Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Google's Continuing Dark Fiber Mystery
eweek.com — Analysts say Google may be spending more than $1 billion on infrastructure projects, including purchases of a "dark fiber" backbone. The reason for the purchases is a riddle to the industry, but one Internet consultant recently offered a new answer to the puzzle.
BloodJunkie- 1536 diggs
- digg it
- Tiabin, on 10/12/2007, -6/+39Being the googlephile that I am, I will of course say, no big surprise that Google is one of the few paving the way.
- BloodJunkie, on 10/12/2007, -47/+13Paving the way towards...what?
- Tiabin, on 10/12/2007, -3/+46In this particular case, I don't know. But my point is they're always doing something out of the usual: google spreadsheets, for example. While as that might seem not all that useful one could feasibley see how running more and more common desktop things on the internet might make it so that data loss from individual PC failure might not be as devastating.
I'm not sure if you kept up with the whole $100 laptop OLPC project (www.laptop.org)... Well, it's biggest shortcoming was that it lacks any real hardrive space. If more services like google spreadsheets were to become commonplace, third world countries could participate in technological development a lot more since more data can easily be stored on the net for free. I mean... 2 gigs of space from gmail... com'on!
I just look forward to seeing what kind of rabbit they're going to pull out of the hat next. :) - theone3, on 10/12/2007, -36/+12Naw, they're just stashing their liquidity until people realise how truly hyped their stock value is.
- phpirate, on 10/12/2007, -5/+29I don't know what they're up to, but you know its google, and they'll do something thats innovative and kickass that will change the industry.
- Primedeath, on 10/12/2007, -3/+262 Gigs of space, almost 3 gigs (2737 megs at the moment)
- vypergts, on 10/12/2007, -1/+72It's probably so that if the telcos end up winning the net neutrality fight, google can provide its content over it's own lines and not get charged by greedy ISPs.
- theone3, on 10/12/2007, -44/+5"I don't know what they're up to, but you know its google, and they'll do something thats innovative and kickass that will change the industry."
Why? They've never done it before. - Matteos, on 10/12/2007, -3/+42I personally can't wait to see Google switch over to there privately owned backbone and say FU to the telcos when they try to charge them extra.
EDIT: Damn vypergts beat me to it. - infonography, on 10/12/2007, -1/+29This is no mystery at all, consider the net neutrality issue. The fact it will fail to pass in our very corrupt congress means that shortly the big telecoms vendors are about to put the bite on all the little fish. Google is planning to have their own wire in place to use so they don't get bit by the massive service fees Ala Enron that are coming in the next few years. Buying dark fiber now will save them from a net services brownout in the future.
I think their motto includes a bit about 'don't be stupid either' - phpirate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24@theone3: Lets just forget about the search, gigs of email, google earth, and the hundreds of other services they give out for free.
- templest, on 10/12/2007, -0/+28You broski's are thinking too small. Imagine, if Net Neutrality gets owned,
all of a sudden, there's going to be a lot of pissed off, overcharged customers. *Then*,
out of nowhere, *BAM*... fast, stable, uncensored Google ISP for $30 a month.
Think of the possibilities. - Egoist, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12They can buy all of the dark fiber that they want, but if they connect to AT&T's backbone at any point (100% of the time), they can be throttled.
I think they're going to roll out with internet access for all. More than likely wifi meshes in large cities across the nation.
*Edit* Now that I've read the article, I see I'm not alone. - rektide, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I believe the expression you were looking for, sir, is not "paving their way", but "digging their way".
- pauleric, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@Egoist, sure "they can be throttled", where 'they' can refer not only to google, but to AT&T. Yes, AT&T is a huge company, but competition is a good thing.
- Wickerman392, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I would welcome a Google ISP, seeing as the at&t/sbc ***** have decided that it would not be profitable to hook up DSL where I live. They would probably have to fix the phone lines first, since they are very noisy and do not even provide regular dialup speeds. I have to drive to a relative's house and use the slow ass computer I have set up there to get some "filez". What's even worse is that I am like only 4 miles away, but believe me, I make up for it by uploading at least 50 GBs of data a month to get back at those *****. Unfortunately, by the time any of this happens I'll have moved, to somewhere with some fiber to the home type deal. Its pretty sad that some third world countries have better and faster access than the country that made the internet popular.
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1"They can buy all of the dark fiber that they want, but if they connect to AT&T's backbone at any point (100% of the time), they can be throttled."
No one's going to throttle Google packets. That's just FUD from Google and the net neutrality advocates.
"I think they're going to roll out with internet access for all. More than likely wifi meshes in large cities across the nation."
If Google gives out free internet access, they're going to still need to pay for use of the backbone, so it doesn't make a lot of economic sense. There will be more users, and therefore, more Google users, and therefore more ad venue. I seriously doubt they could make enough to pay for infrastructure, maintenance, and backbone bandwidth. If Google offers internet service, they'll probably need to charge for it in the long run. - MonkeyFit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1sry, wrong place.
- taylorhayward, on 10/12/2007, -7/+79Here's the story:
- Google buys WIFI coverage for major U.S. cities
- Google buys/produces web applications for the most common Windows desktop applications
- Google constructs HUGE data warehouses around the country
- Google goes into talks with DELL and other laptop manufactures
- Google pays big money for higher bandwidth internet cabling
- Google in talks with big name Linux developers
The Plan:
A laptop computer that has a fair amount of low power RAM, good screen, good battery life, and no floppy drive, hard drive, DVD drive, or drive of any sort. (similar to the one in production by the One Laptop Per Child Foundation) The laptop will have high quality wireless reception.
The computer rolls out with Linux and Firefox heavily integrated.
Your hard disk is now Google. Your applications are now Google running on Firefox; both on and off line. You will be able to convert all your existing Windows files to Google files. Google comes up with a whole host of programming tools for developers to make networked applications via Google.
The net result…
A very inexpensive laptop
A host of free networked applications
Networked computing wherever you go
Your documents backed up for all time and eternity
Google gets…
I’m sure they’ll find some way to profit off there new service. - Tiabin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18Yeah, the fact that they now have a very direct influence over the entire world will assure that they make profit somehow. I'm not too worried... They'll make their profits. But the key is in the fact that even the very very poor could get "plugged in." Now if we can just get this all to happen before the world is destroyed by nuclear war or global warming hehehe....
- bobinator, on 10/12/2007, -14/+21Talk about monopoly of the market.
- Yorn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+37Actually, you're dead on, I don't know why you're being modded down. The net result is that Google knows their audience, we live in big cities, and we own broadband to save files to our computers or websites or wherever. But what if we didn't have to? What if Google provided it for free in addition to the computer. Here's a subscription service (like $100 a year) and you get VOIP, Email, Internet, Video, etc. as long as you are in a major city? Think ABC, NBC, CBS for computers. The only thing you have to do is buy the TV.
IMHO, Google is just doing what the major networks failed to do during the dotcom run. The plan seems so obvious it's funny watching all their competitors freaking out. Hell, their competitors don't even know they are competing with Google yet! - gravedigga, on 10/12/2007, -18/+8...and say hello to googlesoft and goodbye to "do no evil".
Oh and welcome our new AI google-algorithm overlords. - edmicman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4All of that hinges on Internet connectivity. While we can assume you can potentially always have a connection at some point, I for one DON'T want anything where it's continued use hinges on me "connecting" if I don't want to. I also don't want to host my entire life's contents on a corporate "free" service. Sure, I use gmail and the google homepage...whatever. But if I have important things, it's on my own or paid for server, and kept locally.
- 4tygames, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13How will Google make a profit?
One Word: Ads.
There are ads in Gmail currently, but no one really notices them. I like unobtrusive ads, lets keep it like that. - klownkiller, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8& it will all remain in the beta stage for eternity. :P
- bobradarbob, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6It's a known fact that Google's founders have invested in Nanosolar (Inc). Perhaps they have figured out how to deliver power over fiber via solar and everyone is in for a suprise!
" One plug to rule them all " ;)
b. - shaherazad, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Step 1: Buy fiber
Step 2: Monopolize the internet
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit! - mhockey14221, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2In theory I love your scenario, but... signing over my entire digital existence to one company makes me squirmish. One motivated hacker can essentially ruin all the computers in a city or the entire network. Plus, I like knowing that I possess a piece of software or a file, not that its on some remote computer.
I dont know if that version will ever catch on, except with the poor who cannot afford current $500+ laptops - Tiabin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@bobradar: ...and in the darkness bind them? Paradoxical.
- fduplex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Just have the machine boot via PXE right off google's network.
- baxtermadux, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1all yall keep complaining about how you dont like the thought of having your files stored remotely, but its not like you cant also purchase a external hard drive, and use fileshare to keep it up to date with all your documents.
- MonkeyFit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What's wrong with buying/building a different computer and still using the services for either an upfront or subscription based cost. Buying the laptop would cover the upfront cost or a year subscription if that would be the plan.
- LFTravel, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15I also saw a blog post once speculating that Google could buy a cell phone company. The cell phone (and other devices) could use wireless to connect to Googlenet when within range. It would send you advertisements.
GPS and/or access point would tell Google where you are just about 24 hours a day. Datamine the hell out of everything you do. Targeted advertisements everywhere. Your laptop/device when connected to Google's wireless router would tell them exactly where you are to within a few hundred feet.
You couldn't get much more targeted than that. You enter a search query for "car rental new york city". Google sends you an ad, maybe even with a Google map -- "car rental company, just around the corner, walk this way."- taylorhayward, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17It's also important for people to understand this is probably not going to be a bad thing. I myself would love to hear about specials as I walk past my favorite pubs on the way home. :-)
As long as Google adheres to a strict set of guidelines on when and how a person is informed about things they may be interested in, this will be a boon for consumers – which, unless you live in shack in the woods, is you. - CatfishJones, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Actually, some of us are still customers and not consumers.
- taylorhayward, on 10/12/2007, -1/+17It's also important for people to understand this is probably not going to be a bad thing. I myself would love to hear about specials as I walk past my favorite pubs on the way home. :-)
- RadiantBeing, on 10/12/2007, -2/+25Whatever happens, it is always good to be an infrastructure/platform owner. You lay down the pipes and let time and innovation figure out what goes over them.
- taylorhayward, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12I totally agree.
- astrosmash, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3I disagree.
- jonshipman, on 10/12/2007, -2/+41"If you only knew the power of the dark fiber" koooo-kssshhhh
- CatfishJones, on 10/12/2007, -1/+15Minor technicality, that should be 'kssshhhh-koooo'.
- joelito, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6digg++ for the reference to star wars
- jzillan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Paving the way towards free internet friends. WIFI better place to test this than in the UK :)
Google going mobile in London
Read this: http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13129-2229731,00.html - AJRiddle, on 10/12/2007, -16/+1This is very old news
- kleger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11dark fiber sounds like something a tom clancy novel
- YourTechSupport, on 10/12/2007, -0/+24or something my doctor tells me I'm not getting enough of.
- elephantdog, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Google just waits for popular/good ideas to be posted on digg, then pretends they came up with them.
- Highborn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13WiFi is cool, but does it cause cancer?
Either way I choose Google over Microsoft and the telco dinosaurs. Anything they do to offset the current monopolies is fine with me.- Primedeath, on 10/12/2007, -0/+16What doesn't cause cancer these days?
- Rice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10EVERYTHING causes cancer. Don't you know anything?
Oh, Primedeath beat me to the cancer comment... how odd. - alecks, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14Except POT
- darkstar949, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6It is a known fact that radio frequency emissions can cause harm depending upon the strength and duration (i.e. microwaves) however, the long term effects of lower strength emissions are still pretty much unknown. A quick googling did turn up one article ( http://blogs.zdnet.com/Murphy/?p=380 ) speculating on the issue - but I wasn't able to turn up any hard science on it.
- SanTe, on 10/12/2007, -11/+8Rice wrote:
> EVERYTHING causes cancer. Don't you know anything?
Yes but Chuck Norris can cure cancer, so equilibrium in the universe is maintained. - geekee, on 10/12/2007, -4/+1"WiFi is cool, but does it cause cancer?
Either way I choose Google over Microsoft and the telco dinosaurs."
Anyone who thinks WiFi is a good solution for metro wireless networks deserves to lose a lot of money.
- lambda, on 10/12/2007, -8/+15My guess is that they are going to use this fibre to create some sort of network.
- elephantdog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15Good guess! They aren't going to spin it into R12 insulation are they?
- willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7hmmm, fiber, network
A fiber optic network!
"BRILLIANT !!!"
-jk ;-) - NoodlyAppendage, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18"My guess is that they are going to use this fibre to create some sort of network."
God I love digg - gdog05, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Computers are the future. I haven't used one myself, but from what I've read they are absolutely fascinating. Expect good things to come..
[sarcasm]
- makenshi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Could be Google wants to turn the tables on ISPs. Instead of Goole paying to access their network, it'll be them having to pay Google.
- elpayo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8It's all about Net Neutrality and having a backup plan.
- justin22290, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Well, in this situation is would be a great way to prove that they believe in there own motto. I'm sure that would be pretty evil.
- TheKeithD, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1In Soviet Russia, ISP pays Google!
- xelloss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7Where are they putting the Wire though?? Are they just storeing it for a rainy day or what? Or is it already in the ground because its "Dark fiber"?
- brewrat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Dark Fiber is fiber optical cable that has been installed (usually buried) but has not been hooked up. That is why it is called "dark" because it has not been "lit" up (with telecommunications lasers and equipment). Telecoms normally install much more optical fiber than they need because the major expense is the installation and the telecommunications equipment, not the fiber itself.
- xelloss, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Ah ok I see ya took Charter months maybe a year, in my area to string fiber 14 miles from our main town, out into a big country type community.
- willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7to expand a little on brewrat
A lot of fiber was laid in the late 90's Dot Com Boom time using lots of VC money. Lots of different companies were involved.
Most of them blew through the money on coke before anything could be done with it and the companies went belly up. So, now Google has been buying this stuff up at firesale prices (and of course speculation has been rampant).
As the article pointed out, the possibilities, for a bunch of high bandwidth fiber, are enormous.
- miken32, on 10/12/2007, -17/+0I'm sick of this "we're running out of IP addresses" nonsense! Take a look at IANA's list: http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv4-address-space. How many reserved blocks are there? How many IP addresses does a single company or school need? It's an artificial shortage.
- recursive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12IPv6 has other benefits too.
- TOTALineptitude, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4Bad link smart guy.. Try proofreading.
- madfester77, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6I wonder if this also might have something to do with the whole telecoms/cable attempts at kill net-neutrality. If google owns it own pipes for this possible future project, then they can keep the big telecoms out of the picture. Good game google... good game indeed!
- madfester77, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Damn, missed the edit window.
Oh well, I see that vypergts and matteos thought of this first... well, good game to them too.
- madfester77, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Damn, missed the edit window.
- tmwilkin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5So what if they are buying fiber. They have tons of storage and to manage that they need dark fiber #1 Hell we do that here. Plus they are wanting to put in their own peering points. Makes sense remember when others used to do that...? Yes that is how the internet is suppose to work if you want the best connection you get to the peering points..not just any ole connection to the internet.
- Havs, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10My guess is they're going to build a massive Wireless network. There's a good bit of wireless spectrum going up for sale in the near future. Google buys up a good chunk of the wireless spectrum and creates their network to run over that spectrum. Then they're able to provide FREE wireless service to everyone, paid for by ad based revenue. You'll be able to use their network free of charge, but you'll have to view ads to get the service (or pay a fee to get a beefed up service without ads). It'll be so easy for them to do it too.
For web pages, they simply add another frame at the top/side/right of the page that displays their ads. You think they're simply providing gmail because they're nice people; wrong. With the gmail technology they've proven they can insert relevant ads within email as well. Normal email goes over the pipes completely unencrypted. With the technology developed with gmail, they'll scan EVERY email and embed ads within it. It doesn't matter whether you're using gmail, yahoo, msn or any other email provider, if it goes over their pipes they can embed ads into it. It'll be part of the terms of use for getting free service. Think Google is in the instant messaging business because they're nice guys; wrong again. Google messenger gives them the know how to embed relevant links (directly off keywords would be my guess) directly into all of your IM conversations. Once again, it doesn't matter what client you're using, its going over their pipes so they can analyze and embed over any client.
With those three protocols, www email and IM, they've got 90% of the web traffic covered and can give the service travelling over other ports away for free. It's not going to be blazing fast service, my guess would be well under 768kbps, but 95% of web users don't need that, and if you do need more you'll be able to buy better service from them. So there's my guess on what Google's big picture is; complete ad saturation on the internet. Wherever you go, whatever you do, you'll be bombarded (in that ever so subtle and relevant way Google does it that isn't overly intrusive) with advertisements. And the best thing of all for google, they don't have to pay anyone a single cent! No more adsense, they'll bypass that completely by adding another frame onto every page.- Tiabin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Actually,
The use of their IM may be more subtle... They may not insert ads into it. That's annoying and makes them look like AIM. Have you noticed how they integrated google talk into gmail? They're probably using it to simply broaden the reach of their network.
Example: They want more gmail users. But user X doesn't need an email client. He does, however, need Google Talk to VOIP with his buddies. His new google talk account happens to integrate so seamlessly into his gmail account that he ends up using his gmail more than his old email.
(I've already become a victim to this... It works.)
But +1 for you... You have a lot of interesting thoughts in this comment. - Darmichar, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11The thing is, I have used Google nearly since it hit the web. Not once do I ever remember thinking 'That ad is really annoying!'. Hell, most times I don't notice the ads they've streamlined into the Web page/Gmail/Search Result.
As long as they can do all that is mentioned above, as well as continue placing ads the way they always have, I'd be first in line to use it. - BrewedInTexas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13I may be in the minority but I don't mind google data-mining my communications traffic as long as they adhere to their "Do No Evil" philosophy.
I LIKE well targetted ads. I would much rather see ads to something I'm interested in than more annoying punch the monk type ads.
The minute they start selling information to third parties is the minute the whole thing collapses on them and the whole business model is shot for them. - willcode4beer, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Funny the talk about ads.
I've found that I can learn a bit about friends from the ads that display in their emails. For instance, a friend who is into horses. We have never exchanged an email that has anything to do with horses. Yet when I am reading email from that person, I see ads for horse supplies and gifts.
I've noticed similar ads while reading emails from other friends. So, now I am able to learn more about them from the ads that are presented to me.
Call it indirect data mining through advertising.
- Tiabin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14Actually,
- Bigcat151, on 10/12/2007, -9/+5Did anyone see the Terminator movies????
Google = Skynet- buba447, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Is your mom named 'Sarah Connor'?
If so, you got helluva trouble coming your way.
Just remember, that guy your mom always told you about that tried to kill her, from the future; Well when YOU see him, he will be a good-guy.
Goodluck. - NoodlyAppendage, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5If google is skynet, the terminators will kill us with.. HUGS.
*runs away scared* - FenderGeek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Google started in California. Arnie is the "Governator" of California. Coincidence? I think not...
- buba447, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Is your mom named 'Sarah Connor'?
- amormachine, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1i just saw a post where a guy explained how absolutely every piece of information concerning yourself would flow through a google server in one way or another ... how is that not a spooky thought? i love google, they are a fantastic company, and i would believe they are being extremely ethical about everything. but in this age of un-warrented ATT phone taps and government echelon, any government inquiry into google would pull up absolutely everything about you.
quote -> 'if you want peace, train for war' or in our case, encypt the absolute hell out of everything. it's like looking for a need in a haystack, only all the little pieces of hay are dressed like needles. - dgolding, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5This is largely untrue. Basing anything on Alex Lightman is a real mistake to start with - he is pretty ignorant of any sort of technical detail. He got his clock cleaned in the IPv6 debate at the Catalyst conference they were writing about. Google is NOT buying a dark fiber backbone. They are buying some long haul wavelengths and some LOCAL dark fiber for connecting data centers. The vast majority of their $800mn capex goes towards servers and (especially) new data centers, which are very expensive - 100s of millions each, at the sizes and power densities that GOOG wants. The FUD on this issue needs to stop. I realize that people view GOOG as a messianic force of some kind, but a hard look at the financial numbers is very revealing - no dark fiber backbone.
- raccettura, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4I'm not at all suprised with Google buying Dark Fiber... there are many uses:
- Google runs linux clusters in many datacenters.... with their own fiber in beteween they have a VERY high capacity, backend network that nobody can take from them, is super secure, and isn't vulnerable to things like MCI going under, Cogent at war, etc. etc.
- Google, despite their claim is a media company (unique and technically oriented, but doesn't change the facts). How do you provide media over the net? High speed low latency networks. Why should google data take 10 hops to get to a destination, when google can feed data through it's own network to the closest POP to the user's ISP. Google can provide a much faster connection than anyone else (also work around some net neutrality issues). Why connect through 2-3 networks when you can go Google-->ISP. That gives Google a distinct advantage. Smoother video, faster downloads, more fluent web apps.
- Google ISP? Yea, it's not that far off. Google can take on small markets where Net Neutrality poses a risk to it's users.
- Google B2B? Google provides webservices, currently in perpetual beta... guess what... they want to monitize them. But does a company want a slow connection and latency? Or do they want it to feel like it's hosted on a server in the same rack?
- Google Investments - yea, that's right... Dark Fiber is an investment, you know the use of bandwidth is only going up over time. Guess what, buy cheap, hold on to it, and sell for a profit. They've been buying since the dot com bubble burst, and fiber was cheap... then when there is demand, they can sell back what they don't need. It's an investment, just like real estate.
These are just a few of the ways Google can use it, all of which are pretty safe investments and would very likely return a profit for Google. From the way I see it, this was a brilliant move... seems they will either use it to generate money for current businesses, or just hold it as an investment... either way it makes money. - dgolding, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Also, the article is rife with errors. There is no such thing as "mobile dark fiber". Google has a /32 of IPv6 address space, not a /20. This is poor journalism.
- Crackshot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There are a few errors that could have been cleaned up with simple fact checking and source inspections but still.... Wifi clearly a purchasable commodity, linux, open office, firefox, a truck load of online storage space, and the purchase of lots of dark fiber......seems like all the pieces are in place for a significant integration of some sort, good or bad.
- Kitsune818, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I think I'm becoming paranoid, because google buying up dark fiber seems a bit scary to me.. especially since people have to hypothesize about it's business value.. but I think the basic idea is that they want to have as much of your data as possible on their systems (and haven't they even said this themselves?)
What better way to farm data for profit than if you're sucking it right off your own backbone? Well, other than having you post all your information onto their systems yourselves, which seems to be working pretty well for them so far.
Even that wouldn't bother me so much if it didn't seem so ripe for the NSA's picking. Mark my words, one of these days we'll find out about the "secret" room at one of the big searches. - SIDSI, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2...---...
- SilentPurity, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1I thought this was plan to create a power source so they could take over the world, no digg.
- tablatronix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Someone ran a bunch of fiber along the interstate down here about 5 years ago. It was everywhere across the whole state.
Never knew what it was used for. www2 maybe dunno. - Atomic1fire, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2Step 1: Buy fiber
Step 2: Monopolize the internet
Step 3: put google ads on the internet
Step 4: Profit! - Technopundit, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm not certain what form it'll take, but get ready to pay for it every month.
I just hope they don't charge too much, as I'll probably want it. - Enoch9, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1so many hypy guys here, do you really think a company can become god?? wake up!
- johneganz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2From a technical perspective, Google is not buying lots of dark fiber to "run IPv6" on it. Here's why:
It's IPv6, which means it's not IPv4 (what you, and everyone else is using). This seems like a really obvious point, but apparently not. If Google switched to IPv6, they could use their IPv6 network to talk to... Google! BECAUSE NO ONE ELSE IS RUNNING IPv6 (pragmatically speaking).
You're not running IPv6. Again, this seems like an obvious point, but if you're not running IPv6 that means you can't talk to Google's IPv6. So just switch to IPv6 you say? No, no no. Your network provider pretty much determines if and when you get to run IPv6. And then, for most practical purposes, EVERY SINGLE PIECE of equipment between you and google has to be upgraded to IPv6 (no v6 tunnels, etc). EVERYONE has to do this (everyone being a sufficiently large number to make the effort worthwhile). This means that for IPv6 to be a truly viable option, the forwarding planes on all the network providers backbones have to switch IPv6 packets at the same speed as IPv4. That means that you pretty much forklift upgrade the bulk of ALL network providers backbone routers (yes yes, some have hardware IPv6 forwarding engines, but they're largely untested from a production networking standpoint, and enough other details will change in the network (IPv6 BGP, IGP routing protocols) that it's probably easier just to throw it out and start over, hence forklift upgrade).
After the monumental task of getting every piece of networking gear on the planet switched over to IPv6, what next? Software! That's right, you need IPv6 software. While it's often fairly easy to move a piece of software over to use IPv6 (it's essentially the same API's), you still gotta go clean up all those corner cases where you assumed IPv4 addresses in the name resolution, or fields in structures that have four bytes for an IPv4 address.. The big stuff will obviously get converted quickly (browsers, email, etc), but all those little applications? Or enterprise stuff that's pretty much stuck at IPv4? There's an awful lot of inertia right there. The obvious solution is to run "dual stack" (IPv4 + IPv6) at the same time.... but that means you have all the administrative headache of dealing with app problems, network providers, etc etc without any gain because you've still got the IPv4 stuff around. - Sarixell, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I don't think Google, like any other company that has to deal with stockholders, is caring for new technology. Their idea is to make money, one of the markets they could really make a difference, and where they have to compete with Microsoft again, is IP-TV. They need an infrastructure for it and then the next thing is selling ads on IP-TV. Imagine how well they can target ads to people with IP-TV, on region, behavior, target group etc. etc. They already have enough companies that would love to advertise that way, with interactive TV you could even click and buy!
Thanks to the technology Google owns (their search technology is nice and the base of everything, it's not where most of the money comes, it comes from Adwords!) it could build interactive TV applications. Look at their job openings, they are looking for people to make this, the dark fiber is a cheap infrastructure that can help getting the bandwidth required for IP-TV, which is probably the biggest bottleneck now. Good investment if you tell me, they will make huge money on IP-TV advertisements...
Oh and they have payment service coming up as well, how convenient for payments on TV... - mburns, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6The most likely reason is for Google to be able to connect their many datacenters directly, without having to pay for the middleman for transport. This would give them dedicated fiber lines to sync their services and caches up with.
- kobs, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Obviously. At the rate they expand, it'd be much more beneficial if they became their own provider (i.e. peering with Tier 1 ISPs and Tier2)
- thatsiebguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I agree totally, its all for their own backbone/interconnect for their datacenters. Smart move given how much they have to transfer between centers.
- aquastrike, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I agree that Google wants to avoid the proverbial "middleman", but how much will that really reduce their bandwidth costs? They must be astronomical. At any rate, "darkfiber" sounds like something from the Battle Network series
- sjalloul, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is the perfect plan for Google, keep buying more blackfiber! Give users unlimited disk space over the network and provide more functional tools, continue to integrate everything together! Create a powerful operating system that can run-off Firefox (Well they can make an operating system just like Damn Small Linux DSL) User with an Internet connection can execute their OS from Firefox! That would solve alot of problems.
- m98076, on 01/28/2008, -0/+0Definitely very interesting
http://websuduko.blogspot.com/2008/01/how-to-play- ...
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by