the worst offenders when it comes to "patent trolling". I think it's a good faith green move on their part, and they're being sensible patenting it before somebody (possibly less scrupulous) does.
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
IBM is not primarily in the hardware business... you know that, right? Services are the biggest revenue generator at IBM.
As for Google, what kind of company do you think they are? What's their main gig? Data. Acquiring data. Data analysis. Data storage. Serving data. Using data analysis to maximize the value of their adspace.
Considering that so much of their business revolves around data processing, wouldn't you think that a method that reduces one of their largest costs (datacenter operation) is key to their business? If anything, datacenter technology is at the forefront of what Google does.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Death is no escape from a savage flaming on slashdot. It just means we will be crisping your corpse and be denied the joys of imagining the sounds of your lamentations and woe. On second thought, we could just *pretend* you didn't commit seppuku, and still have those joys. So really, your effort goes wasted -- please put the wakizashi down and resume whatever it was you were doing.
On the other hand, maybe you *weren't* going to really commit suppuku, and were just pretending to, to throw the flamers off your trail. If so, nice move. You have confounded the Slashdot Flamemasters. I salute you.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
Hmm, seems you are right...
our patent system is really screwed up, isnt it?
Why? Wouldn't it be more screwed up to say "gosh, Mr. inventor, I don't have to pay you for a license, because I'm going to use your invention for my own use"? It would prevent them from selling it - so consumer goods for sale would be subject to patents, but manufacturing machines and assembly line innovations that companies install and then use for 20 years would essentially be up for grabs, license-free. No one would ever invent anything for 'behind the scenes' use unless they're employed by a big company for that purpose... and the big company would never, ever file a patent on it, because any other big company could just make it and not pay them a license fee.
Essentially what you're proposing is a return to trade secrets. Invent something and don't tell anyone about it. The downside of trade secrets is that they exist for as long as the invention is secret - potentially hundreds of years, such as the formula for Coca-cola. This is as opposed to patents, which are 20 years and then public domain forever. Trade secrets were the primary tool for protecting IP for several hundred years, and as a result, they stifled innovation - every company had to waste time and re-invent the wheel that a company across town invented and kept secret. The mandatory public disclosure scheme of patents solves this problem - the public can't use your invention without licensing it for 20 years, so innovation is stifled... but it's free after that, and in the meantime, the public can freely create improvements on your idea - so innovation is actually encouraged.
For example, if I patent a stool, and you improve it by adding a back, you've just innovated. And if someone else improves yours by adding arms, they just innovated. And because you and I both published, they can leapfrog on our innovations. This is how the patent system is supposed to work.
Seriously - is it too hard to note that it's only a Patent Application at this point?
As a person who is handy carving things out of wood who might happen to one day create a sitting device for my own person use that is identical to your stool, would I be expected to have to pay you, even if i had never seen your stool?
I don't see how, as an individual, I would not be allowed to make for my own use anything i am physically capable of making with my own materials and tools.
Because this is a civilization rather than a libertarian anarchy? Why should you be able to enjoy the fruits of my labor and sweat of my inventive brow without paying me a reasonable license fee?
As for "never seen my stool", there is such a thing as innocent infringement... For one, you can't be liable for indirect infringement without intention to infringe. For two, damages tend to be lower: if you're truly innocent, I'd get the cost of one stool out of you.
Patents are not stupid. Patents are great. Obvious patents given for large amounts of time are stupid.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
That's pretty much the only thing you can do with a patent, stop someone else from using it. (Licensing is just an agreement not to exercise that power.)
I see several explanations for Google applying for a patent:
I wouldn't consider any of these particularly evil, but it is inconvenient for smaller organizations who might want to use the technique, but don't want to go through the hassle of negotiating with Google (who might just ignore their request for licensing).
You mean like the rubber hose I used in a system five years ago to force incoming cool air to pass directly over the CPU first and then get sucked out of the box by negative pressure? Wow, didn't know that was patentable. It seemed so ... obvious.
Sorry, but they still need to remove the exact same amount of waste heat, while the cost of blowing air around is minimal, so I fail to see how this will save much if anything. It may even use slightly more energy since the smaller pipes will have more turbulence and may require more blower power.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Google is a for-profit company that does a lot of work for open standards, FOSS, and charities that they don't have to.
You insist they must do it for PR, yet their PR campaign has been so successful with you. They don't even go out of their way to toot their own horn, to the extent that most people have never heard of the things that Google offers up freely.
Google is not a company like any other.
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
Repeat after me: for-profit companies are run by people, not an infallible profit-maximizing robot.
Left one out: They want an arsenal of patents to make their cross-licensing portfolio more valuable.