Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×

97 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Looks like the old telegraph maps (5, Informative)

JoshuaZ (1134087) | about 3 years ago | (#36767256)

This looks very similar to the maps of the undersea telegraph and telephone lines from around a hundred years ago. See, e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1901_Eastern_Telegraph_cables.png [wikipedia.org] This shouldn't be that surprising since the basic idea of the technology (large underwater cables to transmit information) is the same, the population centers a hundred years ago are not that far off from the population centers today, and the geoological constrains are similar also.

Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (1)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about 3 years ago | (#36767620)

VERY interesting. Thanks for sharing that link. Aside from the new cables between the US and Asia, you're absolutely correct in that most of it is very similar.

Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (1)

syousef (465911) | about 3 years ago | (#36768804)

New Zealand's south island had telegraph but doesn't have broadband? Me thinks this new map is incomplete!

Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (1)

jrumney (197329) | about 3 years ago | (#36770548)

I'm not sure if those telegraph lines from Sydney are going to nowheresville in the South Island or Wellington, my money would be on the latter, as routing the lines over the Southern Alps to the population centres in the South Island would not make sense, and they are too far North to be going to Greymouth, which is about the only notable population centre on the West Coast of the South Island. Interesting that one of the internet cables from Sydney is shown approaching Manukau harbour but labelled as landing in Takapuna. Historically New Zealands first internet connections landed in Manukau harbour and were routed to a data centre in Waikato University. Nowdays it is all commercial, and the gateways seem to have moved North to Takapuna and Whenuapai, but I'd have expected some redundancy to at least Wellington, and maybe Christchurch (in case of Cook Strait cables being knocked out).

Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (1)

willmorton (867939) | about 3 years ago | (#36769064)

From the point of view of the US or Europe, maybe. Look at the waters around Africa, there's a whole lotta difference, especially in the next couple of years.

Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (1)

theshowmecanuck (703852) | about 3 years ago | (#36770332)

Comparing the old and new maps, it looks like the old telegraph system had a more robust connection between Europe and South America than is found today. Given that the 'B' in "BRIC Countries" [wikipedia.org] is for Brazil, I would have thought that there would be at least a couple major pipes linking Europe and South America directly (through Brazil), instead of via North America. Granted the possibility of the connection between North and South Americas being interrupted is slight, but still...

Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (1)

jrumney (197329) | about 3 years ago | (#36770416)

The cables don't necessarily land in population centres. In Malaysia, there are a few cables landing in Penang and Malacca, with total bandwidth of a little over 1Tbps, but on the other side of the peninsular, which is less populated but facing Japan and US, there are two cables landing in small towns with bandwidth of over 2Tbps, and a third cable that is just under 1Tbps. Surprisingly, no cables land in the Klang area, where population is most concentrated. I expect some very high bandwidth cables between Johor and Singapore are missing from the map, as they are considered too short to count.

Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (1)

jrumney (197329) | about 3 years ago | (#36770452)

Actually, I just realised that the cables landing in Penang and Malacca support your point that these cables are following the old telegraph routes, as Penang and Malacca were important colonial settlements up until WW2.

Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (1)

hackertourist (2202674) | about 3 years ago | (#36772850)

Cable landing points are usually chosen in quiet areas: no shipping means less chance of some doofus dragging his anchor through the cable and causing the nautical equivalent to backhoe fade.

Re:Looks like the old telegraph maps (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36770768)

Not only that, but they know a lot more about the issues of undersea cables along those routes, anywhere else is pretty much a crap shoot, and when you're spending big money to do a project, you need a really good reason to go with the more expensive unknown issue route.

Guam and Hawaii are main structural differences (1)

miasmic (669645) | about 3 years ago | (#36772426)

The most obvious changes for me are the development of Guam and Hawaii as hubs of the pacific, where in the telegraph world Hawaii was an outpost and Guam wasn't on the map. Otherwise, it's surprising how similar the two maps are, even the level of development around the coast of Africa, which, although greater now was surprisingly developed in the telegraph world.

Where the pipes at? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36767278)

Fagets.

Re:Where the pipes at? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36768832)

I seriously doubt that there are that many Romanians on here right now. If you're trying to find some, I'd check here [comfi.com] first.

Wait... (1)

lostmagik (776421) | about 3 years ago | (#36767284)

Wasnt there a successful tapping of an underwater pipeline some time ago? ..of course its a security threat.

Anyone that can tap a line could build this map (4, Informative)

rwade (131726) | about 3 years ago | (#36767912)

Who is this Greg Mahlknecht? He's just a random guy doing this as a hobby, which means he has no particular propreitar/secret inside information from AT&T or some other. It would be trivially easy to anyone that has the resources to tap a underwater comms line to just build this map from the same source data, summarized as follows in TFA:

Mahlknecht has drawn his data from a variety of sources. “Wikipedia has a ‘submarine communications cables’ category and I used this as a starting point before going to each cable’s homepage and gathering alternative information."

Another note is that this data is very general. It's generally straight lines from landing to landing. You couldn't take this map or the KML data he's pulled together, send a submarine down straight from some point on the map and be able to spot the cable. It's going to take some work.

Re:Anyone that can tap a line could build this map (1)

Shatrat (855151) | about 3 years ago | (#36768150)

If you click on the lines he describes the accuracy of each cable.
Some of them are pulled directly from GIS data and are probably accurate down to a few meters.

Re:Anyone that can tap a line could build this map (3, Interesting)

Jstlook (1193309) | about 3 years ago | (#36769036)

Who is this Greg Mahlknecht?

A guy who saw that there was a really cool poster that cost money, and decided to make himself a free version. Of course, had he asked the people who sold the poster, he might have found out they have an electronic copy available to download at no cost.

Ah well.

Re:Wait... (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | about 3 years ago | (#36768486)

US Navy routinely tapped Soviet and likely still taps Russian Federation undersea communication cables.

This is the boat that most likely does it
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Jimmy_Carter_(SSN-23) [wikipedia.org]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ivy_Bells [wikipedia.org]

Re:Wait... (1)

unencode200x (914144) | about 3 years ago | (#36769954)

Good read! Operation Ivy Bells is most interesting. I guess that's why they frown on people in financial trouble for government jobs.

Tubes (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36767296)

So it is a series of tubes. I knew it.

Look at him he's heading for that small moon. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36767316)

That's no moon...

Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (1)

trigeek (662294) | about 3 years ago | (#36767412)

Svalbard is an island in the Arctic Circle, with no permanent population. Why does it have a 5TB cable terminating there?

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (3, Funny)

Nadaka (224565) | about 3 years ago | (#36767486)

That is obviously where the secret UFO base is located.

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (5, Funny)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | about 3 years ago | (#36767506)

Up there? That's the department for keeping track of who's been naughty, and who's been nice.

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36768066)

You gotta figure the naughty proportion of the bandwidth is over 90%.

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (3, Insightful)

Nadaka (224565) | about 3 years ago | (#36768346)

just like the rest of the internet.

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (1)

MrKaos (858439) | about 3 years ago | (#36773326)

Rule 34

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (4, Informative)

hardwareman (144389) | about 3 years ago | (#36767556)

Svalbard is an island in the Arctic Circle, with no permanent population.

There are over 2000 permanent residents [wikipedia.org] that disagree :)

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (2)

Lectrik (180902) | about 3 years ago | (#36767854)

And those residents need their porn. And lots of it!

It's not like they can go outside and not freeze to death or anything

Meanwhile Catalina has nothing (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36772610)

Amazing - Svalbard gets huge internet. Right off the coast of Los Angeles CA is Catalina Island. Beautiful place. I heard their internet speed was that of the 1990's

No underwater pipe to the island.

Unbelievable.

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36767574)

Try this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Svalbard

Towns, thousands of people, a "University" and even a NASA research station.

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (1)

houghi (78078) | about 3 years ago | (#36767602)

And then compare it to Australia. Even combined it does not get that much.

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about 3 years ago | (#36768512)

Someone has to track the submarines...

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (2)

Cimexus (1355033) | about 3 years ago | (#36772210)

Not quite ... including all the publically available information I can find (from that map and other sources), Australia's current international undersea capacity is comprised of:

JASURAUS – 5Gbit/s
SEA-ME-WE-3 – 960Gbit/s
PIPE-PACIFIC-1 – 1.92Tbit/s
AUSTRALIA-JAPAN-CABLE – 1Tbit/s
GONDWANA-1 – 640Gbit/s
SOUTHERN-CROSS – 2.4Tbit/s (2 paths, in a ring, 2x 1.2Tbit/s)
TELSTRA-ENDEAVOUR – 1.28Tb/s

Total capacity: 8.205 Tb/s

That capacity is not all lit either - it's enough for the current level of demand. The main issue with internet in Australia is actually the price of domestic transit rather than international (capacity to the US is cheaper per Mbps than domestic capacity).

In anticipation of the nationwide NBN FTTH network which is currently under construction (and which will no doubt massively increase demand for capacity), further cables are under construction ATM. Most importantly the PACNET cable (Australia-US) which is due to be completed in 2013 with a massive 12 Tbit/s capacity (i.e. it will overnight more than double our total international bandwidth).

Anyway either way, a 5 Tbps cable to Svalbard certainly does seem pretty 'overkill'!

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (2)

Dahamma (304068) | about 3 years ago | (#36767654)

It explains everything in the Wikipedia link [wikipedia.org] shown right in the "More Information" section on the map...

"The earth/ground station on Svalbard is a key site for collecting remote sensing data from polar orbiting satellites, such as those from NOAA, due to its close proximity to the north pole."

But even if it was an easy answer, it was one I didn't know existed, so I'm glad you asked it ;)

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36767768)

Maybe the satellite station.

I was curious so did your searching ;)

per wikepedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hotellneset):
"It is the location of Svalbard Airport, Longyear and the port for shipping of coal from Longyearbyen. Above Hotellneset is Platåberget, which is the location for Svalbard Satellite Station."

I guess that satelite station is one of the ground stations responsible for Gallileo system.
http://www.spaceref.com/news/viewsr.rss.html?pid=37249
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_(satellite_navigation)

5TB does seem a bit excessive, but perhaps it handles a little bit more then just GPS. Or maybe they figured if they're running wires they might as well put room for growth?

Re:Svlabard has a 5 TB cable? (3, Informative)

c6gunner (950153) | about 3 years ago | (#36771166)

5TB does seem a bit excessive, but perhaps it handles a little bit more then just GPS. Or maybe they figured if they're running wires they might as well put room for growth?

The latter. Only 20 Gb/s is actually used - the rest is dark. But when you're running a 1300km stretch of cable, you may as well throw some extra in there. Far more cost effective than having to do it again in a few years.

I haven't read it in years and years... (3, Insightful)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | about 3 years ago | (#36767444)

...but I recall Neal Stephenson's article [wired.com] on undersea cables was very interesting.

Re:I haven't read it in years and years... (1)

miasmic (669645) | about 3 years ago | (#36772442)

Good call, even though it's 6-7 years since I read that, it sprung to mind when I was looking at the map and I was planning on looking it up again.

Re:I haven't read it in years and years... (1)

hackertourist (2202674) | about 3 years ago | (#36772622)

Calling it an article is quite the understatement. I've seen novels that are shorter. Still well worth the read though.

On the other hand.. (1)

lostmagik (776421) | about 3 years ago | (#36767460)

"In the mid-1990s, the NSA installed one such tap, say former intelligence officials familiar with the covert project. Using a special spy submarine, they say, agency personnel descended hundreds of feet into one of the oceans and sliced into a fiber-optic cable." If you have the resources to do that i bet you can get the maps either way...

Antarctia? (4, Informative)

pz (113803) | about 3 years ago | (#36767528)

Is there no cable to Antarctica? Hmm... (type, type, click, click) ... Oh, I see:

Antarctica is the only continent yet to be reached by a submarine telecommunications cable. All phone, video, and e-mail traffic must be relayed to the rest of the world via satellite, which is still quite unreliable. Bases on the continent itself are able to communicate with one another via radio, but this is only a local network. To be a viable alternative, the fiber-optic cable must be able to withstand temperatures of -80 C as well as massive strain from ice flowing up to 10 meters per year. Thus, plugging into the larger Internet backbone with the high bandwidth afforded by fiber-optic cable is still an as yet infeasible economic and technical challenge in the Antarctic.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_communications_cable [wikipedia.org]

Re:Antarctia? (1)

Baloroth (2370816) | about 3 years ago | (#36768504)

We should get working on that! After all, those male penguins need their porn while they're sitting on those eggs...

Re:Antarctia? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36770512)

It's also worth noting that most "Internet" satellites (eg. WildBlue) are in geosynchronous orbits, which means - No signal at high (or low) latitudes.

AC

Not much of a threat (1)

GigG (887839) | about 3 years ago | (#36767618)

"Cable is a schematic representation of the connectivity. Path might not be geographically accurate, and branching configuration is a best-guess."

Re:Not much of a threat (1)

RollingThunder (88952) | about 3 years ago | (#36767884)

It's interesting how many of the cables seem to be fairly precise, and others are clearly guesses or approximations.

Look at the three lines that terminate in Seattle. One of them is extremely precise, with weaving and meandering even at the nearest zoom levels. One of the others is so approximate that it crosses over islands as it goes from point to point.

Re:Not much of a threat (1)

uncledrax (112438) | about 3 years ago | (#36768288)

That's pretty much due to how accurate the published data is. Some network operators have turn-by-turn directions of thier fiber paths in urban areas.. others only publish "it goes from pt A to B.. that's all you need to know".

Landfall locations (1)

aaarrrgggh (9205) | about 3 years ago | (#36767642)

Interesting where it shows cables making landfall. In the Los Angeles area, it shows Diablo Canyon nuclear plant and Hermosa Beach. I was pretty sure the cable coming in south of LAX made landfall through ShitPipe, 4 miles north.

Re:Landfall locations (1)

demonbug (309515) | about 3 years ago | (#36767940)

Interesting where it shows cables making landfall. In the Los Angeles area, it shows Diablo Canyon nuclear plant and Hermosa Beach. I was pretty sure the cable coming in south of LAX made landfall through ShitPipe, 4 miles north.

The locations for those cables are schematic and not necessarily accurate. Don't know about the LA-area ones, but I believe the cable landings in the San Luis Obispo area are in the Morro Bay area and Grover/Shell/Pismo Beach area. At any rate, I remember that there is a major interconnect in the Los Osos area near Morro Bay where a couple of major undersea cables are hooked together.

Always wondered.. (1)

daffy951 (546697) | about 3 years ago | (#36767708)

How do they lay out these cables? Are they on the bottom or floating & anchored? Are there repeaters? Anywone know where I can read about it?

Re:Always wondered.. (1)

hawguy (1600213) | about 3 years ago | (#36767818)

How do they lay out these cables? Are they on the bottom or floating & anchored? Are there repeaters? Anywone know where I can read about it?

Try the internet, I heard that there is a lot of information there:

http://www.google.com/search?q=how+do+undersea+cables+work [google.com]

Re:Always wondered.. (3, Interesting)

dkettmann76 (1207898) | about 3 years ago | (#36767870)

Looking through the presentation archives of the NANOG meetings ( http://www.nanog.org/presentations/archive/ [nanog.org] ) has some great stuff on undersea cables and also ISP peering, etc.

Re:Always wondered.. (2)

demonbug (309515) | about 3 years ago | (#36767888)

Someone else already posted it, but Neal Stephenson wrote a great article on just that subject a few years back (okay, over a decade ago - but still very good and interesting). You can find it here [wired.com] .

Re:Always wondered.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36767906)

According to wikipedia, they are on the bottom. Can you imagine if they were floating? Some careless submarine or whale would take one out.

Re:Always wondered.. (1)

uncledrax (112438) | about 3 years ago | (#36768128)

Instead it's careless boat anchorage :]

Re:Always wondered.. (1)

Archwyrm (670653) | about 3 years ago | (#36768144)

It's because of careless whales that we had to hunt them nearly to extinction. If they had been more thoughtful, we could have avoided the whole dreadful affair altogether!

Re:Always wondered.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36768760)

If they were floating, I doubt they'd be called "submarine" or "undersea" cables, plus they might pose a small obstacle to shipping.

I'm certain you can read at least a little about it at Wikipedia, beyond that GIYF. Or you could just post dumb questions and hope nobody directs you to goatse instead of answers, hmmm?

Other interesting things (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36767758)

Guam is like some sort of data hub, eh?

What is that weird cable from Argentina snaking all the way around and across to Africa? What is the point of laying something like that? Seems like a lot of cable just to make that one dedicated connection.

Re:Other interesting things (2)

uncledrax (112438) | about 3 years ago | (#36768258)

Guam is a hub because it's a US Terrority centrally located in the Pac Ocean. It's not like the people in Guam have 1000-count fiber into thier houses, it's just a landing facility.. much like
Re: SA->Africa: Someone(s) wanted it enough to pay/bond it.. so it got built.. *shrug*

Re:Other interesting things (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about 3 years ago | (#36768560)

What is the point of laying something like that?

Connecting to the rest of the world through a European telecommunication company instead of an American one? The point is it was probably cheaper.

Re:Other interesting things (1)

Carnildo (712617) | about 3 years ago | (#36769078)

If you're referring to ATLANTIS-2, it's a cable connecting South America to Europe, and the specific routing is because it's paid for by a consortium of companies from Argentina, Brazil, Senegal, Spain, and Portugal. By crossing the Atlantic where it does, it takes a route that minimizes the amount of deep-water cable needed.

Re:Other interesting things (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36770146)

Probably because South America's not the most peaceful part of the world, and they don't want Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, or any non-national force in those countries, Brazil, or even Argentina itself being able to cut off their internet access if they get in a squabble. Also, overland cables through wilderness regions aren't exactly cheap -- I doubt an undersea cable on the continental shelf's cheaper, but it's low maintenance and not that much more expensive.

Re:Other interesting things (1)

Cimexus (1355033) | about 3 years ago | (#36772228)

Guam is simply a conveniently located switching point. A lot of capacity from Australia, for example, goes up to Guam, because it can then be split out and placed on one of the many US-Asia pipes across the north Pacific. Data can turn 'left' to go to Japan/Asia, or hang a right to go to North America.

This means a company can build a cable from Australia to Guam and then make use of the huge capacity to both Asia and the US from there. Multiple destinations for a single cable, compared to dedicated cables to Asia and the US separately (which do exist as well, and have better latency, but are obviously more expensive to build).

Capacity (1)

demonbug (309515) | about 3 years ago | (#36768022)

By my count it looks like there is a total capacity of about 30 Tbps between the U.S. west coast and Japan, and only about 20 Tbps between the east coast of NA and all of Europe. Seems strange given the relative distances.

Re:Capacity (1)

GreenTom (1352587) | about 3 years ago | (#36768188)

Looks like the trans-pacific cables are newer than the trans-atlantic, might just be an artifact of whatever the technology was at the time the cables were installed.

Re:Capacity (1)

cthulhu11 (842924) | about 3 years ago | (#36772226)

Clearly Europeans aren't big fans of tentacle rape pr0n.

(At least until it gets shut down as a security th (1)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 3 years ago | (#36768040)

From TFA: (At least until it gets shut down as a security threat.)

Looks like it's already been slashdotted, so they won't need to.

Everyone one already knows (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36768120)

...that the transAtlantic cables land on Hudson Street in NYC. If the 9-11 cocksuckers had been smart, they would have blown that up instead.

Missing Some (1)

jroc242 (1397083) | about 3 years ago | (#36768154)

Cool map but it is missing some. SEA-ME-WE-2, the Southern cross(listed on the side but not on the map) FIJI needs high speed internet too! The ADEN-DJI crossing the mouth of the gulf of Aden, I could go on. Point being that there is a LOT of undersea cables, this map shows some.

Re:Missing Some (1)

Cimexus (1355033) | about 3 years ago | (#36772232)

Huh? SXC (both halves of the loop) definitely appears on the map for me. As does SEA-ME-WE.

Look out West Africa (1)

abarrow (117740) | about 3 years ago | (#36768414)

Yikes. I worked in West Africa for a few years, and we dreamed about the day when SAT-3 would bring us more than a couple of satellite T1s. Next year, they are getting over 10Tbps capacity, and almost more importantly, it's coming in separate, redundant cables.

It's hard to imagine what that's going to do.

Now, if they could only keep their cable landings and their terrestrial infrastructure working.

noticable difference between areas (1)

petermgreen (876956) | about 3 years ago | (#36768550)

In europe and north america the cables come accross the sea and then land at a small number of places.While in africa, the middle east and other underdeveloped areas they tend to follow the coast with loads of landings. It would appear that in these areas undersea cables are being used as a substitute for land based infrastructure because countries don't trust their neighbours.

Re:noticable difference between areas (1)

hackertourist (2202674) | about 3 years ago | (#36772634)

It's also cheaper: most of the cost in the undersea cable will be paid for by companies outside the country (since the landing is only a small part of the cable).
And it's more reliable. Stringing a cable overhead through jungle/desert/what have you isn't exactly foolproof. Burying the cable is a huge infrastructure project, way too expensive for those countries.

Bad idea (0)

Corson (746347) | about 3 years ago | (#36768584)

This was a childish thing to do, in the same registry as "Look, no hands!". Now terrorists know where the comm pipes are. Sometimes it is better to think before you act.

Re:Bad idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36768662)

That's the most ridiculous thing I ever herd. First of all, the map doesn't claim to show the EXACT point of landing or position of the cables, only the location cities that they connect. Second, do you really think that terrorists will attack the cables just because they can find a map? That's like saying if only the WTC hadn't been on a map of NYC that we'd never have had 9/11...

Re:Bad idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36768700)

Stick, arse, out.

Re:Bad idea (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36769006)

Crap! Who put the USA on this map? Now the terrorists know where it is!

Re:Bad idea (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36769472)

The routes are (a) made from sources publically available on the internet, and (b) not accurate enough to find from the map.

Even if they did know where a cable was, they're buried a meter deep in the ocean floor until they get into deep sea. The terrorists can't even make a set of exploding underpants, they're not going to be able to sabotage the cables!

What about Guam? (1)

NicknamesAreStupid (1040118) | about 3 years ago | (#36768608)

It has more bandwidth running through it than Hawaii. Is that for the world's largest K-Mart?

Re:What about Guam? (1)

EQ (28372) | about 3 years ago | (#36770392)

It has more bandwidth running through it than Hawaii. Is that for the world's largest K-Mart?

One explanation is the US Dept of Defense. Guam is a large military logistics center

Another point is that Guam is legally US territory, so US law applies there, whcih can be handy for certain commecial ventures, as well as for military/defense/intelligence data transit

Plus Guam looks to be a handy location in terms of landing a cable there as a reshape/regent/retransmission (3R) redistribution point prior to going back into the water (look at the geography)

wow.... (1)

peteinok (1825618) | about 3 years ago | (#36768640)

He has successfully replicated the same map I get from telco carries over couple of years. WAY TO GO!

Terrible. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36768812)

This is terrorism, pure and simple. This man is trying to hold the world hostage by creating this image.

Guam (1)

sturle (1165695) | about 3 years ago | (#36769222)

And the price for best connected island goes to... Guam! If you zoom satellite view in to the north-western airport, you can see at least four B52s. And the main road is called "Marine Corps Drive". I guess those guys need a lot of porn.

Do Not Anchor or Dredge (1)

anorlunda (311253) | about 3 years ago | (#36769750)

What security threat? You don't need a map. Just cruise the coast looking for signs that say DO NOT ANCHOR OR DREDGE. The US military figured that out decades ago.

And no you can not make them more secure by not putting up those warning signs because someone will anchor or dredge and cut the cable.

Not to be a dick or anything (2)

eyenot (102141) | about 3 years ago | (#36769944)

... but the cablemap app was really annoying, it slowed Firefox down like hell, and there was no way (that I could discern) of easily seeing the whole world map at a high resolution, so I made some screen caps and put them together in Photofiltre. I gave the author credit in several places on the map.

http://db.tt/UEjKBo5 [db.tt]

Re:Not to be a dick or anything (1)

eyenot (102141) | about 3 years ago | (#36769988)

In retrospect, saving it as a 16-color .GIF wasn't a hot idea, but it looked better before I saved (a bug in Photofiltre). I should've saved in 32 colors. Oh, well. It was only 31 caps and I still have all of those and the progress .BMP of composite-1-20 (eleven caps to go). If anybody was really interested in a better version, I could make it, but to tell you the truth, the actual thing isn't any more legible than the 16-color .GIF . . . just being honest.

Re:Not to be a dick or anything (1)

cffrost (885375) | about 3 years ago | (#36777956)

If anybody was really interested in a better version, I could make it [...]

Thank you, good buddy. Will you please save one as .png and just let loss-less compression optimize for color-count?

Re:Not to be a dick or anything (1)

eyenot (102141) | about 3 years ago | (#36779920)

*shrug* I never paid any attention to png. I thought it was like a step away from raw bmp or something, and hence was why it was always seen being used with tiny, tiny images.

If you can tell me why it would be better to save it as png rather than a 32-color .GIF (which, btw, is also loss-less compression, although from about ten years ago comes with a potential legal and financial liability) then I'll do so.

In either case, if you at least say you want to have the image in a better format no matter what format that is, I'll put it that way. It'll only take me about an hour.

Canada? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36771802)

Where is Canada!?!

Except that it doesnt. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36771934)

Read the map. Most of the cables are schematics. It doesn't show where the cables -are-, it just shows how the points are connected.

and I complain (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36772038)

Geeze,, and I complain about running cable two rooms away..

Africa's hookup is interesting (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 3 years ago | (#36772252)

Basically a bunch of fat pipes heading straight down to SA, and a series of drops at random locations on the way.

All this and... (1)

dark grep (766587) | about 3 years ago | (#36772358)

... Basslink too! Fantastic. What a great resource.

Cryptonomicon (1)

DarthVain (724186) | about 3 years ago | (#36775184)

ALL LIES!

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>