oh purleez.
the Intertron doesnt work like that.
yes, the old copper wire isnt quite up to task ; thats why, in places, we are switching to fibre, as we can afford it.
in America, companies like Verizon and Comcast were actually give taxpayers money to upgrade the infrastructure - they didnt.
The internet was actually designed to withstand a nuclear assault, eh? Bunch of guys downloading porn on broadband? Not such a threat. The internet might slow down somewhat for a while, but crash? Unlikely.
It's right here http://www.cybermeme.net/end.html
What? No end boss at the end? Oh well, I suppose text is fine too.
On a serious note, I think there's a simple solution. See, look at it like this:
How do we make bandwidth?
1. Just make more of what provides bandwidth.
2. ???
3. PROFIT!!!(at least for the Internet Service Providers)
Ah. I'm psychic. I knew there'd be a thread about this here.
OMG i had a heart attack when i saw the title of this thread...
Lately I've been obsessing over the end of the world...on Easter my mom told me that people are saying there will be a Great Depression and she seems to believe it. My psych didn't buy it for a second
But good Lord if the Internet were to crash????? I don't think it could be...since there are so many servers holding information in different areas...that maybe a section of it could crash...but not the whole structure.
its the main reason that network protocols to detect collisions exist - in ANY network, you are going to get packet collisions sooner or later, and, AFAIK, all network enabled devices will resend a single packet after a random amount of time, to see if "the way is clear", before resending the packets dropped in the collision.
but its so quick, you shouldn't notice it, other than a little lag.
this is just media scaremongering - something which we are all too familiar with.
ah, thank you for the clarification.
Amazon.com doesn't think the party is over. They've launched into the biz of cloud computing on demand. Selling web services piggybacked on a multibillion dollar IT infrastructure.
I dont like the whole "cloud computing" theory.
if I want an application, then I want it locally. what happens if my local links go down? or their server?
although, I CAN see the uses for it. just not for me, really.
I dont like the whole "cloud computing" theory.
if I want an application, then I want it locally. what happens if my local links go down? or their server?
although, I CAN see the uses for it. just not for me, really.
I understand your trepidation toward it. My company buys its own hardware but recently moved the main computers to a super safe installation off site. True the CPU is safer from power issues there. But I'm so nervous about depending on telecommuncations and not physically getting my hands on it. And I like being able to just walk over to a developer's desk to talk about an application.
That said, there are some attractive advantages to cloud computing. No cash tied up in soon to be obsolete hardware. Pay pennies by the hour for major silicon horsepower. And other geeky treats. The attitude is "you don't make your own electricity do you?"
It will be interesting to see if the common business model shifts that direction.