What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
The camera starts rolling on Best Buy holiday campaign. view!
www.youtube.com/bestbuy - A behind the scenes look at one employee's singing debut.
84 Comments
- bepo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Some snippets from the article :
"It is believed"
"possibly with the aim of"
"long been rumoured"
"We think"
"theoretically possible"
That's all pretty vague, the only real facts are that Google is buying dark fiber (we knew that), they have purchased an interconnect facility (we knew that also) and they are experimenting with packing containers with processing and storage equipment (also known). Then the writer sprinkles in an unnamed source from an unnamed company, shake vigorously and serve.
With FUD being thrown about with wild abandon in this industry how do we know that Mr or Ms Unnamed who holds an unnamed position at an unnamed company has any credibility? - dawgma, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5graybot
"..dark fiber is potentially THE fastest way that I know of to move information."
I don't understand. Isn't dark fiber the same as optical fiber, it's just called "dark" because it isn't being used. I don't think it is a new type of fiber, or anything different than what parts of the internet already run on. What is the bandwidth potential of optical fiber with many users on it?
I would like to think a new "Googlenet" could provide everyone with >100MB access to the net.
For you naysayers of Google... step back and think generally about the evolution of the internet for the moment. What is the future looking like right now? What with telecoms wanting to charge more for the crappy bandwidth we already have (comparatively with other nations), and *some* software companies wanting everyone to pay $700 for an operating system and some office software, and then every other tech company coming out with their own standard formats and *****.. no wonder the evolution of the net has become bottle-necked!
Where is our 45Mbit internet connections (that we may or may not have already paid $200 B for)? Why are so many people being charged inconsistently all over North America for their internet usage. Wouldn't it be great if we had a network that allowed seamless integration and access to information wherever you are... a network where everyone is connected with their digital devices with seemingly no bandwidth restrictions. For example... instead of camera phones, think of live streaming mobile video phones (for everyone).
***** like that will require a HUGE infrastructure overhaul. Do you think such a network will just evolve naturally given the current atmosphere? I mean, what company out there really cares about giving people better internet connections if in the long run they don't make much more money anyway. Google's CEO's might care. Page n' Brin. Sure, they've got money on their mind a lot more than they used to.. but if there was ever a company out there that could speed up the evolution of the internet, I would say Google is positioned to be the one to do it.
They have SO MUCH MONEY that hasn't been committed to any other projects yet. Who else has $50 Billion to finance a new internet? They could become a Global ISP and monthly charges could range from $2 month for basic home users to... i dunno, only $50 for the high end access at businesses. Everyone would switch. And even with those rates, a billion dollars or more a month would come in from customers. In 5 years the new internet is paid for and Google could drop their prices.
Well I dunno, sounds too good to be true. But I'd like to see something big happen with the internet. If "Web 2.0" is the big evolutionary leap right now, then at this rate, it's going to be a long time before we see seamless universal information integration.
But I'm just having some fun speculating anyway. Don't get all on my case about it if you don't like it! - dbc00per, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Jesusphreak was right on when he said
"What is the point of that? The strength of the Internet is its openness.
Before some of you guys get excited, think about what this really entails. You sure you want Google literally controlling all information online? Even after their China-censoring scandal and the other assorted BS they pull?
Heck, I haven't even seen MS pull something this "evil""
this is google worst idea ever - tzmartin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I'm not surprise to hear of a private Google network in the works. What is also interesting is the growing concern over domain name availibility and top level domain issuance. I've read the Microsoft is pushing for different standards, too.
Frankly, I think it's a wise move to develop an internal network, brand it Google then leverage into (potentially) the primary mediator of information. Would I use it? Not a chance. Google is evil. They are moving against the very reason why the Internet has flourished... Where they were once a disintermediated search/information tool, they are now a media services company with a DIRECT interest the content that YOU view. Totally against the grain and a conflict of interest in my book. I'm all for the enabled mind and a BIG NODIGG on this crap. - zentro, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I for one do not want any company to create an alternative to the internet. What's the point of getting a controlled version of the internet we know of love? Imagine Microsoft wanted to do the same thing (the actually did, a while back), would you all be so excited?
- fac3less, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2graybot,
Get a brain:
dark fiber or unlit fiber (or fiber) is the name given to fiber optic cables which have yet to be used.
Not "Dark fiber is like really, really fast man!"
It has the potential to be fast (just like any pipe) but that doesn't mean it's fast because it's called 'dark fiber'. - adam.lindsay, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Geee maybe now, we can all go IPv6. :)
IMHO its more about a backbone for WiMax. And then will come WiMax Phones and hmmm GTalk, goodbye telco's. :) - Voltius, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2=====GOOGLE IS NOT TAKING OVER THE WORLD=====
Google is only aquiring connections so they can run THEIR OWN private internet. READ the article, not just the title.
Backin the 1990's companies laid down hundreds of miles of Fiber Optic cable then didn't use it. Google is buying them and finally using them.
=====ADVATAGES OF FIBER OPTIC CABLE=====
It's the same speed as regular cable. YES, surprise!!! Light and Electricity travel at the same speed! But Fiber Optic has less resistance and less interfearance from the outside world (things like radio signals etc...)
=====WHY YOU SHOULD BE HAPPY=====
Because right now Cable companies are trying to make the Internet a PRIVATE network.
"The nation's largest telephone and cable companies are crafting an alarming set of strategies that would transform the free, open and nondiscriminatory Internet of today to a privately run and branded service that would charge a fee for virtually everything we do online."
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060213/chester
Google is the one company that can keep the internet the way it is for us in case something bad like this happens
=====STOP BLAMING GOOGLE FOR CHINA LAW=====
GOOGLE is NOT responsible for what the Chinese Government decides. Unless you can't read, you should know that the Chinese government employees some 30,000 (last checked) to monitor activity in chat rooms and blogs, People have been arrested just by Critisizing the Chinese Goverment.
Google was forced to censor Google.china's results, but with some simple google code typed into the search box you can turn censoring off. Google's brilliant. - dawgma, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Eric Wilson
I'm not sure if you were trying to be contrary to my estimations or what. I really couldn't tell. But no matter, let me break expand on what I was saying before.
According to this site:
http://www.internetworldstats.com/america.htm
the population of North America is 328 million, and there are at least 224 million internet users. Over 30% of these users subscribe to broadband.
If Google (or any singular Global ISP) had an internet infrastructure that penetrated most of North American, and they offered rates of around $2/mo. for basic, you could bet maybe 50 million more people would use the net. And even with 275 million users that still leaves 50 million people without the net for whatever reason (illegals, anti-tech, cant figure it out).
So, if there were 275 million internet users, based on current statistics we would have:
193 mil. basic (low broadband 2Mbit) subscribers @ $2/mo. = $385M/mo.
82 mil. high broadband (100 Mbit+) subscribers @ $10/mo. = $820M/mo.
1 mil. businesses @ $50/mo. = $50M/mo.
For a total of $1.25 Billion/mo. (or $15 Billion/year)
That's just for North America. Also.. at $10/mo. for such great broadband access, the percentage of people using the higher speeds would probably jump much higher than 30% of the total internet users. Not to mention people who buy two or three $2/mo. connections.
A singular ISP could be a breakthrough in internet access.. with potential revenues of $15-$24 Billion a year they would see MORE profits than any other ISP ever and still offer the best rates anyone has ever seen.
What could be wrong about this? - Madh2orat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1IPv6 Here we come.
Bout time. - grayBot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1possibilities for googlenet.....
1. all google only at super fast speed...basically as a user you get super fast access to google video, maps, and of course their cache...
this would obviously put google at a huge advantage they could limit the number of google cubes made to keep bandwidth a ridiculoulsly high level.... 500Mb/sec anyone? ... so everyone will want one - if you have one ... you get most of the internet just much much much faster , plus this will allow unforeseen content such as HD video w/ embedding links and interaction
Lastly google could charge other content providers to be a part of thier network...
2. a vector for a completely new type of content.... what if its all centered around video w/ embedded advertising and the googlecube allows users to easily creat their own content as well as remix others...
3. GoogleNeuralNetTorrent Massively Parrallel Computing.... every cube acts like a torrent all the time.... its built that way in the hardware so that every type of request sent to the google net is handled by all the cubes online and then once completed sent back to original cube ( prolly not practical but cool nbever the less ) ... ini their idle time all cubes serve as computing minions for googlenet..... basically the cubes are nuerons and googlenet is a big ol brain....global brain 2.0
3. a really ***** cool MMORPG .... i dunno where to go w/ this but imagine the possibilities...hehehehehe - jesusphreak, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2This is little more than every single Google rumor ever conceived wrapped up into one. Its hogwash.
- mushoo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1skynet here we come.
- Sell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Is this the beginning of the "googlenet"?
- jesusphreak, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4What is the point of that? The strength of the Internet is its openness.
Before some of you guys get excited, think about what this really entails. You sure you want Google literally controlling all information online? Even after their China-censoring scandal and the other assorted BS they pull?
Heck, I haven't even seen MS pull something this "evil". - drosdin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1So, Google wants a corporate backbone to link all of it's world wide offices together and doesn't want to route traffic across the public internet where it's internal secrets could be sniffed or hacked. Fiber makes more sense for this than other transmission mediums due to it's speed and current relatively low price point.
This is common practice for large, security consious corporations. It's not a plan to take over the net. - bubbatex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I am sure this will somehow tie to the Dharma Project in next year's series.
- kolop1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0 I don't like the idea of having someone owning the Internet and controlling its content. Having said that It wont be too long before Bush and Co. take over the Internet saying Terrorist are using it and we need to control it. Then all free speech will be gone and the world as we know it will be gone. Enjoy the Internet now because it wont be open to free speech and opinions for long.
- dawgma, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0osbjmg
A big FU to you.
It's too bad everyone doesn't know how to talk the way you would like, isn't it? It must be really terrible for you to have to read so many horribly spelled comments all your life. Bet it really BurNs YoU Up?
I didn't know that when I asked a question about something I actually had to know the answer before I asked it! Silly, ignorant me!
You cheese-eating asshat. - TKDWILSON, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"""""""$2 month for basic home users to... i dunno, only $50 for the high end access at businesses. Everyone would switch. And even with those rates, a billion dollars or more a month""""""""
1 billion/2= 500 million subscribers. Total number of people in the US=300million. Number of those people who are illegals and probably can't afford it=15 million. Lets say that even a million businesses buy this. That is only 50 million dollars. that means that still 475 million people have to buy the service to make a billion dollars a year. Now, at $2 a piece, some people might buy two connections for themselves, but not many. Maybe $20 a month per person. That would come to only needed 50 million people subscribing to make a billion. Imagine the RIAA's and MPAA's reaction. You download a full movie 9+ gig Iso in like 15 minutes. People would be unstoppable.
Eric Wilson - motorbikematt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@terryr
No, this article is good...perhaps the title isn't the best. The fact is, that the dark fiber purchases and the potential use for them has NOT been discussed for several years, at least not on any Google forum.
Maybe for the past year...but not SEVERAL as you say. - abuser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0So Google seems to want:
1) Not to pay the telcos for the bandwidth they use (OK)
2) Be capable of providing QoS for its video, voice and other stuff (OK)
3) To solve some architectural problems of their data centers and gain new capabilities (OK)
What I don't like and why I'll never increase my reliance on their services:
1) They will recover investment in this and other projects by selling ads, which that means less and less privacy ("personalized search" where everyone gets a different search result and similar crap). In case you haven't noticed, they single-sidedly update their privacy policy every now and then
2) The more crap you upload to Google, the harder it gets to move it someplace else (the same goes for Yahoo and MSN). And when Google-Brain Interface implant comes out, the easiest thing will be to say "OK, I want it - all my ***** is in their netowrk, this stuff is free and I don't have to use the keyboard (or a computer, for that matter)".
3) I prefer to use providers less capable of analyzing my data and usage patterns. - ACalcutt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0also... i dont think the google isp would get good for a while. the final mile connections (the telco, cable company to you) would be the hardest part for google
- ThirdPrize, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What % of the internet does Google currently have in its cache? I have always thought that its only a matter of time before Google starts hosting and making its own private net. Makes indexing so much easier when the source is all on your servers as well.
I for one welcome our new blue, red, yellow, blue, green, red overlords! - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Google: the new AOL.
/me keels over - salmonmoose, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Perhaps they are respoinding to all of the US Telco's wanting to start biasing throughput depending on how much people pay; if they have enough infrastructure around the country, watch them start their own ISP, subsidise the costs from adverts and really put the fear of god into the telcos.
If that's your plan google, please come to Australia, our infrastructure needs competition :) - eklitzke, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@Voltius
Light and electricity do not travel at the same speed. On the other hand, the bottleneck is the frequency that you can send out and receive signals, not the propagation speed of the signal, so the relative "speeds" of light and electricity don't matter too much. - abstractstar, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1This is, if true, too much. Soon google controls everything.. ach, i'm hungover & paranoid ;)
- Newbie01, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0WOW.
Hmm.
WOW. Potentially anyway. - ACalcutt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0hmmm....i dont know if a seperate network would make sence....what abould a parallel internet with those shipping connectors acting as gatways/datacenters to the normal internet. maybe they will also allow peering on their network by the telcos
- DjOverEZ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0MAN! What isn't Google doing these days? I've said it before and I know others have too: I just hope they're not spreading themselves too thin.
- junesix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'm wondering if Google is planning to develop adjunct rather than alternative content delivery. Think something like AOL where select services and content are available with an AOL account and client program. Instead Google's client provides a unified platform for all its services (mail, maps, IM, voice, video, news, etc) plus unique content as described by the anonymous content provider in the artcle. All of this then works alongside the existing Internet, so to speak. Like Google Desktop on steroids. The activated dark fiber would just be Google's private pipes for delivering all these add-on services. Once they've made the infrastructure investment, piping all this high-bandwidth content over privately-owned fiber is cheap. Since they control the delivery mechanism, they have access to all the information that travels over this private adjunct network. Slap on some unobtrusive ads for revenue.
- neoDingo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Some people here seem to be huge fans of Google, no matter what the headline is they are quick to approve of anything Google does. Then there are the others who actually read and UNDERSTAND the implications of what they are reading! stop the fan-boy attitude when it comes to google people!!!
DIGG! for an open Internet - ABEND954, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There is a simple possible explanation. From what I have been reading, Bellsouth and the other big ISPs are threatening to charge Google, MS, Yahoo, and other high traffic website for bandwidth/access. Google, by creating it's own network/ISP can do an end runaround these threats. "You want to make us (Google) to pay so that your users can access ourt website, fine.. we'll build our own network: so there!" :-)~
- TarryTops, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Well eventually they will own a helluva things. Read this http://dailybuzz.tripod.com/google_takes_over_the_world.htm future news. They'll own you, me "shudder"...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's all about entertainment on demand (TV, Radio, Film, Music) which will become normal given a few more years.
- lollerskates, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0If Microsoft is "Big Brother," Google is most certainly the government from Brave New World.
We should totally keep the internet the way it is. Sadly, I would expect the large companies to get their way. This is why we can't have nice things. - Netweb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Google with the search appliances and cache servers they have at ISP's around the world are only looking at ways to link up their own servers to save on the huge bandwidth costs they pay ISP's in interconnect fees across the globe. Unlike Microsoft and Yahoo who use Akamai for global mirroring of data.
- caluml, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It's already happening. Anonet
- hyperpasta, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0HELLO! This is scary, people. A private internet... completely controlled by Google! That gives them a monopoly over pretty much everything... since everyone will want the speed, they'll basically own the internet!
+Digg - jav1231, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I would think one advantage would be to gain access via typical IP but having a huge core they owned. I can't see going the way of AOL and Compuserve as being of any benefit. Sure, it might be nice to tie into a huge high-speed internet or Googlenet but if I can't get to Digg, what use is it. Meaning, if I can't email my Mom or do everything I can now it's of little use.
- OBKenobi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0And what is going to be on this private, so-called Google IP, high-fiber, pseudo-internet?
This kind of thing is inevitable though. There will be more than just one network, and Google may very well be one of them. The internet will remain the backbone, but there will be a dozen,maybe even hundreds of peripheral networks. Local ones, national ones, privately-owned ones, and special interest networks for specific applications like gaming or education, etc. We already have Internet2 in development for instance. - StephnDolenc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0gosh i hate table designs in websites like this one...i can't believe they still exist
- tidejwe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Google will succeed only if they still left an open connection to the internet, and why wouldn't they? They'd stand to lose a lot of money if they cut off from the internet. I wouldn't switch to Google if they weren't open to the internet...either that or I'd have both and internet and googlenet subscription. There is a lot of speculation going on here, and Google does not YET have enough cable to cover the USA, maybe the state of California or something...
- spareus157, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0oh my gosh Google is taking over the world!!!
RUN into the under ground bunkers before its too late!!! - binarypower, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Google is not an evil comany.
*click*
Google is good (robot voice) - monkeyboy8686, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Scary...
- coolgeek61813, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0its competition to ISP monopoly's and if it brings me faster and cheaper Internet access I'm all for it.
-
Show 51 - 85 of 85 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is