Facebook Builds Data Center Near Arctic Circle

Status
Not open for further replies.

cyberkuberiah

Distinguished
May 5, 2009
812
0
19,010
12
[citation][nom]de5_roy[/nom]cool idea for icebook.only if it could protect users from privacy leaks and malware better.apple called, they patented the arctic circle datacenter idea.[/citation]
rofl :)
 

darkchazz

Distinguished
Jul 27, 2010
404
0
18,790
2
Translation:
"Facebook will be constructing a gigantic datacenter in Lulea, Sweden, to store the private information that you have deleted"
 

officeguy

Distinguished
Jul 21, 2009
188
0
18,680
0
Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that is where the humans found the Predators while drilling a whole in the Artic Circle. Been awhile since I watch that movie. Just a side note to this artical :)
 

alidan

Splendid
Aug 5, 2009
5,303
0
25,780
0
[citation][nom]officeguy[/nom]Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that is where the humans found the Predators while drilling a whole in the Artic Circle. Been awhile since I watch that movie. Just a side note to this artical[/citation]
never watched it predators, but do you mean the thing?

that said

didnt Greenpeace get hijacked by anti corperate people and loose its origional meaning...

that also said, why not just build more nuclear power plants, take all of americas power cost down significantly, and make everyone but the most stupid of hippy happy.
 

4745454b

Titan
Moderator
It's hole, not whole. And it was the Antarctic, not north pole. You can easily remember this because the guy with the camera was upset he didn't get to photograph the "PoR" North pole doesn't have a point of no return. (assuming you mean AvP here.)

I too am surprised Greenpeace and others aren't upset about this. You would think it would increase melting rates. Should help with their electric bill however.
 

vaughn2k

Distinguished
Aug 6, 2008
768
4
19,015
18
[citation][nom]posteris[/nom]2 years later: Greenpeace will protest against Facebook servers, because they doubled ice melting rate[/citation]
And Facebook will bring down the some countries and continents under water...
 

3ddraft

Distinguished
Dec 19, 2008
24
0
18,510
0
Error 000: Your data request was terminated by an avalanche. There are no reported fixes for this bug. Please try again later.
 

synd

Distinguished
Oct 10, 2011
63
0
18,630
0
Error 503: The server is unable to handle the request due to an avalanche or a permanent too-fucking-cold weather, please try again in your next life.
 

pojk3n

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2011
1
0
18,510
0
Correct spelling of the city, Luleå.

The bad, The Swedish government give 100 Million SEK , aprox €10-9 million to facebook for this. Could have been used elsewhere.

To those thinking that it will accelerate the melting rate. Luleå does not intersect the north pole i.e. there is no ice caps around Luleå, it is far far away. So no melting of the ice caps, only snow.

Latency: Dont be shitting me, Sweden have one of the best infrastructure when it comes to fiber optics and copper.
 

sharpless78

Distinguished
Jul 23, 2010
24
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]3ddraft[/nom]Error 000: Your data request was terminated by an avalanche. There are no reported fixes for this bug. Please try again later.[/citation]

Avalanches on flat ground? That's a new one.
 
G

Guest

Guest
This will be finished in 2014? LOL. Facebook will be history in 2014. This data center will become a giant museum.
 

thaile4ever

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2011
28
0
18,530
0
[citation][nom]pojk3n[/nom]Latency: Dont be shitting me, Sweden have one of the best infrastructure when it comes to fiber optics and copper.[/citation]

It doesn't matter what infrastructure there is in Sweden, when we're talking about a trip from Europe to USA. The Transatlantic latency alone is ~80ms.
 

Ezence

Distinguished
Aug 26, 2006
17
0
18,510
0
[citation][nom]thaile4ever[/nom]It doesn't matter what infrastructure there is in Sweden, when we're talking about a trip from Europe to USA. The Transatlantic latency alone is ~80ms.[/citation]

If you're in the US it would most likely use a datacenter in the US. And it's not like 80ms is alot ^^.
 

the_krasno

Distinguished
Sep 29, 2009
550
0
18,980
0
[citation][nom]greghome[/nom]How long until some of them web giants decides to build one at the antarctic ?[/citation]

Never, it would violate several international treaties.

[citation][nom]4745454b[/nom]It's hole, not whole. And it was the Antarctic, not north pole. You can easily remember this because the guy with the camera was upset he didn't get to photograph the "PoR" North pole doesn't have a point of no return. (assuming you mean AvP here.)I too am surprised Greenpeace and others aren't upset about this. You would think it would increase melting rates. Should help with their electric bill however.[/citation]

It wouldn't increase melting rates unless they build it right inside a glacier.
 

nebun

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
2,841
0
20,810
19
[citation][nom]Uberragen21[/nom]Good for cooling, bad for latency.[/citation]
not necessarily true...by that time latency will be a thing of the past....they will make it work
 

nebun

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
2,841
0
20,810
19
[citation][nom]thaile4ever[/nom]It doesn't matter what infrastructure there is in Sweden, when we're talking about a trip from Europe to USA. The Transatlantic latency alone is ~80ms.[/citation]
are you telling me that you can't wait 80ms?....you have got to be kidding me
 

ozzy702

Distinguished
Dec 31, 2008
69
0
18,630
0
[citation][nom]jacekring[/nom]Ummm...did you miss that whole thing that happened over in Japan with 4 of their nuclear reactors?BTW: what happened to the news coverage of that incident??? There is nothing newer then June when they upgraded the severity level to that of Chernobyl. Which btw, is the MAXIMUM severity level we have established. A 7 out of a possible 7 on the nuclear disaster scale. The impacts of the radiation are not yet fully understood, as to what it will do to us here in the U.S.A and over in Europe. But it's safe to consider all sea food from within a few hundred KM of the nuclear plants to be radioactive and unhealthy for consumption. Probably within a year or two that radiation will spread all the way to the U.S. west coast, and I will refuse to eat any sea food fished from that side of the planet. High radiation levels (700 Bq/kg) has already been found in Plankton (a major fish food source) over 200km south of the nuclear plants.[/citation]


Please, that was the Japanese being idiots and building a nuke plant in such an idiotic area. Modern nuclear power is extremely safe especially in an area like sweden. Nuclear is the only form of power that we currently have that has the capacity to replace all coal and oil burning plants. In the future we may have other alternatives but right now nukes are it.
 

Camikazi

Distinguished
Jul 20, 2008
1,405
1
19,315
5
[citation][nom]jacekring[/nom]Ummm...did you miss that whole thing that happened over in Japan with 4 of their nuclear reactors?BTW: what happened to the news coverage of that incident??? There is nothing newer then June when they upgraded the severity level to that of Chernobyl. Which btw, is the MAXIMUM severity level we have established. A 7 out of a possible 7 on the nuclear disaster scale. The impacts of the radiation are not yet fully understood, as to what it will do to us here in the U.S.A and over in Europe. But it's safe to consider all sea food from within a few hundred KM of the nuclear plants to be radioactive and unhealthy for consumption. Probably within a year or two that radiation will spread all the way to the U.S. west coast, and I will refuse to eat any sea food fished from that side of the planet. High radiation levels (700 Bq/kg) has already been found in Plankton (a major fish food source) over 200km south of the nuclear plants.[/citation]
So did you miss exactly where they built the plant? The plant was fine and safe, the only down side was that Mother Nature was pissed and hit Japan on 2 different fronts and there is nothing we can do to protect against her fury. Had the plant been farther inland and away from the coast it would not have happened, there is only so much you can do to protect things from nature.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY