Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

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!

Obama Administration Closing Recently Opened Datacenters

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the breaking-eggs-for-omelet-stimulus dept.

Government 262

An anonymous reader writes "After quadrupling the number of government datacenters over his first three years, Obama's Administration is reversing course and closing the most recently opened datacenters. With one datacenter reportedly the size of three football fields, my question is what happens to all those recently purchased servers? Will the government hold a server fire sale? Count me in!"

cancel ×

262 comments

Gubmint in Action: (1, Insightful)

Cornwallis (1188489) | more than 2 years ago | (#37060850)

Ready, Fire, Aim!

Re:Gubmint in Action: (-1, Offtopic)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061018)

Lemme guess: new FEMA internment camps?

Re:Gubmint in Action: (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061466)

Fire! Ready? Aim.

FTFY

Re:Gubmint in Action: (2)

sycodon (149926) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061474)

The Government is off its meds.

Only that could account for the schizoid policy decisions.

Re:Gubmint in Action: (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061660)

You have heard of the Republican party - right?

There's a reason they're off the meds - its cos the republicans have cut medicare

Re:Gubmint in Action: (2)

The Grim Reefer2 (1195989) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061830)

You have heard of the Republican party - right?

There's a reason they're off the meds - its cos the republicans have cut medicare

Strange, I thought GWB was the president who signed Medicare Part D into law. ;-)

Re:Gubmint in Action: (2)

operagost (62405) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061928)

Also strange-- it's mostly Dems who voted for the health care bill last year that CUT MEDICARE.

Re:Gubmint in Action: (1)

ischorr (657205) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061724)

There is a bit of a mandate at the moment to reduce government debt/growth. There's far too much dysfunctional, ideological infighting to do this effectively or efficiently.

Since we apparently can't reduce ANY spending to the military (a few less $1B planes?) or on a variety of wars, and our economy would collapse if we ended recent tax breaks on the rich, the money has to come from SOMEwhere. One of those places is IT spending. Another is NASA. Another is medical research grants. (And a variety of scientific, infrastructure, and social programs).

This is indirectly related to the game of hostage-taking that's being played with the US economy that resulted in this week's major market correction and credit downgrade.

Re:Gubmint in Action: (2)

wsxyz (543068) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061832)

There is a bit of a mandate at the moment to reduce government debt/growth. There's far too much dysfunctional, ideological infighting to do this effectively or efficiently.

Since we apparently can't reduce ANY spending to the military (a few less $1B planes?) or on a variety of wars

Talk to Leon Panetta about that one.

Re:Gubmint in Action: (2)

operagost (62405) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061958)

Since we apparently can't reduce ANY spending to the military

Wrong. $350 billion was just cut in the BCA, with about 600 billion more if other cuts are not agreed on by the deadline. Far too little, of course, but a start. An average of $35 billion a year is, indeed, 35 of your planes.

Timing... (4, Informative)

BWJones (18351) | more than 2 years ago | (#37060872)

The wording of this post makes it seem as though the data centers were initiated via policies of the Obama administration. However, the reality is that the data center expansion occurred during the policy of the previous Bush administration with funding requested in 2006, approved in 2007 and implementation initiated in 2008 a full year before the Obama administration took office. The Obama administration approved the continuation of the policy in 2009 and 2010 and are currently altering the data center strategy.

Re:Timing... (4, Insightful)

astrodoom (1396409) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061062)

So what you're saying is that the qaudrupling over the last 2 years WAS from the obama administration's continuation of the policy, but they didn't start the policy?

idk, I'm all for specificity, but that seems a bit nitpicky. Either way, they're cutting the data centers now, which is a great move for cutting waste since they're running at 27% utilization. Sad that it means cutting the jobs associated with those data centers, but at least it's a step in the right direction.

Re:Timing... (4, Insightful)

bennomatic (691188) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061168)

Have you ever worked for an organization larger than 1000 employees? Larger than 10,000? I don't know how many people are employed by the federal government, but it's a lot. And there are a lot of programs that have interwoven dependencies. Whether you think that the government should be smaller or not, whether you think that all the programs are worthwhile or not, big decisions have big implications, and it's not usual for large organizations to take several years to make a decision and even longer to implement them.

To that end, it's entirely possible that these datacenters were planned during the Bush years based on policy decisions made in the Clinton era, which were in turn affected by the Reagan/Bush1 years. Wings of a butterfly and all.

The point of the GP was not, as far as I can tell, "BUSH BAD OBAMA GOOD!", but rather, "This is not an example of a bad decision made in haste and reversed in haste."

Re:Timing... (2, Interesting)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061496)

Republicans dont care if Bush started it, in their eyes anything Obama does is bad, even if it is along their beliefs or party lines, or what Fox News said they should do previous to him actually doing it.

Troll me if you want, but I am tired of this back and forth nitpicky. Get the fuck off your high horse and look at the individual, not the party.
Know your history, party centric nations oriented in pride and blind following lead to bad things. You should all know the wars that were fought, and continue to fight where the opposing nation was based on this.
We are USA, we are individuals coming together for a common goal, to live free from oppression and tyranny. Yet governanced by the majority (supposed to be). Remember your individuality before you "tow the line".

Re:Timing... (1)

wsxyz (543068) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061526)

Nice sentiment, but what do you do when one party sees universal health insurance as tyranny and the other sees for-profit health insurance as oppression?

Re:Timing... (1)

Qzukk (229616) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061804)

Try and figure out how to make healthcare affordable enough that you don't need the government or some other insurance company to pay for it for you?

Re:Timing... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061810)

I'm a Republican and I'm for universal health care - in fact I'd go as far as to say healthcare and military are the only aspects of government that should exist at all - what the Obama Healthcare Plan did was not universal healthcare - it made it a requirement to buy health insurance and gave the insurance companies providing it a hefty tip for providing something they already provided, gauranteed more customers so they could drastically reduce marketing, sales and customer service divisions - and required an IT plan pretty much identical to what was already required of them under HIPAA. It was nothing but an insurance company bailout in disguise to avoid the public scrutiny of the previous ones.

Re:Timing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061894)

You logically and orderly and by-the-book, discuss and vote on it. No bull$hit, no closed contents of bill until they are passed, no blocking on principle, no pointless hate. It's the political system, and it's made up of people with minds of their own, be them open or closed, corruptable or not. The reality is that the can't or won't change until the people act and the masses like having their head in the sand, so the rest of us have to deal with it. It's the short sighted BS on all sides of party affiliations that is running the US into the ground. The trend has become to make decisions for today or for the next election, not for the years ahead.

Re:Timing... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061648)

Republicans dont care if Bush started it, in their eyes anything Obama does is bad

Obama's policies have been destroying the United States so, it is easy to understand the Republican's sentiment.

At this point, I'm picturing Obama and Biden as Thelma and Louise unfortunately, the car they are driving is the US economy!

Re:Timing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061726)

It's "toe the line", genius. Unless you're actually towing a party line with some kind of political pickup truck.

Re:Timing... (2)

sycodon (149926) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061518)

Stuff like this is largely out of the hands of a President. It's part and parcel of the whole Ship of State thing. The Captain only gets to point which way to go. Things go on below desks that he has no clue or real control over.

We are being ruled by bureaucrats.

Re:Timing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061338)

Most datacenter cost is ongoing not sunk up front...

Re:Timing... (1)

sjames (1099) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061494)

The alternative is that at each change of president, we halt all government activity for 3 years and have everyone twiddle their thumbs while new policies are written, and then run those policies for the 4th year.

Any incoming president is obligated by logistics/reality to make carrying on with whatever was happening before the default state. It's highly doubtful that even a 2 term president could find time to review the entire federal government before leaving office even if that was the only duty of the office.

Re:Timing... (-1, Troll)

DarkOx (621550) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061520)

No what he is saying is Obama has been in office for three years and is certainly mostly responsible for at least this example of poor government planing, waste, or both. However Obama is his hero and protect his idolized conception of the man he has found a way to lay all the responsibly at the feat of man who has been back in Texas out the spot light for some time now.

Re:Timing... (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061722)

over the last 2 years WAS from the obama administration's continuation of the policy, but they didn't start the policy?

Just like the Bush tax cuts, wars in Iraq & Afganistan, and massive military spending.

Re:Timing... (1)

kenh (9056) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061820)

Too bad Obama wasn't in the Senate to influence these decisions... Oh, wait... [wikipedia.org]

Re:Timing... (1)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061192)

When has that ever stopped political finger pointing.

Logic and politics have nothing to do with each other, its all about finding the crazy excuse to support your guy. Who may or may not have anything really to do about any of the problems.

During the Clinton Years The Right was saying how Clinton was befitting from all the long term improvements that Bush Sr and Reagan did years back. And now after a much prolonged recession the Left is still saying it was all Bush Jr. Fault, even after a period of Democratic Majority. Or the left takes the prosperity during the 90's largely due to a tech boom based on the fact that a lot of computers would fail to function in the year 2000 as tribute to Clintons Leadership and the correctness of the Leftist values. Or the Right giving GWB credits for a period of time where home ownership was at its highest.

What it really comes down to there isn't any real logic behind which party is better then the other. But have good and bad values to them. And going all out in any direction will be really bad. And really the president has little effect on our everyday life.

Re:Timing... (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061678)

Seems that, for the most part, economic booms aren't tied to specific government intervention, manipulation, etc. Shocking.

(i.e., the government can influence and manipulate the economy, but that doesn't appear to be the best way it happens; good economies seem to come not from government policy but from private enterprise and people creating goods/services that other people want...)

Cloud First (3, Insightful)

recoiledsnake (879048) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061320)

This is probably related to the "Cloud First" strategy adopted by the outgoing CIO Vivek Kundra. http://fcw.com/articles/2011/02/28/buzz-cloud-computing-and-budget.aspx [fcw.com]

Re:Cloud First (1)

kenh (9056) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061904)

The outgoing CIO Vivek Kundra assumed his position on March, 5th, 2009 [wikipedia.org] under this administration, not Bush'43.

Re:Timing... (1)

bonch (38532) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061374)

The very first line of the article starts with "Over the last two years, the number of U.S. data centers has quadrupled." Obama took office more than two years ago. Just because the data centers were initiated under Bush, their quadrupling happened under Obama. You even acknowledge that Obama approved the continuation of the policy.

So really, your post is meaningless because Obama approved the continuation of the policy, and the data centers quadrupled as a result. What does Bush have to do with that?

Re:Timing... (1)

TheLandyman (1130027) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061632)

You probably havn't worked in a large organization? or on a project with a budget more than 10 million (or even 1 million?!). These things are planned years in advance... you dont show up and fry's and say give me 5000 of your best servers, i need to install them tomorrow. idiot.

Re:Timing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061454)

What a weird way to deflect blame on Bush. The Democrats controlled the Senate and the House in 2006 through 2010, during the times you claim the datacenter policy was both initiated and funding was approved. Obama approved the policy and further expanded the datacenters on his watch. You even acknowledge this. It's not like he's beholden to previous policy, because he's altering the strategy now that political pressure requires him to.

Re:Timing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061838)

Who signed the spending bills from 2001-2008?

Bush

Who signed the spending bills from 2009-2011?

Obama

Place the blame where it is appropriate.

Re:Timing... (0)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061578)

So it really is Bush's fault.

Really. Pathetique. It is SO important that we asess blame accurately, if not correctly. No wonder Washington is broken - we expect so little, and so wrong, of them.

Re:Timing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061916)

So it really is Bush's fault. Really. Pathetique. It is SO important that we asess blame accurately, if not correctly.

Neither Bush nor Obama had anything to do with this unless you think they care that one of the hundreds of agencies in the gigantic bureaucracies they attempt to manage was building a data center. If the fact of the data centers ever crossed their desk, it was buried in a bigger document with a wider scope.

What does the President do? He could manage the two wars we're fighting or the economy, he could try to destroy|save Social Security and Medicare, or he could worry about some fscking data centers. I expect he has people to worry about the data centers.

Re:Timing... (1)

ShavedOrangutan (1930630) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061854)

The chosen one has had almost a whole term - most of it with no political opposition whatsoever. It's time to accept the fact that he isn't any better than the last president.

Re:Timing... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061900)

Yes, it's important to remember that it will always, always, be Bush's fault, no matter what. Do not question the Liberal narrative!

Stimulus. (4, Insightful)

wsxyz (543068) | more than 2 years ago | (#37060890)

After all of the equipment is sold for scrap at pennies on the dollar, they'll build the datacenters again. That's called stimulus in action.

Re:Stimulus. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37060984)

They're subsidizing server purchases for local small businesses!

Re:Stimulus. (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061186)

You're not too far off.

Rather than auction off the servers or try to recoup some of their cost...if my past experience happens with these...they'll just be destroyed. Sad but true...I've seen it happen more than once. Rather than just take out the harddrives and destroy those and sell off or give away the hardware, it often is all destroyed as a matter of policy.

Re:Stimulus. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061306)

They'll get outsourced to companies like SAIC and Northup Grumman and Martin Marietta...
And after the damage some of the other vendors did they'll be more expensive and more management chains than ever before.

Re:Stimulus. (1)

Avatar8 (748465) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061388)

I'll concur with Cayenne8 since I've dealt with closing a government data center in the past.

Granted what I was involved with was migrating and upgrading, but I saw hundreds of perfectly usable, 1-3 year old servers stacked in the old data center, hard drives pulled and drilled and the servers sold to a scrap company.

Complete and utter waste. I seriously doubt TFA servers will be treated any differently regardless of age.

Fiscally irresponsible (1)

bluemasterflows (2391122) | more than 2 years ago | (#37060894)

...why not rent them out instead?

Re:Fiscally irresponsible (1)

erroneus (253617) | more than 2 years ago | (#37060926)

Would you seriously rent a government owned machine? The problems with that idea just overwhelm the imagination.

why be a landload when you want to sell? (1)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 2 years ago | (#37060954)

as being landload they will have to pay for upkeep. Any ways others can use the data centers from there own use.

Re:Fiscally irresponsible (1)

swan5566 (1771176) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061004)

I believe you might run into Constitutional problems with the government completing with the free market.

Re:Fiscally irresponsible (1)

wsxyz (543068) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061044)

I'm sure it falls under regulating interstate commerce.

Re:Fiscally irresponsible (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061214)

Everything falls under regulating interstate commerce. Everything.

Re:Fiscally irresponsible (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061796)

Then rent them out below market, and call it spurring upstarts.

Obama wastes taxpayer money? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37060940)

Obama is wasting taxpayer money? I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you.

Wait, wait, let me guess. He's going to try and spin this as cost saving, despite the fact that they're already built, and that by building them and instantly closing them we basically blow several billion dollars for absolutely no benefit.

But it's nice to see Obama going back on his "transparency" pledge in such an opaque manner. Apparently he doesn't, in fact, want to provide government data on line. And he can spin it as "cutting costs" when really it's just cutting us out of the loop.

Hope and change, people, hope and change.

Re:Obama wastes taxpayer money? (0)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061006)

Apparently he doesn't, in fact, want to provide government data on line

Transparency is a luxury we can't afford in these austere times.

Re:Obama wastes taxpayer money? (5, Insightful)

Aryden (1872756) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061034)

Yepp, his fault that something that was approved, budgeted and begun before his administration was done... (this is my glare face)

He approved the continuation based on being told that these centers were necessary for data retention and they aren't. So they are getting closed. As any good business person would do when faced with budget restrictions.

Re:Obama wastes taxpayer money? (-1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061746)

So what's the difference between bush being told they are necessary for data retention and funding vs obama completing construction and continuing funding?

Let me guess...you want someone to irrationally blame and it just so happens you like one and don't like the other. To hell with rational thought!

The fact is, the buck stops there - in that chair. It is impossible to hate on bush and not obama, without being a total hypocritical prick.

But that's the state of politics in this country. One idiot wants to blame another idiot and they care so much about irrational, polarizing hatred, intelligence, rational thought, and solutions go right out the window. But hey, at least people get to irrationally express their outrage - almost always at the wrong person.

Re:Obama wastes taxpayer money? (1)

cusco (717999) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061248)

Oh, I'm sure some people benefited, just not the taxpayers. Reminds me of the end of the Apollo program. Do you know why there is a Saturn V baking in the sun outside the Cape Canaveral visitor center? It, and three others, were bought, paid for, and delivered, along with Lunar Modules, Rovers, and the rest. Even the fuel had been purchased. The only remaining cost was actually launching the stuff and accomplishing the mission objectives, and at that time (before privatization) those were mostly internal NASA costs. No one was going to make any more money off the program, except the NASA employees, so the rest of the program was canceled. I cried when I went to the Cape and heard what had happened from the folks in the museum.

The alternative (1)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061398)

Leave them online and keep sinking money into their operations although they are not needed.

He's doing a good thing here. We have plenty of other datacenters throughout the world.

Re:Obama wastes taxpayer money? (2)

b0bby (201198) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061436)

FTA:

Over the last two years, the number of U.S. data centers has quadrupled, and yet they are running at only about 27 percent utilization, according to the Office of Management and Budget. The maintenance costs of these data centers, including backup power supplies, air conditioning, fire-suppression and special security devices, has been astronomical, causing them to consume 200 times more power than the typical office space. By more fully utilizing the remaining data centers, the White House hopes to maintain current service levels while drastically cutting costs.
So far the Administration has shut down 81 of these data centers already this year, and has a goal of shutting down another 195 during 2011, and 97 more by the end of 2012 for a total of 373. Beyond 2012, its overall goal will be to shut down 800 data centers by the end of 2015, which it claims will save taxpayers over $3 billion annually.

It makes sense to me that if you're running at 27%, some consolidation should take place. It also makes sense that this would save money going forward. I don't even care if it was Bush that ordered them, we should save the money now.

Re:Obama wastes taxpayer money? (1)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061658)

Next thing we know, you'll be complaining that Obama's got buddies in the business waiting to rent/lease/buy these vacated datacenters for pennies on the dollar, and will recycle the servers for less, making this all a 'green' project. Saving the environment, tax dollars, and all.

Whatever. Well, all except those pathetic little coloc centers Agriculture got stuck with. Good riddance to the closets, really, what can you DO in 1000 sq ft? Stickhandle?

Typical gov't program (1)

Whatsmynickname (557867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37060946)

This isn't the first time some federal government facility was built and then promptly discarded... Your efficient taxpayer's dollars at work.

Re:Typical gov't program (1)

cruff (171569) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061080)

Yes, the Superconducting Super Collider (SSC) was an excellent example of this behavior. The James Webb Telescope may be another. Admittedly, in these cases it is due to inaccurate budget and/or schedule estimates.

Re:Typical gov't program (1)

Sta7ic (819090) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061434)

SSC never went active, whereas these data centers went live, were monitored, and deemed to be excess infrastructure that didn't help the deficit. Something similar happened around here, with the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF). Could've been pumping out medical isotopes, but noooo, we needed to shut that thing down.

Rename them as private clouds... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37060952)

Easy fix... just rename them as Federally compliant private clouds.

What they didn't tell you (0)

shoehornjob (1632387) | more than 2 years ago | (#37060956)

is that they are closing the data centers because the chinese government stole all the data. Now that the chinese government is the defacto owner of our data Obama can say that he saved the american taxpayer millions of dollars.

To the Cloud! (1)

biodata (1981610) | more than 2 years ago | (#37060960)

Data centres are so old hat these days.

Re:To the Cloud! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061178)

Your right the new thing is the cloud.... But clouds are a bunch of servers called data centers with a new name...

Re:To the Cloud! (0)

jellomizer (103300) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061228)

Too bad what we call Cloud computing isn't what it use to be. Today is is a data center. It was supposed to be a distributed computing platform where PCs who joined the cloud will use their unused CPUs to create a massive super computer.

totally in line with their stated strategy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061076)

Obama admin now has a "cloud first" policy. It stands to reason that getting rid of in-house metal is a consequence of this.

http://www.cio.gov/documents/Federal-Cloud-Computing-Strategy.pdf

Finally ... (0)

Anomalyst (742352) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061098)

Finally, something constructive to keep him busy

List of where they are? (1)

bemenaker (852000) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061120)

Where is the list of these datacenters? One is in my town and I want to know more about it.

Re:List of where they are? (1)

dohcvtec (461026) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061628)

Planning a little dumpster diving?

Outsourcing spying to Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061180)

Of course Obama is closing Gov data-centers; his good buddies at Google are doing the spying now....

Outer Join (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061188)

They Finally figured it out

DRMO (1)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061296)

If they aren't repurposed at another agency, they will be sold in lots at DRMO sales. So will the racks. Servers used on secure networks may be sold, but any storage will no longer be in them.

Re:DRMO (2)

will_die (586523) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061392)

Since none of the them DoD they will not be sold through DRMO, most other agencies go through the GSA

113 are DoD (1)

Quila (201335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061822)

But you're right, the rest will go GSA.

gn4a (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061274)

new faces and many driven out by the end, we need you those obligGations.

sold (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061290)

They will be sold at a heavily discounted price to whichever IT shop has given the most money to the Obama administration.

The Slashdot test: Failed (1)

scumdamn (82357) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061294)

Thanks Slashdot for posting an article that tells half the story so we can easily tell who's smart enough to look into the full story (Bush admin bought all those servers that we didn't need and Obama is saving us money by shutting them down).

Re:The Slashdot test: Failed (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061328)

He has to save money from some place. he is spending so much else where on nothing.

Re:The Slashdot test: Failed (3, Insightful)

Chris Mattern (191822) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061482)

Actually, the article specifically says that servers quadrupled in the past two years under a policy approved by Obama (although it was started by Bush). So it was Obama who bought those servers. But, what the heck, you don't need to think when you know it's all Bush's fault!

Re:The Slashdot test: Failed (1)

scumdamn (82357) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061502)

Who funded the program?

Re:The Slashdot test: Failed (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061878)

Obama... It was started with Bush, but a President change doesn't place the current funding blame with the previous president like Obama and his supporters would like you to believe.

Re:The Slashdot test: Failed (1)

Svartalf (2997) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061896)

Heh... You took my acerbic remark away from me there.

Re:The Slashdot test: Failed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37062000)

I'm sure if Obama had canceled the initiative instead you'd complain about his lack of vision for government IT growth, called him a Luddite, etc. Really, you're going to bash they guy, on slashdot, for deploying data centers? (Regardless of who initiated the rollout) There really isn't any reality you won't twist to suit your world view. Sorry.

Anyhoo, Fast forward to today
Now we've got a horde of howling Tea Party stooges furiously screaming their party line "Cut cut cut! Kill the pig! Make him bleed!" With the all the religious fervor of something resembles a cross between a convulse-for-christ revival and a Hitler youth rally.

To appease this dangerous morons cutting any cost is on the table. It doesn't matter if it's bad choice in the long run. A bunch of of underutilized servers seems like an easy target, so add them to the list.

Re:The Slashdot test: Failed (2)

BetaDays (2355424) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061844)

Obama saving us money? Your kidding right? I have faith he is just getting rid of them so he can rent them off of someone else at a higher price. Or maybe he got in with Amazon to scale up as need with cloud services kind of like what United Kingdom is up to http://eu.techcrunch.com/2011/07/21/uk-government-now-using-huddles-platform-for-top-secret-documents/ [techcrunch.com] . Or the fact that Hillary Clinton is shipping US datacenter jobs off to Inda so we don't need a lot of computing power over here. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/india/india-and-us-to-work-together-on-datagov-and-against-cyber-crime/633 [zdnet.com] So we will never know.

No government data centers are needed anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061344)

After all the government does not need to gather info and watch our online activities anymore. Beings that they just passed the law that the ISP's need to retain this information now and its only a sepia away.

Was Nancy Pelosi in charge....? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061360)

I'm picturing Nancy Pelosi in charge of this project. "We'll just have to build the data centers to find out what we can do with them."

Pork (2)

markdowling (448297) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061370)

Cue yelling from Congresspeople whose datacentres are getting chopped.

"Sack someone else! Cut somewhere else!"

Amazon (1)

michelcultivo (524114) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061384)

Obama, rent some servers from Amazon. They only goes out about 1 day on the year. Bye

Converting them into Bitcoin miners (1)

NitroWolf (72977) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061442)

There's a secret government project to convert all those servers into Bitcoin Mining Rigs.

You didn't really think consumers were responsible for the shortage of high end AMD graphics cards, did you?

Selling the DC (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061500)

They will most likely sell the DC itself for a fraction of what it cost the taxpayers to build... Coincidentally, the company that gets the bargain new DC will probably have a few politicians on the board.

Deactivated systems will not be sold in the US (4, Funny)

ebunga (95613) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061656)

Due to national security, servers will be divided into those that hosted classified materials, and those that did not. Those that contained classified materials will be labeled as Securely Ensure Nonrecoverable Destruction To Ostensibly Completely Hinder Internationally Notorious Agents, but that's a bit long, so really they will be labeled with the acronym SENDTOCHINA. They will be melted down locally and then sold for scrap. Those that do not contain classified materials will be sold to China to help ease their demand for computing resources that they already build. These will be labeled Mutually Economic Lateral Trade. That too is a bit long, so the systems that should be sold to China will be labeled MELT.

Re:Deactivated systems will not be sold in the US (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061742)

Nice!

Re:Deactivated systems will not be sold in the US (1)

rwa2 (4391) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061840)

I lol'd :-P

"from the ultra-liberal National Public Radio" (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061730)

from the credits at the end of the article...

  "from the ultra-liberal National Public Radio"

  Really ??

no wonder there is a 12 trillion + debt (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061766)

they spend billions of dollars with such triviality it makes me dizzy

Utilization (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061770)

from the TFA:
"Over the last two years, the number of U.S. data centers has quadrupled, and yet they are running at only about 27 percent utilization"

So assumign 100% utilization 2 years ago, we are not at 108% of origrinal capacity. So datacenter utilization must be growing at 4% a year, it would have been a little over 20 years before the capacity was filled. Since it can take 5 years for the govenment to even to fund a new project like this (let alone build it, fill it, and man it), I'd say shooting a little high wasn't a bad move.

datacenter fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37061862)

The agencies are not always being truthful in this: for example, five "datacenters" being closed by EPA in its NC offices are actually network-cabinets, for which the "computer hardware" is a router being moved out onto the floor of the real datacenter

Why shutdown the newest? (1)

whoever57 (658626) | more than 2 years ago | (#37061892)

Surely the fiscally responsible approach is to shut down the oldest datacenters first. These will be least efficient and hence the savings will be greatest from shutting these down. The equipment in the newest ones will be the most valuable, but when selling it off, they will only get pennies on the dollar (and things like hard drives will be destroyed, not sold) so the increased revenue from selling the newer equipment will be minimal.

Only reason for selling off the newest equipment: "connected" companies and people will be able to make more money off the surplus equipment.

Government Mining for Gold.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37062006)

They are trying to raise the value of the dollar.
If they melt down all of those processor chips to strip the microscopic amount of gold off of them, they can collect the gold and use it to back our U.S. currency.
Genius!
Or something.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

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>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...