Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Google Founders Buy Fighter Jet

kdawson posted about 6 years ago | from the filing-a-flight-plan-for-redmond dept.

Toys 356

Ponca City, We love you writes "The NY Times reports that H211 LLC, a company controlled by Google's top executives, including billionaire founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, appears to have added to its fleet a Dornier Alpha Jet, a light jet attack and advanced trainer aircraft manufactured by Dornier of Germany and Dassault-Breguet of France. The 1982 Alpha-Jet seats two and was originally used by European air forces, but is now being sold relatively cheaply to civilians. The jet has landing rights at Moffett Field, the NASA-operated airfield that is a stone's throw from the Google campus. It is not clear who exactly flies the fighter jet, although Google chief executive Eric Schmidt is an avid pilot. If the top Googlers indeed own the fighter jet, they would be following in the footsteps of Oracle chief executive Larry Ellison, who has owned several aircraft, including fighter jets."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Just think (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498051)

of how many starving children in Africa they could have fed instead of buying a jet so they can show off.

Re:Just think (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498093)

Fuck no, it's MY money and if I want to have fun with it instead of giving it to hopeless monkey-ass savages.

-Larry Page

Pot, meet Kettle (5, Insightful)

Thiez (1281866) | about 6 years ago | (#25498097)

I see you own a computer. Surely you could have sent your money to Africa instead?

Re:Pot, meet Kettle (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498177)

Of course they own a computer. It's not like you can post to Slashdot on a library computer.

Re:Pot, meet Kettle (5, Insightful)

turtledawn (149719) | about 6 years ago | (#25498235)

Hmm. Using the fighter jet to take out clumps of corrupt African officials may be the single best piece of charity Sergei and Brin could ever offer them, as at least them the money us regular folks send over might have a chance of actually reaching the citizens and being used for its intended purposes. :-)

Re:Pot, meet Kettle (5, Insightful)

DaveV1.0 (203135) | about 6 years ago | (#25498303)

Wouldn't work. What ever governments replaced the ones wiped out would become corrupt in a few, short years. Just look at Zimbabwe if you need an example.

Re:Pot, meet Kettle (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498415)

Zimbabwe has had the same leader since the first post-independence election in 1980. Not sure how that supports your point.

Re:Pot, meet Kettle (1)

JesseMcDonald (536341) | about 6 years ago | (#25499133)

Well, if they persisted in taking out anyone who appeared to be forming a government I suspect people would eventually stop trying. I'm not supportive of random assassinations as a means of inhibiting aggression (it just shifts the problem elsewhere), but I have no doubt such a strategy would become locally effective over time.

Re:Pot, meet Kettle (1)

JavaTHut (9877) | about 6 years ago | (#25498817)

> I see you own a computer. Surely you could have
> sent your money to Africa instead?

You mean do something more like what google.org [google.org] is doing? Just because they weren't egotistical enough to call it the Larry Page and Sergey Brin Foundation doesn't mean they didn't fund, well, all of it.

Re:Pot, meet Kettle (0, Troll)

yttrstein (891553) | about 6 years ago | (#25499025)

I was thinking the same thing, as im sure many people are. With the economy in the toilet, the political landscape ablaze, unemployment jumping, terrible gas prices and millions wondering if their 401K plans haven't been an enormous waste of time and money, Larry and Sergey have shown unquestionably that they are utterly out of touch.

I don't mind saying that it's offensive enough to me to pull out of the Google cloud completely. They could be doing incredibly helpful things with their billions, and instead they just buy toys.

You should be ashamed of yourselves, google execs.

That's right, mods (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498187)

The other AC said "Just think of how many starving children in Africa they could have fed instead of buying a jet so they can show off." That was very quickly modded -1, Flamebait.

It's flamebait but only because it's true. Quick, silence the AC with a -1! We can't be calling someone's character into question when their conspicuous consumption becomes a public spectacle! Why, if that were allowed, then something like a rejection of consumerist culture might emerge ...

Re:That's right, mods (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498407)

That's what happens when niggers get mod points.

Re:That's right, mods (5, Insightful)

somersault (912633) | about 6 years ago | (#25498495)

So everyone with more money than you should give it all to charity?

You think those starving children in Africa wouldn't go out for a meal at a fancy restaurant if they were given a billion pounds? Then perhaps buy some nice shoes? They could just use it to buy everyone in their country just the right amount of food to make sure they're not classed as 'starving' for a while, but I highly suspect they might want to enjoy themselves a little too. They might even buy a bike or a car. You know, some people like to have fun occasionally, when it is within their means?

I'm very sure Larry and Sergey have caused more money to go to charity [bbc.co.uk] than you ever will. Just because they also want to use their money - money that they have earned by creating an excellent business - to have a bit of fun doesn't make them evil. It's easy to point the finger, but I bet you'd buy a nice car and house if you were a billionaire, rather than live in a slum. Any of us slashdotters could survive on a lot less than what we have. Why do you even have a slashdot account and access to a computer? Why aren't you out there earning as much money as you can so that you can redistribute the wealth?

The problem is not with our "consumerist culture", it's with corrupt and moronic governments who run their countries into the ground and treat their citizens like shit. No amount of charity is going to turn a country like that around if its leaders are corrupt.

Re:That's right, mods (0, Flamebait)

postbigbang (761081) | about 6 years ago | (#25498815)

Hmmmm. And Sarah Palin's $150,000 was also good fiscal prudence, too?

What happened with Sam Walton driving a pickup truck?

And special landing rights at Moffet? Can't go a few extra miles out of SJA? Oh, right, it needs to be near their little Boeing something.

Great corporate stewardship. And if they join Larry at Oracle, that's guilt by association.

Not intended as flame. Intended as an observation of prima facia conspicuous consumption that smacks of aristrocracy in a country that soundly, firmly, and with my ancestor's blood-- rejected aristocracy.

Re:That's right, mods (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498907)

If you RTFA you would note that they have a NASA contract which that jet is going to be used on.

Re:That's right, mods (1)

postbigbang (761081) | about 6 years ago | (#25499039)

I did.

Nothing like a little government money.

Re:That's right, mods (4, Funny)

mr_mischief (456295) | about 6 years ago | (#25498945)

Sam Walton is dead. It's difficult to drive a pickup while afflicted with such a condition.

Re:That's right, mods (5, Insightful)

MBGMorden (803437) | about 6 years ago | (#25499033)

Hmmmm. And Sarah Palin's $150,000 was also good fiscal prudence, too?

I'm not voting for her either way, but I fail to see why people pounce on her for this. She's a public figure that is engaging in the mother of all popularity contests. Like it or not, appearance makes a HUGE difference to the American people. That $150,000 is an investment in her campaign plain and simple. If she stood up there in K-mart clothes people would have perceived her as less sophisticated.

Essentially, consider it part of the advertising budget. When you're trying to sell yourself to a nation packaging is important.

Re:That's right, mods (4, Informative)

Shade of Pyrrhus (992978) | about 6 years ago | (#25498867)

So what is the jet really for, though? For fun? According to another article [gawker.com] ...

Science, of course! H211 LLC uses many of its jets for NASA-sponsored experiments, since they operate primarily out of Moffett field, a NASA-controlled airstrip that's conveniently located right next to Google's Mountain View HQ. The jet was acquired to carry scientific instruments that could not be rigged up to Boeing 757/767 and Gulfstream jets the company already operates, some of which were used to monitor the re-entry of the ESA's Jules Verne satellite.

Re:That's right, mods (5, Funny)

nizo (81281) | about 6 years ago | (#25499069)

When they start doing practice runs over Microsoft, the mission will be obvious.

Re:That's right, mods (-1, Flamebait)

yttrstein (891553) | about 6 years ago | (#25499075)

No, the problem is with people like you who refuse to entertain the idea that your own selfishness and greed is influenced heavily by wealthy people in the public eye.

Poetically, your defense of them has the same root as any defense of ridiculously wealthy people allowing their silly purchases of toys to be publicized. You either are one of them currently, or you want to be one.

I cannot think of a more pointless thing to pursue.

Re:Just think (3, Informative)

youngdev (1238812) | about 6 years ago | (#25498795)

who says the 2 are mutually exclusive. I would bet the google top execs contribute more to charity than this douche bag.

Re:Just think (2, Interesting)

bopo_the_mofo (888877) | about 6 years ago | (#25498983)

So, a company owned by some people who can put a lot of capital up front has bought a fast jet, which they lease to NASA at a profit.

How does this translate into...
"OMG, the evil ones are spending money on fancy toys instead of giving all their money to disadvantaged kittens!!! EVIL... EEEVIIIIIILLLL"

Knee-jerk.

Should it be asked? (4, Funny)

eclectro (227083) | about 6 years ago | (#25498079)

Are these guys Yahoos??

Re:Should it be asked? (1)

aproposofwhat (1019098) | about 6 years ago | (#25498323)

Well, their mastery of the search market makes Microsoft seem positively Lilliputian, so I guess they can choose whichever tribe they like :)

So? (1, Interesting)

RandoX (828285) | about 6 years ago | (#25498083)

Red Bull has one too. Does that make them evil?

I'd have one if I had that kind of money too.

Re:So? (5, Funny)

gclef (96311) | about 6 years ago | (#25498121)

Yes, Red Bull is definitely evil. You can tell by the taste.

Re:So? (4, Funny)

arudloff (564805) | about 6 years ago | (#25498193)

Yes, Red Bull is definitely evil. You can tell by the taste.

Or by it's association with Jagermeister.

Re:So? (1)

RMH101 (636144) | about 6 years ago | (#25498823)

OMG. I'm no stranger to vodka-and-red-bull, but *jagermeister*?

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498895)

cf: yager bomb!

Re:So? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25499177)

What are you 80? Jagerbombs are all the rage.

Re:So? (4, Funny)

X0563511 (793323) | about 6 years ago | (#25498207)

Red Bull: The Taste of Evil.

It gives you wings, but they don't say the wings are featherless...

Re:So? (0, Offtopic)

jellomizer (103300) | about 6 years ago | (#25498683)

Next time you go to the sports drink section in your store. Chances are you will find red bull being nicely displayed and their competitors covered with sticky syrup. It is not that Red Bull is cleaner then the other guys. It is that their stockers will open a can of Red Bull and pore it on their competition. To make them less appealing to customers. So yes Red Bull is Evil.

In other news (5, Funny)

xs650 (741277) | about 6 years ago | (#25498085)

In other news, Microsoft is installing anti-aircraft emplacements

Re:In other news (1)

badran (973386) | about 6 years ago | (#25498233)

AA guns ready (In soviet accent).

Re:In other news (3, Funny)

Tablizer (95088) | about 6 years ago | (#25498313)

In other news, Microsoft is installing anti-aircraft emplacements

MS has no worries: if Google flies too close, their plane gets a BSOD.
       

When spear meets shield... (4, Funny)

Vexler (127353) | about 6 years ago | (#25498339)

Fighter jet, which has been in "Beta" for years.

AA guns, with targeting system running Vista.

Ought to be a good show.

You mean chairs? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498389)

> In other news, Microsoft is installing anti-aircraft emplacements

So, Ballmer is buying more chairs?

Re:In other news (5, Funny)

rhyder128k (1051042) | about 6 years ago | (#25498411)

Command And Conquer 5: Microsoft vs Google.

Take my tip - don't buy too many shipping crate data centres at the beginning as you're better off upgrading to an IPv6 infrastructure as early as possible.

Some people build up a massive force of tanks and try to wear MS down (the MS tanks are unreliable, they run their own software) but I prefer to create my own web browser and give away as much free email storage as I can. I don't like using too much lock-in if I'm playing as Google but it's unavoidable if you want to win.

I hate those "novelty" missions where you've got to get Balmer across the map or something.

Re:In other news (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498957)

Actually this is just Google Flight Simulator. They are testing it internally right now. You should expect to see it on Google Labs shortly.

Re:In other news (2, Funny)

Kwiik (655591) | about 6 years ago | (#25498535)

Your order is wrong, you must be from Soviet Russia... first, they get attacked and their main campus "overheats". This isn't a bug or attack, it is a feature.

Next, they decide that they have improved their public image enough by providing "inter-operability" with Google's new "cloud" based platform, and that is when they upgrade their Anti Malware solution, to add sharks with anti-aircraft lasers

Re:In other news (1)

Kwiik (655591) | about 6 years ago | (#25498577)

Might I add that Google doesn't mind their new fighter jet being shot down, because it Google Fighter Jet Beta. Google doesn't fail.

Re:In other news (1)

rpmayhem (1244360) | about 6 years ago | (#25499103)

I knew it! Microsoft SAM [wikipedia.org] was just a cover!

hint (4, Funny)

kulakovich (580584) | about 6 years ago | (#25498107)

> It is not clear who exactly flies the fighter jet,

Hint: The Google AI

Re:hint (1)

Chaos Incarnate (772793) | about 6 years ago | (#25498169)

Paging Miles Dyson... Paging Miles Dyson...

Re:hint (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498969)

Just found this on google labs

Google Toolbar for Fighter Jets.

FYI (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498145)

When fighter jets, tanks, etc. are sold to civilians, most of the fun stuff is ripped out.

This is basically the rich fuck's version of buying a sports car when you're 50 to stroke your ego.

Re:FYI (1, Informative)

sexconker (1179573) | about 6 years ago | (#25498173)

Why the hell is everything I post posting as AC?
Well, now it works... (or so claims the preview).

Re:FYI (2, Funny)

X0563511 (793323) | about 6 years ago | (#25498257)

Well, true, all the fun stuff comes out.

But it isn't very hard to pack it full of fuel and other things-that-go-foosh.

I'm sure the folks at google could wire a laptop inside to guide the thing to the Redmond campus.

I think you see where I'm going with this :D

Re:FYI (2, Interesting)

MBGMorden (803437) | about 6 years ago | (#25498899)

Depends. If you're a terrorist or fledgling militia or something, then yeah, the "fun stuff" is taken out. Being a pilot though, a functional fighter jet in itself definitely qualifies as "fun stuff".

Hell I'll admit that if I had the money that they did I'd probably buy one too (along with a P-51 Mustang because I've always wanted one). It wouldn't be for stroking an ego as much as it would be just being able to afford cool "toys" that are FUN.

In the Future (2, Funny)

xpuppykickerx (1290760) | about 6 years ago | (#25498157)

Companies will do battle in the sky to prove superiority.

Not that unusual. (3, Interesting)

lunartik (94926) | about 6 years ago | (#25498171)

This isn't a big deal, Bob Lutz (Vice Chairman of GM, Retired Marine Aviator) owned a MiG i think, and now flies around in a Czech fighter.

Jack Roush (NASCAR owner, head of Roush Industries) owns a bunch of WWII fighters.

The odd part is that the Google guys seem to have bought it through some company.

Re:Not that unusual. (4, Interesting)

JCSoRocks (1142053) | about 6 years ago | (#25498243)

The Governator owns a number of tanks. Including the one he drove when he was in the military.

Re:Not that unusual. (1)

sorak (246725) | about 6 years ago | (#25498905)

The Governator owns a number of tanks. Including the one he drove when he was in the military.

He was in the military? Which one?

Re:Not that unusual. (1)

Philzli (813353) | about 6 years ago | (#25499157)

M47

Re:Not that unusual. (3, Informative)

scubamage (727538) | about 6 years ago | (#25498337)

Most likely they purchased it through a privately held company because companies have lessened license restrictions for purchasing any class of weapon (ie, if you want to own an RPG legally, just start a corporation and you can buy whatever you want). I'm not sure if licensure is necessary for military aircraft (even decommissioned) but who knows, maybe that's the reason? Plus if they'd bought it through google maybe they'd be concerned about a shareholder backlash? These are just guesses btw, but its what I would surmise.

Re:Not that unusual. (5, Funny)

sorak (246725) | about 6 years ago | (#25498927)

Most likely they purchased it through a privately held company because companies have lessened license restrictions for purchasing any class of weapon (ie, if you want to own an RPG legally, just start a corporation and you can buy whatever you want). I'm not sure if licensure is necessary for military aircraft (even decommissioned) but who knows, maybe that's the reason? Plus if they'd bought it through google maybe they'd be concerned about a shareholder backlash? These are just guesses btw, but its what I would surmise.

But if they used Google Checkout, they could have gotten $10 dollars off.

Re:Not that unusual. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25499047)

Most likely it was done for tax reasons - after all it is so hard to get by when you are a millionaire / billionaire / gazillionaire.

Mig-21 on Ebay a couple weeks ago (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498643)

There was a former Czech air force MIG-21 for sale on Ebay a couple weeks ago with a "buy it now" price of only $45K. The aircraft was located in Ohio and was in ready-to-fly restored condition, and is actively flown in air shows. While the purchase price was cheap, it is hideously expensive to operate a MIG-21. A half-hour flight consumes almost $2000 worth of Jet-A fuel. Also a MIG-21 can only carry about two hour's worth of fuel onboard anyway. The engine in it has to be overhauled at a cost of over $100K about every 250 hours of flight time too, since Russian jet engines are built with such loose mechanical tolerances in the moving parts.

and Michael Dorn (2, Informative)

TrekkieGod (627867) | about 6 years ago | (#25498687)

Even some actors [wikipedia.org] are into that.

I have to say that there's something fitting about Worf in a fighter jet

Re:Not that unusual. (1)

jd (1658) | about 6 years ago | (#25498941)

Old fighters, sure. After a certain period of time of disuse, warbirds become available for civilians - usually sans armament. However, something still in use in the 1980s seems... very modern to have been released into civilian hands. However, released it has been. There seems to be no question of that. Getting spare parts - ah, now that's another matter. Since such planes are only released long after any serious production has ceased, both the parts and the expertise to make them correctly will be in very short supply. This is not a trivial matter. The last flying Mosquito crashed because a replacement carburetor for one of the engines failed during an aerobatics display, and component failures that would simply not have happened under any kind of meaningful quality assurance are nowhere near as uncommon as they aught to be.

Integration? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498175)

Android + Maps + Fighter Jet = Deadly Precision with real-time traffic!

Funny thing to have around (5, Funny)

jeffmeden (135043) | about 6 years ago | (#25498209)

Isn't it hard to live up to "do no evil" when you have a strike-capable air force? This is a slippery slope, indeed. I think the next time the Yahoo! talks escalate, things just might go a little differently.

Re:Funny thing to have around (1)

iztehsux (1339985) | about 6 years ago | (#25498653)

I'd buy more than strike-capable air jets, I'd be hoarding tanks too!

Obviously (2, Funny)

ThePyro (645161) | about 6 years ago | (#25498237)

Obviously this is a first step toward achieving air superiority in the skies above Google's new aquatic data centers. As the Google Navy continues to expand its influence the importance of protecting the fleet from airborne threats will increase.

Also, never underestimate the bandwidth of a fighter jet full of tapes screaming across the sky at Mach 3.

Re:Obviously (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498293)

Also, never underestimate the bandwidth of a fighter jet full of tapes screaming across the sky at Mach 3.

You mean, "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a fighter jet full of 64GB flash drives at Mach 3"

get with the times....tapes, sheesh....

Showdown! (2, Interesting)

halcyon1234 (834388) | about 6 years ago | (#25498255)

Awesome! Maybe they can challenge Dexter Holland of The Offspring to a dogfight:

cashflow has been very good to The Offspring. This has allowed singer Dexter Holland to engage in his favourite hobbies. First, there?s stamp collecting (specifically those from the Isle of Man in the U.K.). If you?re a philatelist, you know how expensive that can be. I said 'philatelist'. Look it up. Then there's Dexter's passion for airplanes and flying. Here's a quote: "Some people are into golf, some people are into shooting deer. I'm into flying". Dexter first got his pilot's license back in 1996. Over the years, his certifications became more and more sophisticated. He owns a Citation 2, which is a twin-engine jet that can fly as high as 43,000 feet for 2,000 miles at a time. They run for about $2.5 million - used. Dexter calls it 'Anarchy Airlines'. The tail fin is painted with a logo and everything. Inside, the interior is decked-out in leopard prints. Oh, and there's more. Dexter also flies an Aero Vodochody L-39, a Russian fighter jet.

- Alan Cross, Ongoing History of New Music, "100 weird things about new rock - part 9" [ongoinghistory.com]

Re:Showdown! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498601)

Aero is Czech , not Russian.

Re:Showdown! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25498805)

Alan Cross is a douchebag, Vodochody is in Czech

Re:Showdown! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25499027)

You're a chody. Does that make you Czech?

Far out thought (4, Interesting)

svendsen (1029716) | about 6 years ago | (#25498271)

This is beyond the realm of reality so cut me some slack...

Corporations (or their top execs) are starting to buy military hardware. Do you think we will ever see a corporation declare war on another corporation?

Gives a whole new meaning to hostile takeover...

Re:Far out thought (4, Insightful)

BlowHole666 (1152399) | about 6 years ago | (#25498497)

This is beyond the realm of reality so cut me some slack... Corporations (or their top execs) are starting to buy military hardware. Do you think we will ever see a corporation declare war on another corporation? Gives a whole new meaning to hostile takeover...

You mean like the East India Company [wikipedia.org] ?

Re:Far out thought (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | about 6 years ago | (#25498589)

Jericho; War, Inc? They're closer than we think.

Re:Far out thought (1)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | about 6 years ago | (#25498699)

Do you think we will ever see a corporation declare war on another corporation?

You're at least 150 yrs too late. East India Company. [wikipedia.org]

Re:Far out thought (2, Insightful)

TheModelEskimo (968202) | about 6 years ago | (#25498877)

>Do you think we will ever see a corporation declare war on another corporation?

Most people will tell you this has already happened. Most of it has been done by proxy so far, i.e. friends in the government. But I think you're asking for the meaty stuff?

With today's security situation the way it is, I'm guessing it won't be long before security contractors like BlackWater notice that CEOs enjoy fighter jets and begin to offer complementary patrol services. Only for the richest. Formation flyovers above corp HQ three times a day tell you that your husband is safe working in the new MegaCorp Building building gas canisters to be used against fringe groups, and the Baptists for Free America extremists won't ever sneak another Beechcraft loaded with FAE through our 49th floor lobby.

Alas, Babylon

Re:Far out thought (5, Interesting)

TubeSteak (669689) | about 6 years ago | (#25499013)

Corporations (or their top execs) are starting to buy military hardware. Do you think we will ever see a corporation declare war on another corporation?

Corporations have, relatively recently, declared war on other countries, not just other companies.

The British & Dutch East India Trading Company is the first one that comes to mind which had an army, navy, minted money, warred with countries & companies and setup & administered governments.

We talk about corporate influence in government, but what exists now pales in comparison to the overt control and militarism of years gone past.

Re:Far out thought (1)

maxume (22995) | about 6 years ago | (#25499109)

Isn't the U.S. already at war with OPEC?

Space Weapons must be next? (4, Funny)

NobodyExpects (843016) | about 6 years ago | (#25498283)

So... Google has added an "airforce" to complement their navy [slashdot.org] ...

Re:Space Weapons must be next? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25499083)

Well, duh, everybody knows air cooling is cheaper than water cooling.

google navy needs air cover (1)

RichMan (8097) | about 6 years ago | (#25498327)

Google Navy [slashdot.org]

That's not bombs it's carrying... (1)

MiniMike (234881) | about 6 years ago | (#25498335)

It must be carrying pinatas full of candy and goodwill...

Michael Dorn (Worf) (1)

TWX (665546) | about 6 years ago | (#25498357)

Didn't Michael Dorn (Worf of Star Trek: The Next Generation) buy a fighter or a trainer after he was done with TV?

Re:Michael Dorn (Worf) (1)

kungfugleek (1314949) | about 6 years ago | (#25498765)

"Ramming speed!"

Just wait till Obama gets elected... (4, Funny)

RogueWarrior65 (678876) | about 6 years ago | (#25498383)

They'll have to offer free rides to people who could never afford a plane of their own.

Re:Just wait till Obama gets elected... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25499073)

Isn't that what military service is for? /ducks

(checks to make sure AC box is checked!)

google bombed (2, Funny)

xaositects (786749) | about 6 years ago | (#25498425)

luckily it's payload is light.

Interesting! (1)

areusche (1297613) | about 6 years ago | (#25498509)

They can use these fighter jets to fend off the pirates attacking their oceanic data centers!

In all seriousness it sounds more like a , "Dude I own a fighter jet!" then a, "Let's defend our data centers from Microsoft and Pirates!"

How is this news? (1)

Madman (84403) | about 6 years ago | (#25498533)

OK, so a couple of rich guys buy an expensive toy, so what? They already own a boeing 757, and a 767 for chrissake, and you didn't post those aquisitions.

Pfft! (1)

speroni (1258316) | about 6 years ago | (#25498629)

Its no Rocket Car...

Rocket Car [slashdot.org]

It's a trainer (4, Insightful)

confused one (671304) | about 6 years ago | (#25498651)

It's an advanced trainer. It's a toy. (albeit a rich man's toy). What's the big deal -- he already owns several aircraft. This isn't even uncommon.

Now, if you told me he bought a couple of fully armed F22's, THAT would be news. (you may, of course, substitute your plane of choice for the F22)

Calling it a jet fighter is more sensational (2, Informative)

Nimey (114278) | about 6 years ago | (#25498747)

The Collings Foundation owns an actual jet fighter, an F-4D Phantom II from the Vietnam War. They had to get all kinds of waivers from the Feds to be able to own and operate it. This is for display at airshows.

I wonder if when they turn on the radar... (3, Funny)

teh_c0unt (1392683) | about 6 years ago | (#25498711)

...the first thing to come up is a wikipedia article?

Finally Google shifts to Iceland (4, Funny)

ghoul (157158) | about 6 years ago | (#25498755)

Well they have the cheap geothermal power and the free cooling for the datacenters. The only hitch was how out of the way iceland is. But it does have an abandoned NATO airfield so now that the top execs can jet in and out in an hour or so at supersonic speeds goodbye Silicon Valley Hello Reykjavik. Solves all the turnover problem too as in "You want to leave Google and join Microsoft. Fine as soon as you get security clearance from the Icelandic government you can leave (never that is)" With Iceland being bankrupt they would sell their souls and change their national anthem to "Do no evil" if Google comes calling.

Controversy (2, Interesting)

sycodon (149926) | about 6 years ago | (#25498999)

This was the subject of some controvery in the aviation community.

Moffett Field is a Naval installation and as such civilians cannot use it unless it's a emergency and even then you can expect to spend some time answering questions posed by the Military Police.

I understand the nearest civilian airport that can accept jets is quite a ways away.

So how did the google guys obtain rights to use Moffet field when no other civilians can?

Just a guess (3, Informative)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 6 years ago | (#25499125)

But I suspect is has to do with a large stack of paper with pictures of presidents on them. You'd be amazed out how well such things work when the stack is large enough. The key is to make sure that your get them into the right hands. Elected officials are particularly partial to them, and hold a great deal of sway over what is and what isn't allowed.

Paul Allen has a missile (1)

zaax (637433) | about 6 years ago | (#25499017)

Actually a WWII V1 Doodle Bug. It was found in the V2 production workshop in Germany just after WWII. He also has a super-rare, original Messerschmitt Me-262 jet fighter. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Allen [wikipedia.org]

In other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 years ago | (#25499175)

I bought a toothbrush and some new underwear. Really guys, is this stuff that matters?

tag: !news

they're going to put a datacenter in it (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | about 6 years ago | (#25499181)

while shipping container datacenters get all of the news today, google has realized that a shipping container just isn't very sexy

meanwhile, imagine a full rack of server hardware, effortlessly streaming youtube movies and search returns, all the while cruising at mach 1 above the rockies

now that's some seriously sexy IT hardware

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?