Slashdot Mirror


Feds Now Plans To Close 1,200 Data Centers

1sockchuck writes "The U.S. government now expects to shutter at least 1,200 data centers by the end of 2015 in its data center consolidation project. That's about 40 percent of the IT facilities identified in the latest update from federal CIO Steven VanRoekel. The number of government data centers has grown steadily — jumping from 1,100 to 2,094 and now to 3,133 — as the Obama administration has identified more facilities than expected, and expanded the initiative to target telecom closets. The CIO's office says it is on track to close 525 facilities by the end of this year, and has published a list of data centers targeted for closure."

7 of 148 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Figures by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Welcome to topsy-turvy land. We've actually been here for awhile, with "fiscal conservative" presidents and legislatures growing the national debt and supposedly "tax and spend liberal" presidents actually shrinking debt.

    I support consolidating telecom facilities. Having facilities physically compromised is a bigger danger when there are more facilities, and having more facilities and presumably more equipment means more places one's information ends up, possibly leading to a greater chance that one's data won't remain secure to electronic penetration either.

    Many years ago, Tennessee forced all of its state agencies on to one computer system for the bulk of State business. The agencies were very upset by this, but in the end it did save money and help keep records better because now agency X and agency Y were handling the same record, instead of having separate, different records that were never checked against each other. I'm sure there were problems, especially turf wars where agencies would fight over who "owned" the data and who could change things, but I'd bet it still worked better than having thirty individual agencies all with their own equipment that doesn't synchronize...

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  2. Re:Figures by mr1911 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, what is the national debt again? What was it last year, and the year before?

    The government has grown wildly under all parties. Yeah, I know it is hard to troll when keeping reality in focus.

    --
    This post comes with a double-your-money-back guarantee!
    Any offense taken to this post is at your sole discretion.
  3. Re:Figures by Kenja · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sure there is. Small government Republicans just get the next administration to pay for things. Much like what's been going on for the past few years. If we ever get a Republican that is actually for small government and fiscal responsibility without being a total nut job they'll have my vote. Till then, I feel the Democrats have been doing the least damage.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  4. Re:Figures by bussdriver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Obama put the wars into the budget for the 1st time; that made it appear spending went up more than it actually did!
    The revenue went down because of the depression that started under Bush and continues today; that means less money coming in while spending continues and in most cases can not and should not instantly reflect revenue. Then you have tax cut extensions which also lowered revenue.
    Plus do not forget inflation undermining the dollar's value; a number which is no longer reported because it got so bad (again under Bush, but Obama would have probably done it too.) While this makes the debt amount seem lower in value it actually does more harm than good.
    The economy stimulus was way too weak and way too foolish (republican tax cuts) and that cost us a huge amount only to soften the downward spiral and couldn't dig us out-- you have to take a big step backwards so then you can build up enough momentum to escape...

  5. Useless data centers by lucm · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are not needed anymore because:

    1) the big hardware vendors already made their money
    2) the contractors who installed and configured the hardware already made their money
    3) the corrupt purchasing officials have already made their money from the bribes they got from the hardware vendors and the contractors
    4) the software vendors will keep racking up software maintenance fees since all those physical servers will become VMs

    It's called "greed computing".

    --
    lucm, indeed.
  6. Re:Figures by wygit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So if there something wrong under a Democrat administration, it's the President's fault, but if there's something under a Republican administration, it's Congress's fault.

    OK, I get it.

  7. Modern Monetary Theory by Nicolai+Haehnle · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Welcome to topsy-turvy land. We've actually been here for awhile, with "fiscal conservative" presidents and legislatures growing the national debt and supposedly "tax and spend liberal" presidents actually shrinking debt.

    It's bizarre how perverted the discussion has become due to the focus on deficit and debt. There is a reasonable political debate to be had on the question of whether government should be small or large. Should the government be responsible for maintaining basic infrastructure? For education? And so on.

    But these questions should not be confused with discussions about the deficit and debt, at least on the federal level. The deficit is mostly endogenous. That is economist-speak for saying that the deficit is not directly controlled by political decision. Instead, it is largely the result of what happens in the private sector. If the private sector produces a lot of activity, this automatically results in higher tax payments and therefore a lower government deficit. If the private sector is running idle, tax revenue drops while at the same time federal outlays in social programs increase, hence the government deficit increases. Therefore, it is best to just let the deficit be whatever it needs to be. That is the approach of Functional Finance, which greatly influenced Modern Monetary Theory.

    Stop worrying about the deficit or the debt. They are meaningless, red herrings. Start worrying about real things instead, like crumbling infrastructure or high unemployment - both are things that can very easily be fixed simultaneously at the federal level, if the deficit terrorists are finally silenced.