Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:Quantum Entaglement is not strange at all (Score 1) 189

Except you can delay when you cut the car into the future and still get the same result. They can send entangled photons in two different directions, and use different types of measurements to cause statistical influences on the other photon, no matter the distance, and even if it happens in the future. Example is if you measure for vertical polarization, you will get a different distribution than if you measure for horizontal, simplified.

Comment Re:Waste of money (Score 2) 134

cost $123.9 million...per year

You're confusing budgeted and actually spent. Wartime expenditures are not restricted to budget. For example. On paper, we budgeted only a few billion for wartime expenditures between 2001 and 2006, yet the actual money spent was in the trillions. My poli-sci teacher said in those 5 years, we spent enough money on the war to fund all healthcare and college for all of the USA for 10 years.

Comment Re:The big difference is... (Score 1) 73

Currently commercially available is 32Tb/s with 6km ranges, and has been for 5+ years now. There is little demand because backbone bandwidth supply has completely outpaced demand. No point in increasing the backbone's bandwidth if it's mostly idle already. They are expecting 100Gb/s FTTH over 5Tb/s shared fiber by 2020. I'm sure that will start to drive up demand.

Comment Re:Quantum Entaglement is not strange at all (Score 1) 189

It gets better than that. You ball may be a wave or a particle, and you can record the state of the ball now, but in a scrambled form. Then send the paired ball to some someone else who may be millions of light years away. And depending on if they observe it or not, will decide if your ball is a wave or a particle. From your point of view, someone possibly measuring the twin ball millions of years in the future decides if your current ball is a particle or wave.

The issue is that you can't know until data about what they read is sent back allowing you to decipher what you measured. That has to be sent via classical means.

Comment Re:Perhaps... (Score 2) 69

I visualize all kinds of logical problems, which conflicts with my navigational abilities. I have a hard time thinking and walking. Sometimes my balance is thrown off because what I'm "seeing" and what I'm feeling don't match. I would not describe what I see as normal 3d images. I see "n dimensional" images where "n" is the number of variables.

If I'm thinking really hard, even my hearing and touch gets hijacked and I can experience strange sensations. An example would be when thinking about how network flows interfere with each other. The rate of packets being sent can be thought of as "sound", then all of the "sound frequencies" of the network flows converge on a single point, and then I visualize the resulting sound of these overlapping frequencies and can "see" where peaks get too spiky, resulting in jitter or packetloss. I've done this several times when trying to visualize why I was getting incredibly rare transient packetloss. Effectively microbusts of roughly synchronized senders. Where the "n" dimensional comes in is I can see multiple versions of these at the same time, like many steady flows, many starting flows, etc etc. I can think of the corner cases ahead of time and see all of these cases concurrently without having to rethink of the issue for each case.

I just used networking as an example, but i'm a programmer and do this same thing to pretty much all problems.

Comment Re:Cool, and no 4K content (Score 1) 207

Fiber ISP uses IPTV to send me 20Mb/s 1080p. I did a side-by-side of ABC's Harry Potter weekend against my Blueray on the same monitor and I could not tell a difference. The TV was distinctly better than my DVD version, even my wife chimed in on the quality differences. My STB does not support 4k. It will be a bit before they start moving in that direction, but bandwidth is not an issue.

Comment Re:Caps don't fix the problem (Score 1) 160

98% of the cost of an ISP has nothing to do with bandwidth or network equipment and speeds are increasing 100% every 9 months. It is so cheap it has been described as "selling air". Are you proposing that people who consume way more air than others should have to pay more? Stop running! You're breathing too much!

Comment Re:Monopolies (Score 1) 160

They play games with the laws. There is no exclusive franchise, but they do make right of way laws that make the barrier to entry incredibly high. AT&T successfully sued my state government to disallow ISPs access to right of way easements. But you ask, isn't AT&T an ISP? Nope, they're a telcom, completely different. They offer internet services, but they are not an "ISP" by right of way definition. Funny how that works. AT&T wasn't alone in suing the government, so "cable" companies also have access, but not ISPs.

Then you couple that with another common city law that states that unless you have right of way access, there is a limit of how many companies have access. They don't want lots of competition coming through and tearing up everyone's lawns. So we have this law that effectively limits the number of ISPs right of way access to exactly 1, but AT&T and Charter aren't ISPs, but because they offer ISP services, they still count towards that "1". So yeah, good luck.

Comment Re:Then why aren't the telecoms, cable more pofita (Score 2) 160

Cable companies spend 10x more money upgrading their cable networks every 5-8 years than the cost of a fiber network that won't need to be upgraded for several decades. They're throwing money in the wind. Average cost to install 1Gb/1Gb fiber, $1.5k/house, cost to upgrade an existing cable network from DOCSIS 2.0 to DOCSIS 3.0, $10k/house. DOCSIS 3.1 will be more expensive for anywhere they plan to actually provide the "3.1" speeds, otherwise you're stuck with 3.0 speeds until they split nodes, which is hugely expensive.

That's not even including the ~20% industry average reduction in Op-ex costs going fiber, which is a lot of something that consumes 60% of your revenue.

Comment Re:Channel saturation (Score 1) 160

"more upstream equipment"? ISP's router can support up to 64 400Gb ports for a city of 8000 households. How soon are you expecting them to have to upgrade? You seriously underestimate how fast modern ISP equipment is. The linecards are upgradable to 1Tb/s ports. Entry level gear can handle 4Tb/s and high end gear can handle about 900Tb/s. Ever see 300+ 1Tb/s ports in a single router? Yes, they make them.

They're already working on 10Gb/s FTTH and expect it to not only to easily scale to 100Gb by around 2018-2020, but that is 100Gb per customer. The entire fiber will support about 5Tb/s of "shared" bandwidth. Unless they plan to have 50+ customers per fiber, everyone will have dedicated bandwidth.

Slashdot Top Deals

If you push the "extra ice" button on the soft drink vending machine, you won't get any ice. If you push the "no ice" button, you'll get ice, but no cup.