Slashdot Mirror


NSA Building $860 Million Data Center In Maryland

1sockchuck writes "As its current data collection makes headlines, the National Security Agency is continuing to expand its data storage and processing capabilities. The agency recently broke ground on an $860 million data center at Fort Meade, Maryland that will span more than 600,000 square feet. The project will provide additional IT capacity beyond the NSA's controversial Utah data center. The new facility will be supported by 60 megawatts of power and use both air-cooled and liquid-cooled equipment."

17 of 177 comments (clear)

  1. Re:All that processing power by Samantha+Wright · · Score: 3, Funny

    Pfft. We all know you're a double agent, Anonymous Coward. How else can you explain your schizophrenic posting history?!

    --
    Bio questions? Ask me to start a Q&A journal. Computer analogies available for most topics!
  2. sequester jester by OffTheLip · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Cry me a river. Regardless of how much lip service is given to the current fiscal pain the gov is shouldering there is always a revenue source for pet projects and nothing returned to their source of funds (us taxpayers).

  3. Cool! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now I won't have to go through the trouble of backing up any of my e-mail!

  4. Fixing the problem by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It's become clear that the federal government no longer serves the interests of the people.

    Does anyone have suggestions for fixing the problem?

    Whenever some "government done did wrong again" article comes up, the comments are all non-constructive: blithe unconcern, fatalism, pessimism, and so on.

    What constructive actions can be taken, and how can the people be encouraged to support these actions?

    My one idea: If people could band together and agree to vote out the incumbent (senator, representative, president) whenever one of these incidents crop up, there would be incentive for politicians to better serve the people in order to continue in office. This would mean giving up party loyalty and the idea of "lessor of two evils", which a lot of people won't do. Some congressional elections are quite close, so 2,000 or so petitioners might be enough to swing a future election.

    (And no, replies of "you won't accomplish anything because of this reason" are not constructive.)

    1. Re:Fixing the problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Tor, I2dP and the likes. Let's build a new common internet over the internet. Full strong anonymity and integrity.

      Transform what an eavesdropper would see in a huge cypherpunk clusterfuck.

      Taking back what's ours through technology and educated practices.

      There is no fatality, even the tools are there already. Let's go back to the 90' where the internet was a place for knowledgeable and cooperative people.

      Also die facebook.

    2. Re:Fixing the problem by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Insightful

      A first step might be understanding the extent towards which the government actually disagrees with the people. Are we talking about a situation where the government is enacting unpopular policies that people oppose? Or are we talking about a situation where people support the policies? Because the solutions to those two situations are very different.

      In many cases involving "national security", I think the situation is closer to the second one. "Tough on X" policies are quite popular, and politicians often pander to people by enacting them. The USA Patriot Act, for example, was hugely popular when it was passed. And in general, politicians get voted out of office more often for being not "tough" on crime and terrorism and whatever else, than for being too over-the-top in pursuing those policies.

    3. Re:Fixing the problem by turp182 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The Uniparty system we are under is the problem, so swaying the vote would be ineffective. The Repubs and Dems are basically the same, at least when it comes to power and surveillance. Both parties like the power. And abuse it.

        The problem is getting access to high level elections, and coalescing people on a third party. It is a difficult problem.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    4. Re:Fixing the problem by korgitser · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My best guess:
      1) this kind of sht is morally wrong
      2) thus, working for this kind of sht is morally wrong
      3) thus, anybody who works for this kind of sht is going to hell, for whatever your value of 'hell'.
      4) you might say that 'i need the money from this gig', but
      5) anybody who works for this kind of sht is feeding their kids but is at the same time fscking over the kids' future bigtime. Your kids will not forgive you for being the AC IRL.

      From this, it should easily emerge that everybody should just stop working for this sht. No workers, no NSA. There needs to emerge a culture and a movement to encourage it. Shame the spineless coward who works for the Man! Shun him or tell him what he does is evil and his country hates him for it. Spread the word!
      You, everybody, personally, need to work to push this through. By this time and age it should be obvious that the Man is the real terrorist. Your democratic functions have long since ceased to return value, hoping for change in elections will not do. It will require significant effort from each and every american to repeal this next age of slavery.

      --
      FCKGW 09F9 42
    5. Re:Fixing the problem by Mansing · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Vote them out AND remove their lifetime, taxpayer-funded, free health care.

      See how fast the health care system gets fixed.

    6. Re:Fixing the problem by RabidReindeer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's become clear that the federal government no longer serves the interests of the people.

      Does anyone have suggestions for fixing the problem?

      Whenever some "government done did wrong again" article comes up, the comments are all non-constructive: blithe unconcern, fatalism, pessimism, and so on.

      What constructive actions can be taken, and how can the people be encouraged to support these actions?

      My one idea: If people could band together and agree to vote out the incumbent (senator, representative, president) whenever one of these incidents crop up, there would be incentive for politicians to better serve the people in order to continue in office. This would mean giving up party loyalty and the idea of "lessor of two evils", which a lot of people won't do. Some congressional elections are quite close, so 2,000 or so petitioners might be enough to swing a future election.

      (And no, replies of "you won't accomplish anything because of this reason" are not constructive.)

      From what I've seen, local politicians are mostly OK. They may be corrupt, but practicality doesn't get pushed aside by blind partisanship. Moving up to the state level, it's less so, especially recently in my own home state. But since the name recognition for reaching state office generally comes from having first participated at local levels, we could start turning this thing around by considering more carefully the records of those we "promote" to that level. I've seen too many regional/statewide campagins where the reason for voting for the other guy is that "So-and-so is Too Liberal" or "Such-and-such has strong Conservative values". Forget all this Liberal/Conservative, Republican/Democrat, Us/Them crap. Look beyond the narrow issues and the one-size-fits-all solutions and don't vote for the person who reaffirms your strongest prejudices, vote for the person most likely to do actual practical good.

      Vote 1-strike-and-you're out. If the person you elect ends up doing the same old thing as everyone else has been doing, vote for someone else next time, even if it's not the ideal person. Even if the other guy makes your skin crawl. One bad choice only makes a difference if all the choices are the same bad choice. That's why we have groups of legislators. Make them all fear for their jobs, because no matter how much you spend on a campaign, if the people don't vote for you, it's no good.

      And do it again for the next level up, all the way to the top. We need to stop voting our emotions and vote with our brains. We need to move beyond the same old solutions-that-can't-solve, and it doesn't matter whether the reason they failed was actual flaws in the solution or simply that the solution requires an unrealistic set of circumstances (such as zero opposition) to work.

      In the end, we always get the government we deserve, but I'd like to think we deserve better than what we've got.

  5. Re:The real question is... by cervesaebraciator · · Score: 4, Funny

    Given advances in technology, LOC is no longer a clear, effective or sufficient unit of measurement. I propose we move instead to fractions of an NSA data center. Of course, the fraction would approach 1 as one gets near the capacity of the whole internet and all current communications, so it would always be useful.

  6. Re:Come on american patriots by cold+fjord · · Score: 5, Informative

    I assume you must be either a failing agent provocateur or a nitwit.

    Benjamin Franklin said Americans had a republic, if they could keep it.

    This is the time work on keeping it by:
    - Letters to congress put in the post box
    - Voting for a change of representation at the ballot box
    - Some time on the soap box.
    - Some government employees sitting in front of the jury box.

    Suggested topics:
    - IRS suppression of legitimate peaceful political opposition groups
    - IRS suppression of legitimate peaceful religous groups
    - Possible involvement by the FBI, EPA, and OSHA in the above
    - IRS seizure of 60,000,000 medical records they are not entitled to in breach of the 4th Amendment
    - Unprecedented Justice Department investigation of reporters
    - Stonewalling by government officials before congress and refusing to turn over documents
    - Attempts by the administration to disarm the public by outlawing weapons seldom used to commit crimes - semiautomatic rifles
    - The very wide dragnet by the NSA when considered with the above

    Slashdot has had stories on much of that recently. Search for IRS, or AP, etc.

    It is legitimate for the NSA to monitor people in direct communication with terrorist groups, and other terrorists*. But this, considered in light of the above is cause for concern. Congress better be doing some good oversight.

    * Genuine terrorists trying to bomb, shoot, poison or otherwise kill innocent people, typically in large numbers, with a very broad understanding of innocent.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  7. Re:but no unemployment for displaced workers by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unemployed workers have no lobbyists. The security industry does.

  8. Re:$860 Million by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "logging machine"...

    On the contrary, the NSA has some great minds working for them, and they are probably doing some very interesting and useful analysis with all that data. The problem is, what great minds create, can be misused by others.

    All this power is supposed to be used to catch terrorists. But now that this database is out in the open, a lot of other folks will find reasons why they must also have access to it.

    Think of a simple police detective at the scene of a murder interviewing potential witnesses and suspects. He could immediately get a topology drawn of who knows who, and which ones have been chatting a lot with each other. Usually the poor policeman needs to do a lot of grunt and foot work to map this out. And get warrants for phone records. This would really help his investigation a lot.

    But do we really want data collected this way to be used that way . . . ? What will prevent a slippery slide of more and more agencies and organizations getting access to this data for their own purposes . . . ? Can the DEA escalate their war on drugs to also be a matter of national security? This info could also help the IRS track down money launderers as well . . . how about the IRS . . . ?

    Now that the government has this "Critical Tool" at their disposal, the more important question is not how can it be used, but how it should not be used.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  9. Where does the money come from? by OhANameWhatName · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I thought that the US was in debt so far that they're defaulting on the bonds they sold to China? And the government has 860 million to throw around just to find out where their citizens are eating lunch?

    It's amazing that this data centre is worth more to the US government that financial liquidity.

  10. Re:$860 Million by Charliemopps · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Don't be a fool. Terrorism is not, and never was a threat. More people are killed by cancer every DAY than have been killed by terrorist attacks in this country in all of history. Imagine if they'd used the money from these 2 data centers for cancer research. Either their idiots or their goal has nothing to do with terrorists.