Consumer group SLAMS NASA for letting Google rent $1bn 'playground' A consumer watchdog has slammed NASA for signing a whopping $1bn deal that will see a historic airbase turned into Google's space "playground". Mountain View has inked a deal with the space agency which will see it rent Moffett Federal Airfield for 60 years. The massive site is home to the Ames Research Center, where the …
.. that Google didn't pay the lease in cash from their chump change so that they can use the prepaid expenses as an ongoing tax deduction for the next 60 years?
http://www.plantemoran.com/perspectives/articles/2012/Pages/irs-revenue-ruling-2012-1-clarifies-the-tax-deduction-of-certain-prepaid-expenses.aspx
Since it seems Nasa are being forced to outsource a lot of future missions does this not make sense?
I can be as anti Google as many people but I don't see the issue here as opposed to the fuel deal which definitely seemed suspect. If Nasa weren't going to use the site and it wasn't being maintained why not let Google spend 200 million upgrading the site and putting it to use?
Can understand people not wanting a historic site to be in private hands but unless Congress decides to properly fund R&D and future missions for Nasa I would expect more deals like this, I wonder how much they want for Cape Canaveral wouldn't mind having free roam of the Kennedy centre.
Well, realistically, Moffet Field has always been a big burden for NASA. It used to be a naval air station and the DoD paid the bills, but once the naval station was closed the costs got pushed to NASA, who wanted to keep the field open because Ames Research Center (which is literally next door) flies aircraft in and out occasionally.
It's not even an issue of "not funding aerospace research sufficiently", its just that most research facilities can't meet their own budget plus take care of the big airbase next door.
NASA has been looking for private tenants since the naval air station closed. They were hoping that FedEx would want to put a major air cargo operation there, but the residents of Mountain View put an end to that because of concerns over cargo jet noise. Then Google came on the scene, and wanted to put their corporate air force there, and now they want the land for other purposes.
And let's not forget that this airfield is smack in the middle of Silicon Valley. The land involved is worth a king's ransom, so NASA is under even more pressure to put it to some use beyond hosting 10-15 planes that NASA Ames has there at any given time.
"Happily, the answer is no, because Mountain View's greatest ruse has not yet come to pass. It wants everyone in the whole world to strap on Glass and happily spend their days chanting "ok Google" and video recording every single moment of their bleak existence."
Wasn't a very well hidden agenda was it.
In the pre-Internet days I once worked with an American contractor who thought the Hoover building was named after J. Edgar...
If I remember rightly it took a visit to the local library and a copy of the Encylopaedia Britannica to convince him otherwise!
"What can I say, us Yanks can be a dim lot."
Like all the Brits, myself included, who thought/think the World Series for baseball is named after a global competition instead of a newspaper called "The New York World"...?
"Like all the Brits, myself included, who thought/think the World Series for baseball is named after a global competition instead of a newspaper called "The New York World"...?"
Nah - everyone knows hardly any other countries play US sports like American Football and Baseball...
...only the Western hemisphere and Japan.
Similarly, the Stanley Cup could probably be called a "World Cup" because of all of the top talent that gets poached from all over the world. The NHL has to go on hiatus during the Olympics because everyone is off playing for their national teams.
Consumer Watchdog has been accused a couple of times of being paid by Microsoft to attack Google on various fronts. They certainly seem not to like Google:
- Watchdog calls for Google break-up
- Watchdog backs Google antitrust complaint with (more) data
- Consumer Watchdog lambasts Los Angeles over Google Apps
- Google accused of hypocrisy over Glass ban at shareholder shindig
- Consumers pay up to 67% more for products on Google Shopping
And now Moffett Airfield.
For some definition of "couple." It's somewhat telling that a Privacy Watchdog is committed to opposing the use of an airfield to test autonomous automobiles. Having spent over five years living on one, I can vouch that parking private aircraft, which is lawfully allowed and encouraged, and testing vehicles are perfectly sane. These people? Not so much.
They have an aircraft hanger big enough to build a hollowed out volcano inside
Musk has rockets and wants to build a mono-rail from LA.
Ellison has his own private island
Has somebody checked if Zuckerberg's parents were killed in front of him by robbers and how he feels about bats?
Why doesn't Google just buy Moffett Field? Or better yet, why don't they build their own facility out in Nevada/Arizona/New Mexico/Etc. for a fraction of the cost? As a bonus, they would no longer be held back by California's laws so they can test whatever they want.
Google has a habit of 'accidentally' slipping NASA cash in ways Congress can't really complain too much about. In the middle of the jet fuel deal fandango you could find terms for a refurbished jet kitted out with experimental instrumentation, owned and maintained by Google, for actual use by NASA (IIRC).
Oops, and it looks like this deal rents old unused rope for cash and hands back an expensively refurbished facility at the end of it. Tut. Careless. How do they expect to make a profit doing deals like this?
State laws do not apply to federal land, however, most federal agencies will play nice with the locals. Especially when it comes to things like power plants, weapons caches, and air strips which can present an unacceptable risk to the lives of the local populace or to property in the area.
Yeah, it's in the CONSTITUTION. You might try reading it.
Federal laws and land are not governed by state laws. It's the other way around. The states can complain and they often get what they want but they can't override the Feds.
That's why all the weed pharmacies in CA are all afraid of the DEA, because pot is still illegal by federal law.
Federal law still considers pot illegal. Local laws does not supersede Federal Laws. The DEA (Drug Enforcement Agency) is a FEDERAL entity. If you don't like the laws change them.
Downvoting me for speaking the truth just means I will find every one of your posts and downvote YOU just for being a dick.
> Federal law still considers pot illegal. Local laws does not supersede Federal Laws.
Depending on the subject, that's a point of dispute. The powers of the federal government are theoretically limited with most rights and authority remaining with the states or the people. It's by no means an "obvious and settled" issue.
States can and have given the feds the big middle finger. (even without seceding)
"California law still applies on private land."
Even to the extent of playing with driverless cars on your own land? So how does that apply to farm families where the kids often grow up driving across their own land in tractors, quad bikes, pickups etc long before the legal age? Or is there an exception for agricultural land?
Most state laws have an exception for farm equipment. Mostly left over from when:
1) we were primarily an agrarian culture,
2) the primary workers on a farm were the family that owned it.
We're such laws actively reviewed, I'm pretty sure that would change. Although given there's also an exception for 14 year old farm workers in labor law, I might be wrong on that count.
Mangy dog. I would immediately cancel my membership and possibly sue for "misuse of funds to pursue goals not in accordance with stated purpose and causing of rage, great psychological harm and irreparable febrility due to increased blood pressure".
"The lease gives Google unprecedented control of a federal facility to use as its own playground,” said John M. Simpson, director of the body's Privacy Project.
And this a problem how exactly?
especially over 60 years, but it isn't to NASA. NASA will also save $6.3 million annually in maintenance and operation costs on what is for all practical purposes a defunct facility. Not that I'm happy it is effectively a defunct facility, I'd much rather it were being productive on the space front. But better to give Google a good deal than sell off the land only to have to rebuild it all later at a much higher cost.
Also worth noting: After a fair and open competition, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) and NASA so it's not like it was a back-room deal.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
