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!

In the Google Navy

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the thats-a-lotta-boats dept.

Earth 129

theodp writes "Having already assembled a private Air Force, Google's top execs now seem to be turning their attention to building a personal Navy. At last count, CEO Eric Schmidt's wife had assembled a stable of three classic racing boats — the Swan 80 Selene, the 46-foot W-class Equus and the Alerion Mischief. Perhaps not to be outdone, the press is reporting that Google founder Larry Page just snapped up a $45 million superyacht called Senses from New Zealand businessman Sir Douglas Myers, who referred to the ostentatious-yet-awesome yacht as his 'adventure boat.' As Google likes to say, 'just the latest steps in Google's commitment to a clean and green energy future.' So, do Google execs eat their own carbon footprint calculator dogfood?" All I know is if Larry wants to go fishing, I'll bring bait — or he can come here and fish on Zen's pontoon boat. It only leaked once, the engine usually starts right up, and while there's no helipad, I'd love to watch someone try.

cancel ×

129 comments

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

all you know indeed... (0)

MichaelKristopeit353 (1968162) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839334)

slashdot = stagnated

Not a Navy (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839362)

It's not really a Navy unless it's got guns, or a least archers or spear-throwers or something.

Re:Not a Navy (3, Funny)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839398)

Well, if either of them bring their laptops on board I'm sure they have some electronic warfare capabilities.

Re:Not a Navy (1)

Gunkerty Jeb (1950964) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839530)

Even without weapons the Google Armada is a formidable enemy.

Re:Not a Navy (4, Informative)

rainmouse (1784278) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839738)

It's not really a Navy unless it's got guns, or a least archers or spear-throwers or something.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merchant_Navy [wikipedia.org]

Re:Not a Navy (1)

jklovanc (1603149) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839854)

I was going to make that comment as well so I looked up the definition of navy and found that it includes any group of ships.

Re:Not a Navy (1)

specialguy92 (1974828) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841574)

Nobody expects the Google Inquisition!

Re:Not a Navy (1)

plate_o_shrimp (948271) | more than 3 years ago | (#34843044)

I saw recently that the HMS Invincible was up for auction. Does Eric need an aircraft carrier?

Ummm...? (5, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839380)

Enormously rich person buys large object, news at 10?

Re:Ummm...? (4, Funny)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839412)

Hello, this is the news at 10. In headlines tonight: an enormously large object squashes a rich person.

Re:Ummm...? (4, Interesting)

Monkeedude1212 (1560403) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839442)

Yes. But... But But... But.... These are Google Execs! You see, when a rich executive does something that is frowned upon, they bring shame to their company. But when a company does something that is frowned upon, no one blames the exec. It's a completely unilateral relationship where there is absolutely no personal responsibility when an organization does something wrong, but it is ENTIRELY the organization to blame if the executive officers decide to do something like this.

Are you getting it yet? The entire corporation that is Google isn't living up to its standards because 2 individuals don't!

Re:Ummm...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839624)

But when a company does something that is frowned upon, no one blames the exec.

Tony Hayword (and many other present and former CEOs) might disagree with you on that one.

I'd also like to note that this troll submission offers no actual information on the carbon impact of the purchases in question, nor of Schmitt, Page or Google's actual environmental record.

Re:Ummm...? (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839710)

While there are various subtleties, externalities, and subsidies to consider, it is usually a fairly safe bet that a large expensive object, if produced by anything resembling a contemporary global supply chain, will have a substantial environmental footprint. Exactly how large can be more difficult; but between transport costs and hydrocarbon chemical feedstocks, price and size are a reasonably good proxy measurement.

Re:Ummm...? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839772)

But, but, but, he bought it USED. It already had a footprint. Maybe he bought it to, you know, recycle it?

Re:Ummm...? (2)

CohibaVancouver (864662) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840030)

But when a company does something that is frowned upon, no one blames the exec

Are you joking? The hate that much of Slashdot had (and continues to has) on for Bill Gates verges on irrational lunacy....

Re:Ummm...? (1)

Tarsir (1175373) | more than 3 years ago | (#34842876)

If only I had mod points...

Re:Ummm...? (1)

MichaelKristopeit355 (1968164) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839692)

slashdot = stagnated .

Re:Ummm...? (1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839800)

FWIW, supposedly Mark Zuckerberg commutes in a relatively humble Acura TSX. http://time.com/poy [time.com]

Re:Ummm...? (1)

BigSlowTarget (325940) | more than 3 years ago | (#34842006)

There's a little secret to the economy. Even though rich people make huge profits and take large salaries if most of it goes into investments it doesn't matter much. When the money is invested somewhere it's adding value to the world. It isn't going to feed the hungry, but it is going to increase efficiency, build businesses or enable people to live a decent life. After it is done doing that it can be reinvested to do it again and again pretty much forever.

When that money is taken out and blown it on something you are redirecting real productive assets away from improving the world toward making large pointless objects. This is when societal problems are realized - sort of locked into reality. For example: The wood for the boat is gone - so it cannot be made into houses (or the gas is burned or the engineer's time is spent, etc.). If there is a time to be offended at excess it is at this point, not when the original amounts were earned and then wisely invested by people the market has evaluated as good decisionmakers.

These decisions mean that these resources are permanently and forever removed from the global pool. That's why it's interesting.

Thank you /. for sticking that song... (1)

jappleng (1805148) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839384)

Thank you /. for sticking "in the navy" in my head. It also somehow has a YMCA blend to it too. Say, wasn't Google at one time at least helping NASA develop rockets?

Re:Thank you /. for sticking that song... (5, Funny)

countSudoku() (1047544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839458)

In the Google navy
Yes, you can yacht the seven seas
In the Google navy
Yes, you can put your search at ease
In the Google navy
Come on now, people, they're going green
In the Google navy, in the Google navy

This is news? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839386)

Seriously, who cares? Why is this on the main page of slashdot?

Re:This is news? (1)

AndrewNeo (979708) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839504)

Have you seen the front page of Slashdot lately?

Re:This is news? (1)

MichaelKristopeit355 (1968164) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839558)

slashdot = stagnated .

Newsflash (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839392)

Liberals don't really care about causes, just looking like they care.

Re:Newsflash (0, Troll)

countSudoku() (1047544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839432)

And all Repubicans (I meant it that way) are ignorantm anti-Americans who cannot accept alternative views, own guns, and are an inch away from their own gun-toting rampage. It's all true! BTW, most will also post as AC because they can't even trust their own fellow, gun-toting, douchebag, red tie buddies. Ask the guy who got his face shot off by Dick Cheney.

your final sentence (0)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839450)

really nailed all your points firmly into place without possibility of objection.

Ask the guy who got his face shot off by Dick Cheney.

Re:Newsflash (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839576)

I'm a Republican that met Dick Cheney in the Las Vegas airport bathroom, he didn't tap his foot or shoot me in the face with a quail gun.

I do own guns, and I'm more than happy to get my news from alternative sources and accept alternative views. Hell I lived on a Kibbutz for a year and support tax hikes on the wealthy. I also voted for the Democrat for the Governor of Alaska in '10 (he ran on more of a drilling and pipeline platform) and wrote in Murlowski in the race against the Tea Bagger.

The only thing I've gone on a rampage against is a shotgun vs a balky printer from work.

Re:Newsflash (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839746)

And all Repubicans (I meant it that way) are ignorantm anti-Americans who cannot accept alternative views, own guns, and are an inch away from their own gun-toting rampage. It's all true! BTW, most will also post as AC because they can't even trust their own fellow, gun-toting, douchebag, red tie buddies. Ask the guy who got his face shot off by Dick Cheney.

Really? Who pushes "hate speech" codes and "hate crimes" laws?

Ask Juan Williams what the political leanings of the hacks who fired him from NPR for daring to state that seeing an obvious Muslim on the same plane makes him nervous.

Find a gay conservative. Ask him if it's easier being gay at conservative functions, or being conservative at gay functions.

"Progressives" are immensely less tolerant of alternate viewpoints than "conservatives" are.

Re:Newsflash (-1, Offtopic)

countSudoku() (1047544) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840302)

More bullshit from an A. COWARD. Sit down, shut up, and read a fucking book, you turd. I'm a middle of the road, ex-military, type. So, be careful with your claims of "hate speech", son.

This is blue site, for science, technology and making the USA a place for progress. Not a site for your fucked up views on how you need more automatic weapons to save yourself from the "dangerous liberals" who threaten your ignorant view of the world. The mouse and computer you're using to spin your pro-Palin agenda were designed and coded by wacky, left-wing, nerds. Not gun-loving, tobacco chewing, hillbillies. Like I said; read a book, red-tie douche. I'm not very liberal myself, but I served in this country's military so they, and you can spout off using the freedom of speech that now causes real violence when mixed with guns and ignorant thoughts and pictures of public servants with overlaid gun-site graphics. Also, use another login. AC is low-brow, like your forehead. You have a Score of 0. FAIL!!1!

If you're not pro-science, pro-embryonic stem cell, pro-choice, or anti-automatic weapons consider yourself not an American. Period.

Re:Newsflash (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34840550)

Remind me who is the one filled with dangerous rhetoric, again?

Re:Newsflash (0)

iserlohn (49556) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840682)

You can't even understand the difference between being overly passionate and dangerous rhetoric. GP was abrasive, but not violent. No mention of a "second amendment solution", no mention of "reload", no.. well you get the idea...

Re:Newsflash (0)

captainwisdom (1182145) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840736)

Oh knock it off countsodoku. I have many friends that served in the military and they love their personal guns and they don't shoot anybody. It's called a metaphor. Just words. And I'm a conservative that programs computers for a living. It's quite true that liberals are pretty poor on the second amendment. And it's people like you that help to inflame the public discussion. Where do liberals get off demonizing everybody that disagrees with them? It's obvious that the country is about half/half liberals vs conservative. And yet too many liberals truly, truly believe that conservatives don't have legitimate viewpoints. It's just unacceptable

Re:Newsflash (-1, Offtopic)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841112)

It's quite true that liberals are pretty poor on the second amendment.

This gun toting liberal disagrees. Liberal enough to say that there is no liberal party here just conservatives and ultra conservative fascists. What legitimate viewpoints would you like to bring up? Hatred of homosexuals, maybe fear of empowered women, or how about your feelings on those uppity minorities?
That was not fair, you probably have a great plan to stop taxing anyone who makes more money than you.

Re:Newsflash (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34841384)

It's quite true that liberals are pretty poor on the second amendment.

This gun toting liberal disagrees. Liberal enough to say that there is no liberal party here just conservatives and ultra conservative fascists. What legitimate viewpoints would you like to bring up? Hatred of homosexuals, maybe fear of empowered women, or how about your feelings on those uppity minorities?
That was not fair, you probably have a great plan to stop taxing anyone who makes more money than you.

Like liberals' fear of Sarah Palin?

Re:Newsflash (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841500)

Laughing at someone is not a sign of fear.

Re:Newsflash (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34842278)

Laughing at someone is not a sign of fear.

Laughing? I think not:

Abort Sarah Palin [cafepress.com] bumper sticker.

So, why are leftists so AFRAID of Sarah Palin, anyway?

Besides, we're all finding out the hard way that the laughinstock of 2008 was good old Hopenchange himself.

Troops out of Iraq yet? Nope. In fact, we're now doing a SURGE in Afghanistan, and it's even led by one General Betray-Us. (Ever hear that name before?)

Illegal wiretops stopped? Hardly.

Gitmo closed? No way.

Bush tax cuts repealed? Hell no. They were EXTENDED - by a Democratic House (lame duck session was controlled by Dems), a Democratic Senate, and signed by a Democratic President.

"Change" my ass. Obama has endorsed and extended every significant policy of George W. Bush.

The fact that probably makes your head explode amuses me to no end.

HA HA HA

Re:Newsflash (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34841040)

More bullshit from an A. COWARD. Sit down, shut up, and read a fucking book, you turd. I'm a middle of the road, ex-military, type. So, be careful with your claims of "hate speech", son.

This is blue site, for science, technology and making the USA a place for progress. [deleted extraneous crap that always follows that buzzword]

Wow. A "Sit down, shut up" response to the statement:

"Progressives" are immensely less tolerant of alternate viewpoints than "conservatives" are.

Q.E.D.

Thanks for proving my point.

Taco mad (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839404)

U mad Taco?

I remember the heady days of the LNUX IPO. Boy were you all riding high back then. ESR was planning to charge for speaking engagements, after putting pen to paper one last time for us, in the form of a gloat over what he thought was new found wealth. You yourself were entertaining questions about what kind of car a newly minted millionaire geek drives.

Those days are off behind you now though. No doubt you once dreamed of yachts and air forces and the like. But that was 6 or 8 company name changes ago and who knows how many realignments of the business model. Can you even buy a toy boat now?

Probably not.

dont know about taco but ... (-1, Offtopic)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839474)

you, apparently, ARE mad. and i dont even know why.

not to mention that someone not aspiring to buy yachts or millionaire sports cars would be the person who would have acceptable qualities, than the one who would seek to equate its own ego with those external objects to supplement it, or toy with them.

Re:dont know about taco but ... (1)

MichaelKristopeit331 (1966802) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839752)

maybe you don't "even know why" because he isn't really mad, and the whole time you were simply an ignorant hypocrite.

slashdot = stagnated

Re:dont know about taco but ... (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841236)

no i dont know he isnt really mad. i dont have an obligation to spare inane efforts to see sarcasm everywhere i go - which happens to be the most abundant commodity on the net by the way.

basically, i dont have to oblige with anyone's shitty sarcasm. if one wants to say something, s/he should directly say it.

Re:dont know about taco but ... (1)

MichaelKristopeit341 (1967638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841320)

you make claims while lacking any evidence, and later justify it with the ubiquity of others doing the same.

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

cower behind your chosen pseudonym some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:dont know about taco but ... (1)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841468)

let me put it this way :

the guy, talked as if he was mad. i have read it, taking it as he pictured himself, that is, as mad.

i dont have any obligation to see deeper meanings or connotations or references or hidden implications in any random schmock's post on the internet.

by the way, i havent made any claim. it was you who pulled me making a claim out of your ass. you can put it back there, if you wish.

tho, i want to thank you for providing me with the opportunity to voice my opinion about this very rare sarcasm phenomenon that we have on the net. ooops - that was sarcasm too ? how rare !!!

Re:dont know about taco but ... (1)

MichaelKristopeit342 (1967640) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841564)

no one talked as if they were mad. they wrote words that made you experience the feeling of "mad".

you're an ignorant hypocrite.

you, apparently, ARE mad.

emphasis your own... you understand that is a claim, don't you?

you're an idiot

cower behind your chosen pseudonym some more, feeb.

you're completely pathetic.

Re:dont know about taco but ... (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841898)

Now, I know your UID is close to a million, but almost as many people have joined after you as before, so someone really should have said this to you before now:

Don't feed the trolls!

Re:dont know about taco but ... (0)

unity100 (970058) | more than 3 years ago | (#34842090)

did it occur to you that i am utilizing the trolls to allow me make some points i want to make, for 3rd parties to read ?

Re:dont know about taco but ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34842924)

You should know better than to tell a troll to not feed the trolls.

Re:Taco mad (1)

MichaelKristopeit330 (1963782) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839732)

slashdot = stagnated .

and while there's no helipad (1)

Suki I (1546431) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839444)

"and while there's no helipad" What? No way! Count me out then unless accommodations are made for my Xheli [xheli.com] .

Sea View, Harbour View? (5, Interesting)

bananaendian (928499) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839496)

I predict they will cruise around the world taking photos of every harbour, ship and shoreline.

I also predict they will get into trouble for doing that.

All of the world's marine traffic [marinetraffic.com] in real-time is already on Google... (ok, its basically just overlayed AIS data, but still its effing cool ! just try to find an application that is cooler! or is it wetter?)

You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboats? (5, Insightful)

jbc (3796) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839500)

Carbon footprint of racing sailboat is pretty much 0, at least while it's actually racing. I'll grant you that construction and the diesel auxiliary contributes to greenhouse gas emissions, and especially if they're having it moved around on a container ship so it's ready to go in exotic locations, and then flying in to sail on it, they're pretty much at the head of the line in terms of their individual contribution to future generations' climate-related misery. But overall, I think sailboats should be way down your list if you're making a catalog of climate-hostile consumption.

Still, I realize this is slashdot. Let the poorly-informed outrage fly!

Re:You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboat (2)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839982)

Generally speaking, the only kinds of racing that have anything approaching a 'green' fotprint are the kinds of racing that leave footprints.

Auto racing can't claim a green footprint. Even solar racing has a manufacturing footprint that is noticeable.

Boats? Powerboats of course just crave fuels. Sail? Except perhaps for some small classes, they rely on exotic materials. Smaller classes are starting to give in to this a little bit.

Planes? hehe... Gliders? Carbon-fiber.

Even bicycles use such exotics that their footprint is scary, perhaps the worst emissions/lb. of anything.

But footracing, horse racing, maybe.

Re:You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboat (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34840332)

How is carbon fiber not 'green' - you are keeping some carbon form becoming CO2! Heck the manure from horse racing is probably worse for the environment than small amounts of carbon fiber and cloth.

Re:You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboat (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840898)

Making a carbon fiber epoxy composite uses a bunch of energy etc. I imagine that's what he referred to.
You're not keeping carbon from being CO2, net.

Re:You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboat (1)

Tailhook (98486) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840426)

I think sailboats should be way down your list if you're making a catalog of climate-hostile consumption.

Why?

http://galenfrysinger.name/eh61/harbor02.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Monterey_CA_harbor_p1070194.jpg
http://www.pictureninja.com/pages/new-zealand/north-island/auckland-harbor-sailboats.jpg
http://www.harborsailboats.com/images/mainpage.jpg
http://www.gdanmitchell.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/SouthBeachHarborMornFogSF20090701.jpg
http://reve.ed.shizuoka.ac.jp/photos/Honolulu02.jpg
http://thetriton.com/directory/userlogo/21736-5724_b.jpg
http://www.boatharborslocator.com/ca%20marin%20county/ca_marin_ar_lowrie_yacht_harbor.jpg

The coasts and inland lakes of every wealthy nation are littered with harbors filled with composite and hardwood sailboats and yachts. You dismiss concern over the climate impact of these because....?

If there is a more effective way to foster resistance to climate regulation than exempting the toys of the wealthy I'll need some help from the audience, because nothing comes to mind.

Re:You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboat (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840638)

I was going to make the same exact point.

As these are proper ocean cruiser boats you are not going to move them by container ship. 24m worth off composite hull is something you move by water with a hired crew, not by ship. Sailing such boats from A to B so that the person with excess pocket money can use it where they want it is a pretty good job if you can have it by the way. I would not mind being a sailing crew on one of those :)

So the only greenhouse emissions are from the leerjet flying you to the sailing destination and back.

If there is to be a choice, I woul definitely go for this (and Larry Ellison America cup obsession) compared to let's say top Microsoft execs lobbying for specia exemptions to the USA import regs so they can import limited use supercars for their personal consumption (which they did at least once).

Re:You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboat (1)

initdeep (1073290) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841182)

you can easily move very large ships from ocean to ocean via a piggyback ship.

in fact, there are ships designed for this very purpose, and moving a large sailing yacht is one of their main customers.

these specialized ships take on ballast and essentially purposefully flood their own decks and then the large sailing/motor yachts are driven over the deck, pilings are set to support them, and the ship pumps out the ballast to raise itself above the waterline.

why?

because its a lot cheaper to pay for one large transport to move from continent to continent than it is a whole bunch of little ones that require not only propulsion but electrical power as well.

Re:You realize Schmidt's wife's boats are sailboat (1)

ammorris (755429) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841730)

One such company is Dockwise Yacht Tranport - www.yacht-transport.com The larger the Sailboat / Yacht the more likely it is to move from place to place on it's own bottom.

Liberals don't actually believe... (0, Offtopic)

MikeDataLink (536925) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839540)

I hate to post this on slashdot... -5 TROLL here I come... but it's true.

"A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellowman, which debt he proposes to pay off with your money" -- G. Gordon Liddy

Just like Biden said... everyone should have a 2500sq ft or less house... as soon as Al Gore, and Biden sell their mansions and move to a 2500sq ft house, I might listen to them.

Re:Liberals don't actually believe... (1)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839794)

The world is full of liberals/socialists/workers/puritans/humanists who live by their beliefs. You usually don't hear them in the media because they're too busy living off a worker's wage, possibly playing a part in a local union, looking after people in the family and community, etc. to have the money to make their voice sufficiently loud.

Unfortunately, like the undergrad banner-waving protester who says "capitalists r evil hypocrites look at Bush/Hitler!", we have childlike Randroids with the idential "librals r evil hypocrites look at Gore/Stalin!" A nice balance of idealists from every faction seems to make for a nice outcome, with pragmatists acting as the glue to keep everyone stuck together.

Re:Liberals don't actually believe... (1)

initdeep (1073290) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841192)

The world is full of conservatives/religious people/workers/puritans/humanists who live by their beliefs. You usually don't hear them in the media because they're too busy living off a worker's wage, possibly playing a part in a local union, looking after people in the family and community or church, etc. to have the money to make their voice sufficiently loud.

Re:Liberals don't actually believe... (1)

FuckingNickName (1362625) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841722)

Yes, quite.

Re:Liberals don't actually believe... (1)

amRadioHed (463061) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840900)

Joe Biden's mansion? You might want to check your facts on that one.

In the Navy... (1)

scourfish (573542) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839542)

You can search the net with ease...

At Google, You Can (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839566)

Do No Evil [youtube.com] .

Yours In Odessa,
Kilgore Trout

inb4 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839588)

terrible Google Wave pun

Re:inb4 (1)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840468)

terrible Google Wave pun

sorry, all that came up when I googled that was this [tvtropes.org]

actually, I'm joking. the actual GIS results for that phrase were even more off the wall

(luxury) floating data center idea (1)

schlachter (862210) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839594)

remember the floating data center idea? They're doing it with style. sys admins on the night shift need to party, right?

Re:(luxury) floating data center idea (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839766)

That explains the recent push at google to recruit "linux sysadmins who look good in a bikini"...

Oww my English (5, Funny)

lennier (44736) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839656)

do Google execs eat their own carbon footprint calculator dogfood?

All those words... but together they.... the letters, the letters...

So it's come to this. After all those centuries, English, this is what you've become. Face down in the left gutter wearing Comic Sans with an empty carton of Strunk and White. Googling your own blogfeed indeed.

I just hope you're happy.

Re:Oww my English (2)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840942)

You gotta problem with four nouns jammed together in a sentence, huh? You must not be German. They cram 'em into one WORD.

Re:Oww my English (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34841740)

Like Donaudampfschifffahrtskapitänsmütze. But as an Austrian I agree with the parent poster. Do Americans like to eat dogfood?

Re:Oww my English (1)

treeves (963993) | more than 3 years ago | (#34842848)

Danke schoen for the example.

No, Americans don't like to eat *dogfood.
That is point of the saying: "you make/sell this stuff but you don't want to eat it (or have it apply to) yourself".

*We certainly do spend a lot on dogfood though.

What's next, Slashdot Cribs? (1)

Whatsmynickname (557867) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839722)

Does this article fit the "news for nerds, news that matters" criteria? Does every web site now have to show how pitiful my existence is compared to the "rich and famous"?

Inquiring minds want to know (4, Insightful)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 3 years ago | (#34839742)

Does owning a $45 million yacht significantly increase your probability of getting laid?

Re:Inquiring minds want to know (1)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840462)

Owning a $45 million anything will do that.

Re:Inquiring minds want to know (1)

arivanov (12034) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840696)

It does and I guess that is Taco's problem. Even after all these years he still has some of the reactions from the days when Slashdot was being run on an Alpha salvaged from a skip and put under the desk in his dorm room.

Time to let go dude.

Re:Inquiring minds want to know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34841046)

Does owning a $45 million yacht significantly increase your probability of getting laid?

The short answer is: YES

Re:Inquiring minds want to know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34842496)

YES. I own a $45 HUNDRED yacht and it helps. ;-) (although telling my fresh-faced crew to " blow the guy [wikipedia.org] " IS actually necessary during a spinnaker takedown)

Tech company with a Navy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839760)

They've got some catching up to do with Oracle

Obligatory (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839810)

Yvan elgoog eht nioj!

A Navy has guns (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34839868)

A navy has guns. Calling this a navy is like calling Jay Leno's garage a tank regiment. Just sayin'.

How's that "Don't be evil" working out? (1)

kriston (7886) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840056)

How's that "Don't be evil" working out?

Carbon-neutral? Nope.
Excessively reckless and wasteful? Yep.

The top AOL execs were never this ostentatious.

Well, we did buy Time Warner. They were bigger than your yacht and stable of Cigarette boats.

That's not a boat (1)

boristdog (133725) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840184)

THIS is a boat. [apolloduck.us]

If I had Larry Page's stupid amount of money, I'd get a real ship. Plus, you can make money with it if the GOOG stock tanks.

Or just load it up with 1400 hot chicks and sail around the world.

And of course, there's always THIS boat [maritimesales.com]

the boulevard (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34840348)

what if social and environmental stress become obvious issues? I'm a doomer: these ships are safe heavens, a result of strategic planning. the rich can afford walled gardens and construct privacy islands. sadly, they can't escape capitalism. it forces them to be the number one, to conquer markets they don't have interest in. so they can't buy out effectively.

Well, if they all sink ... (3, Funny)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840582)

... we'll get Google Davie Jones' Locker View, real soon ...

Net Google Carbon effect (1)

Yergle143 (848772) | more than 3 years ago | (#34840648)

But what about Good Google? How much carbon is saved each year, for example, by their handy maps? (Now if I could only get my wife to stop printing them out and just write the directions on a piece of waste paper) How much does Google reduce carbon by efficiently locating points of interest -- and someday -- helping you get your car to the nearest electrical outlet. Sniping at rich people's yachts is I guess a family tradition but the real problem with carbon hypocracy stories is they really don't take in the big picture. I'm for an all electric civilization; wave, wind, sun and nuke. Google is an extremely valuable part of that as it makes things smarter. They can keep their yachts and hovercraft and jet planes.

Google Sea Org? (1)

metamatic (202216) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841056)

Careful, it didn't end so well for L. Ron Hubbard.

Obama, welcome to my yacht (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34841068)

It comes with a helicopter. Sweet. Someday, the Obama's will be guests of honor. Larry Page visits the White House so often, that he must have already invited the Obama's for a ride...perhaps in two years...

This is news? (1)

das3cr (780388) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841446)

Someone with money bought a boat. News at 11.

I mean come on ... who the fraq cares?

Meh (1)

benjamindees (441808) | more than 3 years ago | (#34841828)

Any idiot can buy yachts and planes. You're not a truly awesome geek millionaire until you have a self-sufficient private island.

Phoenix 1000!!! (2)

U8MyData (1281010) | more than 3 years ago | (#34842122)

This is my documentation that if someone from google wants to buy the best in personal/corporate submarines, it's over here -> http://www.ussubmarines.com/submarines/phoenix_1000.php3 [ussubmarines.com] Check it out, you will be impressed if you haven't seen it before. How much for the finders fee? I might be able to right my own ship if everything works out ;-)

Re:Phoenix 1000!!! (1)

catmistake (814204) | more than 3 years ago | (#34842362)

No one will ever buy that. But it is interesting. Thx for the link.

Re:Phoenix 1000!!! (1)

U8MyData (1281010) | more than 3 years ago | (#34842922)

"No one will ever make money on the internet!" :-D

If you're going to buy a boat... (1)

TheSync (5291) | more than 3 years ago | (#34842348)

...then you should get a badass boat like this one [smugmug.com] , a 190 tons displacement, 37 meter costal patrol boat purchased by an early Internet pioneer from the Royal Navy.

I guess you could say that Larry Page has... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#34842458)

...missed the boat.

Thank you, thank you. Oh you're too kind.

Google Green? (1)

al0ha (1262684) | more than 3 years ago | (#34842486)

Probably when pigs fly; or maybe when all power is gleaned solely from the sun and/or nukes. But then that only accounts for carbon created for power generation. What about the emissions from the servers themselves while running, plastic wire coatings decaying, the actual creation of the parts that make up the servers - etc., etc., etc.

The only way for Google to ever be green in reality is to cease their business. Let's get real.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>