digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

FedEx Still Faster Than The Internet

royal.pingdom.com — If you need to transfer more than 1 TB of data, maybe your better choice would be still just send it on disks for over-night delivery.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • hbweb500, on 10/11/2007, -7/+213Wow, this is a great bit of trivia for my nerdy conversations!
    • monsterenergy, on 10/11/2007, -101/+5pics or it didnt happen.
    • abbott75, on 10/11/2007, -4/+96C'mon, even pigeons are faster than the internet.

      "Advances in flash memory technology mean that data transfer over avian carriers may have advantages over traditional data transfer wherever high latency can be tolerated in exchange for high bandwidth, possibly as a sneakernet. For example, over a 30 mile distance a single pigeon may be able to carry tens of gigabytes of data in around an hour, which on a purely bandwidth basis compares very favorably to current ADSL standards, even when accounting for lost drives."
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_over_Avian_Carriers
    • Anpheus, on 10/11/2007, -3/+104The old bandwidth joke was, "Yeah, but is it faster than a station wagon full of magnetic tape going down the freeway?"

      No, it isn't.
    • retral, on 10/11/2007, -5/+92"exactly how burning like 250dvd's and sending thme is faster than uploading it with a t1 line?"
      RTFA:
      "Instead they send actual physical disk arrays via regular mail, something they have dubbed, for fun, FedExNet."

      ..."anyways UPS is way faster than fednext"
      I don't know about everyone else, but here, Fedex consistently delivers a day before the listed delivery date. UPS in my area has never delivered a package early, and, on a couple occasions, has been late.. Plus, they always come pulverized.
    • KibibyteBrain, on 10/11/2007, -3/+15A really fun question to explore would be which is more reliable, and which more secure. You could encrypt both methods completely so I think security would be a tie for the most part, but reliability would be interesting. FedEx could lose a hard drive or DVD in transit and that would be like a bad packet, with an error correcting penalty of 1 new transmission cycle(not too bad) plus the time to realize it was lost(probably the bad part). You can hash file data on the fly over a network connection to make sure you got the right data. So there still are advantages to both methods in this sense.
      The nice thing about the fedex method is that any old receiver has nearly infinite incoming bandwidth.(ie, can receive as many dvds from as many people as possible.
    • evildeadman, on 10/11/2007, -4/+20@retral:
      I'm with you on that. I wouldn't trust UPS with a box full of sand that I want to ship to my next door neighbor a month from now. I've had nothing but bad or mediocre experiences with UPS. Hell, the US Postal Service is a better courier service than UPS.

      As an example, one time my wife's wedding ring needed to be resized by the jeweler. The store promised UPS signature required service back to our house, insured and all of that. What we received was a package in our doorway (we live in an apartment building), no knock, no buzz, no note, nothing. I was less than impressed. I really should have called their customer service line. I could have complained. I don't know what they would have done to compensate, and I really don't care. The fact that we had the ring safely back was a relief, but I felt it would instead be more productive to tell people this story when they talk up UPS. It's possible things like this have happened to people who've shipped FedEx, but in my experience, there's no competition.
    • eighties, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10@abbott75:

      That protocol (RFC 1149) has been replaced with the much more modern RFC 2549.
      Geez, read the documentation. It might save you some grief one day.
    • Vrail, on 10/11/2007, -5/+38Yeah next time I have a terabyte of data to send I'll use fedex for sure.


      Oh wait that's never gonna happen.

      (Well I shouldn't say never, terabytes will become common someday)
    • dasilva333, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3i remember the sneakernet article on digg sometime back, there was this fat dude with long hair it was a glamour shot in the article, why oh why did this article have to bring back the painful memories :(
    • joklem, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3@evildeadman

      I've had that happen with a USPS shipped package worth a couple hundreds. Anyone could have snatched it and I wouldn't have had *****.
    • Sphonix, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9The fact is, that this is a useless study, the number completly decides how fast each of the methods are comparing an finite possible size for a fixed period, and the other, an infinate possible size for a fixed period.

      Internet = K*T
      FedEx = { 0 For 0 < T < P ; N For T > P }

      Apples and Oranges!
    • Philbert, on 10/11/2007, -8/+68"C'mon, even pigeons are faster than the internet."

      An African pigeon or a European pigeon?
    • ComradeRikhi, on 10/11/2007, -18/+10"An African pigeon or a European pigeon?"

      *Swallow
    • cconger, on 10/11/2007, -13/+3Now if only FedEx offered a torrenting service. FedExBay.com/org/net?
    • schoate09, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14Not only that, it's cheaper than signing up for a new ISP after comcast cuts you off for using too much bandwidth of your "unlimited" internet service.
    • rompom7, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14Even SNAP (snail-based data transfer protocol) can get you download speeds up to 37,000 Kpbs.

      http://www.notes.co.il/shimon/user/SNAP.pdf

      Snails carrying DVDs, using a lettuce based guiding system.
    • Lukesed, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4@cconger
      How about a fedex.alt.binaries.dvd.erotica service?
    • griz, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1How to impress the chicks.
    • knightblade2oo4, on 10/11/2007, -3/+27I like FedEx better than UPS for one simple reason:
      FedEx has never dumped $1100 worth of computer parts in the middle of my driveway and drove away without calling or knocking.
    • pap3rw8, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5@knightblade
      fedex did exactly that to me.
      UPS and FedEx are pretty much the same. I just go with whichever is cheaper. Someone above mentioned UPS never delivering early. UPS more often than not gets stuff here a day early, but I've had FedEx hold packages at the local distribution center for a day or two until the delivery date you paid for.
    • EtherGnat, on 10/11/2007, -4/+35I can top that. UPS was supposed to drop off my two DVRs (value $900) signature required, so I took the day off work. They dropped them off:

      1. Two blocks from my house at a random location where nobody was home;
      2. In the middle of the driveway;
      3. In bright, full color electronics boxes that screamed "steal me";
      4. Didn't scan one of the packages at all;
      5. The UPS driver scanned the other package but fraudulently signed for it.

      Luckily the owner of the home was able to get my number off the invoice and call me. I harassed UPS for two days without telling them I had the package all the while they assured me one of my packages was still out for delivery and that they would find the other one--although they refused to run a trace on them for me because I was not the sender of the packages. When I told them they threatened to press charges against me for fraud, despite the fact I had never lied to them and had no intention of filing a fraudulent claim--I just kept asking them if they had figured out where my packages were.
    • Salgat, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2But is it cheaper? Wasn't a TB of data around 25 cents if you already have the infrastructure?
    • pifko87, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Why not consider the amount of time it would take a DVD burner to burn 1TB worth of data, and the cost of the discs.
    • tamrix, on 10/11/2007, -7/+2How many people on the internet actually need to send 1TB of data?

      case solved.
    • Light11, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1it would suck if they lost your mail
    • tech42er, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5@abbott
      It would be very easy for someone to intercept your data though. All they need is a rifle and a retriever.
    • Lukesed, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6@ people who rated my old comment
      For shame, the average digg user isn't familiar with usenet? This is the new aol.
    • Wisgary, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1@evildeadman

      You should have picked it up, then say someone took it. They get screwed, you get money *and* the ring. People responsible for leaving it at your doorway even though it was such a high-value package get fired. Hooray!
    • 89vision, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5@lukesed

      We all know what usenet is. Your comment just wasn't very funny.
    • t0ny, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2@Ethergnat
      I ups drop off a mini wireless camera two blocks away at some random house. I checked their website and it said it was delivered. So I called them and they said it was dropped off and signed for. I told them the problem with that was I was out side in my front yard most of the day doing yard work. They said because it was signed for there was nothing they could do. I got ***** at them so they hung up on me. About 3 hours later some kid rang my doorbell and said he found my package in a bush in front of his house.

      /ups rant
    • Cerium, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1@knightblade2oo4

      I'm pretty sure fedex (might have been ups, but I don't think so) has dropped 2k of computer parts in my front yard (really backyard, since I live on a hill) before. Only reason I found them was because I walked outside on the phone and ran into them. At least they were a day early.
    • aussieNickuss, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Just for the convenience, I find burning a CD or DVD and express posting overnight is easier (and usually more reliable) than transferring over the internet. I do that for anything over as little as 500MB.
    • Bootes, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1DHL, FedEx, and UPS are all basically the same. FedEx seems to take longer getting packages to my house though. I also had a pretty bad experience with them delivering my package to a house on another street. Buy.com would do nothing because FedEx claimed they had delivered it. I finally received it 2 weeks after it had supposedly arrived and American Express had charged back buy.com.
    • evildeadman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1@Wisgary:
      I like the idea of that courier being fired. I'm not a big fan of the lying about not getting my package part. Just knowing that this person's source of income would be lost because they were too damn lazy/impatient to do their job right would make me sleep better.
    • psykiv, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1DHL > Fedex > USPS > * > UPS

      I refuse to ever do business with UPS. They have mes sed up way too many times for me to ever use them again. If a company's only shipping option is UPS, I will find another company to do business with. They have even dropped off packaged with signature required without a signature, wtf. Not to mention what they have lost:

      2 Cell phones
      1 digital camera
      2 sticks of ram (in one package)

      Not to mention, we have cameras outside of the house, and I actually caught the UPS guy throwing the package to our door on camera this one time
      .
      Luckily Amazon's customer service is awesome so they shipped out the cell phone and the camera again for me. The ram was a loss, and the other cell phone was shipped out again.

      Fedex has never managed to lose anything, but they did mess up a package. USPS has a ***** tracking system, but at least it gets there on time and in one piece.

      I ship a lot by DHL and have yet to have a problem with them. Can you call at 6pm to have a package picked up in an hour with DHL? Yup. With UPS and fedex... no. Heck, one time I had a problem and it was not even DHL's fault and they covered it for me! +1 for dhl customer service.
  • mercurysquad, on 10/11/2007, -2/+62Not long ago in India, and many other places, it was more expensive to download the mp3s than buying the album on CD. Now it's about the same cost.
  • saleem, on 10/11/2007, -168/+3This story is why the "Bury as OK, this is Lame" option exists.
    • Cwo655321, on 10/11/2007, -37/+15and that reply button is what allows a third person make a reply in pure sarcastic form.

      are we done explaining how digg works?
    • bryan986, on 10/11/2007, -3/+17I miss the "old news" option..
  • SwissCamel, on 10/11/2007, -17/+5For when you absolutely gots to see Shrek 3 in a hurry, Shrek 3 with each frame as a .bmp that is. Click through it using fax viewer, be done in no time at all and you wont have to put up with that donkey and his nasty comments to Shrek, undermining his confidence.
    • pifko87, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3I LOL'ed. I don't really know why. Do I need professional help?
  • truthteller, on 10/11/2007, -36/+3Uhh..no, because by the time you copy it on the discs THEN send it..it would have already been uploaded. Duh!
    • truthteller, on 10/11/2007, -17/+1Instead of you idiots digging me down, why not disprove me? Thats what I thought...
    • bloodhound01, on 10/11/2007, -19/+1THE POST ABOVE ME MAKES A VALID POINT. STOP DIGGING HIM DOWN UNTIL HE IS DISPROVEN. FILED AS INACCURATE.
    • theone3, on 10/11/2007, -6/+26CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL
    • Neronix, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7The article is talking about hard drives, not DVDs. Notice how he mentions disKs rather than disCs. Also notice how he mentions an array, as in writing to multiple devices at the same time.

      Perhaps make sure you're not missing the point before you get your nuts in a twist?
  • Ninjab3ar, on 10/11/2007, -5/+135Yeah, But tell a FedEX delivery guy to drive through a series of tubes without getting lost........
  • Renton, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3"How soon can we reach such massive transfer rates? There is hope at the horizon, but FedEx probably hopes the answer is “never.”

    FedEx and the telecom companies, that is.
  • algo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+30but which is cheaper?
    • ravan46, on 10/11/2007, -1/+35Nearly 4 months of maxing out a 100mb connection is damn expensive.

      Overnighting 120TB of disks is probably nearly as expensive.

      But in the world of time=money, the quicker one will always be cheaper.
    • fdiskit, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I do a lot of work setting up secondary data sites, i.e., company needs a failover site in case of a disaster. By far, the costliest part of the setup is putting the two storage arrays next to each other, letting them sync locally, then crating and shipping one to the remote data site. If it's going OTR (ground), then it'll be a few thousand bucks. If it has to go air freight, oh, fuggedaboudit. We needed to do this since trying to do the initial sync of tens or hundreds of terabytes would never happen with the pipe we had - the rate of data change at the primary was just too much. A company I worked for once came up with a really cool software-and-tape-based solution, but it isn't used anywhere near as much as the sync-and-ship method with hardware.

      The other thing to keep in mind is that you have to integrate the data once it gets to the remote site. Expensively shipping the array means that all you have to replicate is the changes that occurred post-shipment. Not quite as expensively shipping, say, a few JBOD trays, mirroring them back into an array, then replicating changes, somewhat cheaper but longer. Cheaply shipping a crapload of tape, restoring it to your array, then replaying the days or weeks of built-up data from there (tape restores are SLOW), well, hope you haven't overflowed your change buffers at the primary site by then.

      Ya get what ya pay for. That station wagon full of tapes may be cheapest per Tb, but will the data have any value once it gets to its destination?
  • yujie, on 10/11/2007, -23/+2I wish FedEx provide high speed internet service.
  • alumunum, on 10/11/2007, -3/+23The actual saying goes: "Do not underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon loaded with backup tapes going 80 miles an hour down the freeway"

    Anyways, this smells like a viral marketing by fedex.
    • EntropyMan, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I think it would be true of any brand of overnight shipping, even USPS.

      A company I used to work for needed to ship 10 TB on a regular basis (literally, the whole earth). There was only one way to do it -- sneaker-net.
  • Wasted, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21This is allmost as old as the internet: "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes"
    http://www.bpfh.net/sysadmin/never-underestimate-bandwidth.html
  • tatankanuk, on 10/11/2007, -8/+1I guess this means my cousin still has a job!
    • royall64, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Quick, maybe if we act like we care it'll go away!
  • NordicSkiing, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3More than 90% of fiber is still dark...
    (we are only using a tiny bit of the capacity we could use)
    • 15charmaxwtf, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1They can fit a lot more information down the cables used at the moment too. I guess the bandwidth has more to do with the routers etc
  • fishbeef33, on 10/11/2007, -6/+0Makes sense. After all, the internet is just a series of tubes...
  • utdiscant, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2I don't doubt FedEx will in some way corrupt the data on the way.
  • AstroZombie138, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1True, but large companies are using much larger than 100mb connections, and typically use layer 2 or layer 3 carrier based private networks that don't touch the internet. I know of many companies with their own OC12 connections between data centers, and several that are looking into 10G LAN-PHY connections.
    • omghi2u2, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Exactly. 1g/s+ to the internet isn't expensive these days. About 10$ per mb/s per month.
  • jennamalia, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3déjà vu

    http://www.digg.com/tech_news/Google_s_Next_Gen_of_Sneakernet
  • douglasr007, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7So, I look on the related news link on the page and this comes up:
    http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/03/73007

    I couldn't read the article and you'll see why.
  • Rhatz, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5How do you think I feel ? I am still using dial up 56k modem
  • ruddy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+24thanks fedex for unclogging our tubes
    • royall64, on 10/11/2007, -2/+14Because we all love it when FedEx unclogs our tubes.
    • sahaskatta, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3not exactly the best idea, now we won't be able to get to work because of traffic jams
  • Darthmalt, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Obligatory quote

    "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes going down the highway"
    - Andrew Tanenbaum
  • niradg, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2anyone in the film industry will tell you this.
  • andrew522, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Yeah, I suppose, but that would really only be valid if you were already holding the information on external harddisks or on blu-ray, or hd-dvd... whatever storage media. The thing is that you have to transfer the info to an external drive or disks before sending it, which also takes a lot of time also (for that much info); whereas you just send it over the internet, and you don't have to have all that physical storage.

    BUT if you are on a slow connection, (as mentioned) where the internet transfer would be months, then you would benefit.
  • alloneword, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3There ain't no bandwidth like a boot full of tapes.

    Or to update that adage to modern terms.

    There ain't no bandwidth like a boot full of blu-ray discs.
  • bcarl314, on 10/11/2007, -2/+12Oh come on now. FedEx can deliver [enter arbitrary value to make point] amount of data faster than the internet? Really?

    No offense here, but FedEx will always be able to transfer data faster than the internet, if the amount of data is sufficient.

    Even if you could increase bandwidth 1000 times, then you could say FedEx can deliver one PB (Peta Byte) faster than the internet, and so on and so forth.
  • voxiso, on 10/11/2007, -9/+6lol people think up anything to blog about just to get it on digg
    • royall64, on 10/11/2007, -9/+7lol people think up anything to bitch about just to get attention on digg comment forums
  • tecknoplasma, on 10/11/2007, -13/+1Transferring over the internet is free... (patience not included)
  • alumunum, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5What i want to know is when the ***** did a song become a unit of measurement for media? Soon our providers will be advertising in terms of songs 80songs/second download speeds! Woot.
    • dave932932, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3It's funny what a "song" is too. Usually Real Audio at 48Kbps.
    • killiansman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2ever since Napster became popular...
  • Skotlake, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1In other news, mail-order TB pornography sales skyrocketed this weekend.
  • Zybernaut, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3Like the old adage goes:
    "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway."
    —Tanenbaum, Andrew S. (1996). Computer Networks. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 83. ISBN 0-13-349945-6.
  • BebopBlues, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0FTA: "Imagine a company with two offices in different cities, perhaps even in different countries. Each office has a 100 megabit internet connection."

    If you have 100Mbit connection between two offices, you can just setup a way to mount a share volume over the internet from one Office to the other which can have access to it like if its local network. There's no need to transfer the entire data unless for some special circumstances.
  • RedViper1999, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1DHL FTW.
  • emt1451, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1FedEx will always be faster than the internet, depending on how much you want to transfer.
  • looselips, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1I thought we had all paid for fiber-to-the-curb in the US? Wasn't AT&T suppose to deliver this already?
    In the US FedEx it might be cheaper for over-night delivery; but I would love to see the package delivered a whole day early on overnight, "What do you mean it isn't there yet? I sent it FedEx, like 5 minutes ago!" or the other impossible, where it shows up at their door before you thought about sending it.
    Serious, where is my cheap fiber I paid for already?
    Congress would investigate, but lobbyists have their hands tied on every decision which could affect any major corporations' bottom dollar.
    Without cheap, secure and fast internet, we will find many other more important issues to bring up sides against our established rule. You would think they would want to keep us happy.
    I can't wait for Internet3 where we torrent our wireless bandwidth for free access on our own anonymous networks. Wireless Access Points (wireless routers) are already in place, it is time for someone to develop the mesh networking client so we can create the new fast and free net. If a client throttles they get throttled, I would gladly buy another router if it meant I could run a server or ul & dl t= 10x speeds on a network which might be the new free dial-up for latency issues alone. Remember how speed was limited to 56k over copper phone lines? I do not believe a completely digital wireless spectrum would be limited by much more than processor power, so think what you could do with a speed slightly slower than your hard drive. Nice thought isn't it?
    I was hoping the shared mesh network was part of Google's Free WIFI idea; looks like we may have to wait another 10 years.
  • dave932932, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Just remember to put "Fragile - Throw Underhand" on the package. You won't get much data transfer if the external hard-drive/ discs/ tapes snap in half.
    • ragsmaloy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I used to work for Parcel Force for a while (kind of English FedEx equivalent) and the only packages I treated with respect were the ones marked "medical supplies" so if anyone’s planning to send a terabyte worth of porn through the post in Britain I recommend you mark it up as "medical teaching material" or some such and it'll get there without a scratch.
  • weekender, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Internet Still Cheaper Than FedEx
    • dave932932, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Not at corporate speeds. (100Mbps+ goes for about $300 a month here).
  • GeneralSun, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Err, only if you don't count the burning time...
  • GhostWithToast, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3This is simply not true. I work for a company that regularly ships gigabytes of data across the globe for high-resolution trailer and effects work. Not only that, but it is encrypted from source to destination, checks every byte on completion, and sends email notifications. Here's a pdf if your interested.
    http://fotokem.com/downloads/fotokem_global_data.pdf
  • dezent, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1what about physical safety...? if you dont mind Fedex throwing your 1TB drives around.. the truck being robbed or something else.. go ahaead and send it via truck or get faster internet connections
  • rarson, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6I want to see FedEx stream that terabyte.
  • socraticchrist, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4You could say this for any amount of data. As hte pipes get big, just replace hte # with a higher amount of data
  • PiMPSP, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Next Article On Digg: MPAA And RIAA bullying FedEx and UPS To Hand Over Data On Customers Who Send Large Packages Containing DVD-R's And CD-R's And HDD's Over 40GB. lol
    • ModOps, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Don't laugh... it wouldn't be surprising in the least, not from those asshats.
  • dezent, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4ohh btw i pay 320 SEK for my 100mbit at home.. that's about 47USD / month =)

    The solutions is.. move to Sweden where bandwidth is cheap !
  • HappyScrappy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Nonsensical comment.

    It'll always be faster as long as you are sending a high-enough capacity device/tape along.

    When I was in school, it only took a 2GB 8mm tape in an envelope overnight to exceed the bandwidth of the internet (and the school labs/offices were literally across the street from the HQ of the NSFNET). Now I can receive that much in 2 hours AT MY HOUSE.
  • ModOps, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0It's nothing to do with the company when crap happens, it's to do with the driver. I've had good and bad drivers from both companies... it depends on how good the driver wants to be.
  • misterdoodi, on 10/11/2007, -4/+0PigeonTorrent.com
  • hobophobe, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2What is the total resource used in shipping vs. network transfer? That's the question. It should ultimately use less resources to transfer electronically and therefore we should upgrade our pipes to allow that as the first choice of moving information. Any amount of information.

    We should also continue to improve our physical transportation systems to make them more efficient too.
  • tektalk, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Hell yeah, I would trust Fed Ex to deliver 1TB
  • sh0rtstop00, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0yeah, 1 day delivery but how long do u think it'll take to put all those data on disks?
  • injury0314, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Voice over FedEx anyone?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.