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!

TIME DotCom and Facebook Invest In Massive Undersea Internet Cable Project

timothy posted more than 2 years ago | from the also-recovering-cold-war-alien-artifacts dept.

Networking 94

MojoKid writes "This week, TIME dotCom (out of Malaysia) has entered into a construction and maintenance agreement of the Asia Pacific Gateway (APG) submarine cable system connecting Malaysia to Korea and Japan. The APG is a 10,000 km international fibre optic cable system that will link Malaysia to Korea and Japan with seven branches to other Asian countries. The cable system is scheduled to be ready in quarter three of 2014. TIME is leading up the process, but Facebook as well as a few others are joining in by combining $450 million to the cause."

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

Financing? (3, Funny)

rootus-rootus (151960) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579037)

Ok, where is the Dentist?

Re:Financing? (1)

2.7182 (819680) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579163)

Financing isn't the issue. The issue is a madman in a submarine named Nemo, who rules the sea.

Time dot com (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40588545)

That "Time dot com" is one of the many "semi governmental corporations" of Malaysia designed specifically for two purposes only -

1. To fleece as much $$$ from the taxpayers of Malaysia

2. To promote their "superiority racial identity" - namely, the Malays
 

Re:Financing? (1)

msauve (701917) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579323)

Dentist? I want to know if TIME dotcom is related to Kim Dotcom.

Re:Financing? (1)

ChunderDownunder (709234) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579689)

I want to know why kim.com just has a blank 'Coming Soon' page.

Re:Financing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40586195)

Because he is masturbating right now, but he is almost finished.

Re:Financing? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40582949)

Time dot com has got nothing to do with kim dot com

How about "Time" magazine? (1)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | more than 2 years ago | (#40588495)

Is "Time dot come" related to "Time Magazine" ?

Or are we looking at a copyright infringement ?

Frozen piss (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579059)

Frozen piss

Great. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579075)

More asians in the usa game servers.

I love giberish and cheaters.

Re:Great. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579117)

Hate to break it to you, Einstein, but people come in several different colours. They also (gasp!) speak different languages. You should turn off the TV and haul your fat, ignorant ass off the couch and get out more.

Re:Great. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579377)

"You should turn off the TV and haul your fat, ignorant ass off the couch and get out more."

How about instead I find you and take a shit and make you eat it.

Trust me, by the time you are done with your meal you will be asking for more.

Re:Great. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579769)

Post your address, you dumb fuck and I'll come to you. That way, your lard ass can shit yourself right where you sleep.
Am I not merciful?

Re:Great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40581273)

Isn't it fun having a flamewar with yourself?

Re:Great. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580195)

And maybe those people should get their own fucking gameservers in their own country of whatever the fuck color and language they want!
and stay the hell off ours.

Re:Great. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580809)

The rest of the world would happily stay out of your fat, overconsuming country if you'd stay the fuck out of the rest of the world.
But it's OK, soon, the US will be so bankrupt at the hands of a government you are too dumb not to serve blindly that nobody over there will be able to afford a bus ticket, let a lone a flight out of the country.

Re:Great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40581523)

Americans wouldn't care about leaving their country anyway, they wouldn't even know the difference between Korea and Malaysia, they don't even know the difference between China and Japan.

They are so backward in the USA they banned the of teaching evolution in their schools and now teach their children that Adam and Eve are their great great grandparents and that the Loch Ness Monster is real but Dinosaurs never existed. Most of them make moonshine, have bad teeth and sleep with their cousins so I wouldn't expect too much from them.

Most of them are so stupid they gave their life savings to Mark Zuckerberg and hoped he do something useful with it. They also created Justin Bieber and many of them use Apple Macs. Like I said, backward.

Re:Great. (1)

FreedomOfThought (2544248) | more than 2 years ago | (#40581591)

Its hard to make an umbrella that small fit over such a large territory isn't it? Nearly everything you said pertains to just a few states in the south eastern region. Please if you will make fun of this awful country, do it properly!

Re:Great. (1)

Yo Grark (465041) | more than 2 years ago | (#40582263)

Not that I would ever admit it, but we gave the USA Justin Bieber cause he was fricken getting on our nerves.

Yo Grark

Re:Great. (1)

tehcyder (746570) | more than 2 years ago | (#40590179)

nice flamebait, I especially enjoyed the gratuitous and Apple dig

Facebook investors (4, Interesting)

hey (83763) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579087)

I bet Facebook IPO investors didn't know they were investing in this.

Re:Facebook investors (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579149)

Hahaha... suckers!

That big-eared Jew is laughing all the way to the bank after his brethren from Hollywood suckered the goyim into his ponzi scheme with a movie promoting the IPO.

Re:Facebook investors (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579635)

It's comments like the parent's that are the only thing still worth reading on Slashdot. The goyim are indeed eating it up like flies on shit.

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:Facebook investors (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579731)

why don't you log in?

Re:Facebook investors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580043)

My account got hacked. I shouldn't have made my password "hunter2." :(

-- Ethanol-fueled

Re:Facebook investors (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580239)

Annoying, I'm sorry.

Cheaper by the dozen. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579229)

Well in all the discussions about net neutrality one of the ideas was having the content providers owning the infrastructure. When you own it, no one can block/throttle or otherwise tamper with it. Cheaper too.

Re:Facebook investors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579311)

I bet Facebook investors didn't know that private companies aren't required to employ generally accepted accounting principles until AFTER the company has 'gone public'.

But they should have, after what happened with Groupon.

Re:Facebook investors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579341)

As if Google didn't use it's investor's capital to broaden it's business operations and continue to innovate! It's called diversification...

Of course for Facebook, it might appear to be rather (ahem) two-faced.

Re:Facebook investors (4, Interesting)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579369)

I guarantee Facebook isn't doing it as a charity operation.

They expect to get a return on their investment. Facebook might be ripping off their stock holders in general, (ha! might! I crack myself up), but you can count on them to never betray their stockholders by donating to charity!

Re:Facebook investors (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 2 years ago | (#40581039)

Sigh, Zuck may be a douche but he has donated hundres of millions to charities, including $100M to NJ public schools.

Re:Facebook investors (1)

phantomfive (622387) | more than 2 years ago | (#40582867)

lol ok, good you fact checked. Guess you can't even count on Facebook to not betray its shareholders by donating to charity.

Re:Facebook investors (2)

garcia (6573) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579393)

So? Investing in a company is a gamble no matter what knowns there are. Companies always do things which are unexpected and possibly undesirable. However, sometimes these unexpected and undesirable actions have large payoffs.

Perhaps Facebook wants a better presence in Asia. If some of the Asian countries which will be best served by this updated cable now have better access to Facebook, the payoffs could be huge for the investors. If not, an investor can always take their money elsewhere.

Re:Facebook investors (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579459)

Perhaps Facebook wants a better presence in Asia. If some of the Asian countries which will be best served by this updated cable now have better access to Facebook, the payoffs could be huge for the investors. If not, an investor can always take their money elsewhere.

Could could be even simpler than that even. They could see an opportunity to invest in something cheap with lots of returns. I seriously doubt Facebook would invest anything worth while simply based on the bandwidth returns. They are actually now a publicly ran company and the game has completely changed for them.

Re:Facebook investors (2)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580309)

So? Investing in a company is a gamble no matter what knowns there are.

Pretty much, the only thing I expect on a stock return though is a good return per-share. And if I hold enough stock, I expect an invitation to the shareholders meeting so if they're doing anything stupid, I can voice my complaints. If it pays off, I really don't care what they do, as long as they're making me money.

People can whine and cry about "greedy wall street" and all the rest. But they happily forget that the vast majority of the investments are retirement funds, and other loose asset shares including healthcare offsets. Or general people like me who are out to make money. Though as a point, I didn't buy any FB shares, at their offer range it was way too high. Their initial offer should have been $23, it would have climbed to $27 and settled out then picked up some in awhile. Then tanked.

Indeed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580053)

Must be a real shock to find they've invested in something real!

Re:Facebook investors (2)

isorox (205688) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580331)

I bet Facebook IPO investors didn't know they were investing in this.

Yes, their money's being spent on something tangible, which has a good chance of ROI!

Re:Facebook investors (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580629)

Does this qualify as a bailout? Assuming that taxpayer money is used to solve issues of profit making companies?

Re:Facebook investors (1)

wmac1 (2478314) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580931)

Facebook is possibly going to open an Acia-Pacific data center for the local market. They will need reliable high bandwidth access from the local web servers (and possibly databases) to the main data center.

I don't think they want to enter bandwidth market and this is going to be directly used by FB.

Undersea Internet (0, Offtopic)

seeker_1us (1203072) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579097)

Because fish need porn too.

stephenson (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579103)

zukerberg just finished reading cryptonomicon

Paging Neal Stephenson? (4, Funny)

Gothmolly (148874) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579181)

Didn't I read a book about this?

Re:Paging Neal Stephenson? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580051)

Didn't I read a book about this?

How the fuck would I know? It wasn't my turn to babysit you.

Re:Paging Neal Stephenson? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580769)

which book?

Re:Paging Neal Stephenson? (1)

Hexact (22921) | more than 2 years ago | (#40582383)

Cable laying is part of the plot in Cryptonomicon, but besides that Stephenson wrote a (very) long article in Wired 4.12 back in 1996:

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.12/ffglass_pr.html [wired.com]

"The hacker tourist ventures forth across the wide and wondrous meatspace of three continents, chronicling the laying of the longest wire on Earth."

Entertaining and full of info, a must read if you are at all curious about cable laying.

Re:Paging Neal Stephenson? (1)

cthulhu11 (842924) | more than 2 years ago | (#40586771)

My first thought as well

Investing in wireless (-1, Offtopic)

nurb432 (527695) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579185)

Would be more useful in the long run.

Re:Investing in wireless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579195)

Wireless doesn't help if the content originates 10000km away. Once it gets within a few 10's of km away from the consumer, sure go wireless.

Re:Investing in wireless (2)

khallow (566160) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579855)

Well, I think you could get even 801.11b to work, assume you had line of sight, say like satellites repeating the signal.

Bandwidth is the real problem. The article says the cable can handle almost 55 terabits per second with 40 gigabits per second per fiber (I guess there's over a thousand fibers in that cable). I'd love to see a wireless solution do that.

Re:Investing in wireless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580323)

Latency is a problem as well -- repeating off of satelites is quick but still worse than just some fiber. Gota keep the quake ping times low!

Yay 40gbits/sec... a lovely oppurtunity for TCP and its windowing algorithms to f**k up. There needs to be a high-bandwidth, low-latency protocol that's somewhat smarter than UDP out there right?

Re:Investing in wireless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580921)

The problem isn't the satellite itself, it is the distance that the signal has to travel. 72000 km to geosynchronous orbit and back = 0.24s additional delay for each direction, or 0.48s additional ping delay

Re:Investing in wireless (1)

dutchwhizzman (817898) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580831)

Latency would absolutely suck if you were to be bouncing off satellites. That wouldn't be a viable option for interactive traffic, no matter how much bandwidth you would be getting.

Re:Investing in wireless (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579201)

Why?
Cables have greater bandwidth, lower latency and are able to reach greater distance for less power.
How exactly is wireless more useful in the long run?

Re:Investing in wireless (1)

westlake (615356) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579287)

Would be more useful in the long run.

How do you propose to do this over 10,000 km of open water?

Re:Investing in wireless (4, Funny)

msauve (701917) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579327)

Without wires, obviously. How hard can it be to not install wires?

Re:Investing in wireless (2)

ceoyoyo (59147) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579735)

Don't forget, it's curved open water. As in, you can't see one point from the other.

Re:Investing in wireless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40600331)

Smoke signals can be seen from way off - earth curvature be damned!

Re:Investing in wireless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40600309)

20,000 Cantennas [wikipedia.org]

would never work, but had to be said :-)

Confusing name (1, Offtopic)

tepples (727027) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579209)

I searched time.com for asia pacific gateway, and TIME Magazine has nothing to say about it. I wonder if there's a potential trademark case between TIME [time.com] and TIME [time.com.my] .

Re:Confusing name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579409)

that's not how trademarks work. trademarks are designated for the specific market you operate in.

TIME dotCom specialises in mobile, fixed, internet and payphone services.

TIME Magazine puts out a news magazine.

for another example, see http://www.delta.com/ [delta.com] and http://www.deltafaucet.com./ [www.deltafaucet.com] both companies have trademarked delta, but in obviously different markets.

Re:Confusing name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579559)

TIME dotCom specialises in mobile, fixed, internet and payphone services.

You sure he isn't related to Kim DotCom?

DotCom (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579211)

I love Mega Upload!

Look on the bright side. (5, Funny)

jd (1658) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579221)

If they want to move all Facebook traffic off the regular Internet and build a separate infrastructure for it, maybe we can get all the Facebook users to migrate entirely over to Internet 3 and leave everyone else alone.

Re:Look on the bright side. (2)

datavirtue (1104259) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579653)

maybe we can get all the Facebook users to migrate entirely over to Internet 3 and leave everyone else alone.

You gave me goosebumps.

Re:Look on the bright side. (2)

LordLucless (582312) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579669)

Sorry, how exactly to Facebook users impact your usage of the rest if the internet such that moving them off to different infrastructure would benefit you?

As far as I can see, you're getting nothing but benefit from Facebook existing; namely, it gives you a group of people to whinge about and feel smugly superior to. Bitching about AOL users just isn't enough to satisfy your ego any more.

Re:Look on the bright side. (1)

Keen Anthony (762006) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580091)

Well, for starters, when I look at products on Amazon, I might no longer get a Facebook app that displays Facebooks users who also liked what I'm looking at. :)

Re:Look on the bright side. (1)

jd (1658) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580107)

I can bitch about the Creationists who are inhabiting The Guardian newspaper's comments section at the moment, the idiots commenting on Yahoo! and the morons on YouTube. Hell, as I'm in the top 2% on intelligence tests, I've 98% of the planet I can feel smugly superior to if I really wanted to, but I'm going to be generous and only denigrate the bottom 2% and those are the inhabitants of Facebook.

Re:Look on the bright side. (1)

vux984 (928602) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580223)

but I'm going to be generous and only denigrate the bottom 2% and those are the inhabitants of Facebook.

Its funny because its true.

600 million accounts, and half of them are extra accounts to prime farmville, and most of what is left are friends and family who have facebook accounts... just to stay in touch with the 2% who live there. And you can tell its circling the drain because companies are creating facebook accounts at breakneck speed... and you know something's cool when Pampers, Verizon, and "Cash for Gold USA" is there...

Dotcom (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579241)

Wasn't this DotCom guy captured in New Zealand or Austria or something?

Since the USA created the internet, shouldn't all these countries pay us for using?

Sure (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579417)

The Europeans behind CERN and Tim Berners-Lee would like to have a word about their payment for using anything web related :)

what's the word? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579295)

John the Ripper now able to crack office files and use GPUs

4 July 2012, 12:38

http://h-online.com/-1631901 [h-online.com]

"Version 1.7.9-jumbo-6 of the John the Ripper password cracker sees significant format support enhancements. The open source tool is now able to crack password-protected office documents (Office 2007/2010 and OpenDocument) and Firefox, Thunderbird and SeaMonkey master passwords, as well as WPA-PSK keys and Mac OS X keychains. It can also request to use GPUs via CUDA and OpenCL. The suffix "jumbo" appears to be intended literally â" more than 40,000 lines of code have been added in the six months since the previous release.

Developer Solar Designer told The H's associates at heise Security that, in developing GPU support, the focus has been on modern functions which can be slow to calculate, such as WPA-PSK and Unix password hashes. For some functions, such as Ubuntu's standard hash function (sha512crypt) and the time-consuming bcrypt, there were, according to the developers, no crackers with GPU support until now, "because others were unhappy about releasing a tool with 'non-impressive' speed numbers, even if this is desirable in practice".

In the case of sha512crypt, this means that the GPU on a GeForce GTX 570 graphics card can generate around 11,000 hashes per second â" still more than five times faster than on a computer with eight CPU cores. By comparison, for SHA1 hashes, with GPU support this figure would normally be in the millions. For bcrypt, a graphics card just beats an eight-core system by a hair's breadth â" in both cases the maximum figure is around 5,000 hashes. The inability of GPUs to realise speed gains with bcrypt is due to the algorithm's design, which is very memory intensive. According to Solar Designer, the developers were primarily concerned with finding out just how slow the bcrypt implementation would be."

- http://www.openwall.com/lists/john-users/2012/06/29/1 [openwall.com]
- http://www.openwall.com/john/ [openwall.com]
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument [wikipedia.org]
- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bcrypt [wikipedia.org]
- http://www.reddit.com/r/netsec/comments/vsygc/john_the_ripper_179jumbo6_adds_gpu_support/ [reddit.com]
- http://www.h-online.com/news/item/Cracking-DES-faster-with-John-the-Ripper-1273585.html [h-online.com]
* http://www.h-online.com/security/news/item/John-the-Ripper-now-able-to-crack-office-files-and-use-GPUs-1631901.html [h-online.com]

crve@h-online.com
Copyright © 2012 Heise Media UK Ltd.

####
Sensitive Information Security Sources and Breaches

Unauthorized disclosures of secrets are essential for democracy.

In response to Wikileaks background inquiries Cryptome offers that there are hundreds of online and offline sources of sensitive information security breaches which preceded Wikileaks beginning about 120 years ago. This outline traces the conflict between technological capabilities for sensitive information breaches and control by law enforcement when technical countermeasures are insufficient -- a few examples among many others worldwide:

http://cryptome.org/0002/siss.htm [cryptome.org]
####
Feds Look to Fight Leaks With âFog of Disinformationâ(TM)

http://cryptogon.com/?p=30257 [cryptogon.com]

July 4th, 2012

Via: Danger Room:

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/07/fog-computing/all/ [wired.com]

Pentagon-funded researchers have come up with a new plan for busting leakers: Spot them by how they search, and then entice the secret-spillers with decoy documents that will give them away.

Computer scientists call it it âoeFog Computingâ â" a play on todayâ(TM)s cloud computing craze. And in a recent paper for Darpa, the Pentagonâ(TM)s premiere research arm, researchers say theyâ(TM)ve built âoea prototype for automatically generating and distributing believable misinformation ⦠and then tracking access and attempted misuse of it. We call this âdisinformation technology.â(TM)â
#####
Three NSA Whistleblowers Back EFFâ(TM)s Lawsuit Over Governmentâ(TM)s Massive Spying Program

http://cryptogon.com/?p=30266 [cryptogon.com]

July 5th, 2012

Via: Electronic Frontier Foundation:

https://www.eff.org/press/releases/three-nsa-whistleblowers-back-effs-lawsuit-over-governments-massive-spying-program [eff.org]

"San Francisco â" Three whistleblowers â" all former employees of the National Security Agency (NSA) â" have come forward to give evidence in the Electronic Frontier Foundationâ(TM)s (EFFâ(TM)s) lawsuit against the governmentâ(TM)s illegal mass surveillance program, Jewel v. NSA.

In a motion filed today, the three former intelligence analysts confirm that the NSA has, or is in the process of obtaining, the capability to seize and store most electronic communications passing through its U.S. intercept centers, such as the âoesecret roomâ at the AT&T facility in San Francisco first disclosed by retired AT&T technician Mark Klein in early 2006.

âoeFor years, government lawyers have been arguing that our case is too secret for the courts to consider, despite the mounting confirmation of widespread mass illegal surveillance of ordinary people,â said EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn. âoeNow we have three former NSA officials confirming the basic facts. Neither the Constitution nor federal law allow the government to collect massive amounts of communications and data of innocent Americans and fish around in it in case it might find something interesting. This kind of power is too easily abused. Weâ(TM)re extremely pleased that more whistleblowers have come forward to help end this massive spying program.â

The three former NSA employees with declarations in EFFâ(TM)s brief are William E. Binney, Thomas A. Drake, and J. Kirk Wiebe. All were targets of a federal investigation into leaks to the New York Times that sparked the initial news coverage about the warrantless wiretapping program. Binney and Wiebe were formally cleared of charges and Drake had those charges against him dropped."
###
Swarms of Maple Seed Drones (Lockheed Martin)

July 6th, 2012

http://cryptogon.com/?p=30277 [cryptogon.com]

Via: Talking Points Memo:

http://idealab.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/07/maple-seed-drones-will-swarm-the-future.php [talkingpointsmemo.com]

Imagine a cheap, tiny, hovering aerial drone capable of being launched with the flick of a personâ(TM)s wrist and able to provide manipulable 360-degree surveillance views.

Itâ(TM)s real, itâ(TM)s inspired by maple seeds, and the company behind it, Lockheed Martin, envisions a future in which swarms of the new drones can be deployed at a fraction of the cost and with greater capabilities than drones being used today by the military and other agencies.

âoeThink about dropping a thousand of these out of an aircraft,â said Bill Borgia, head of Lockheed Martinâ(TM)s Intelligent Robotics Lab, in a phone interview with TPM, âoeThink about the wide area over which one collect imagery. Instead of sending one or two expensive, highly valuable aircraft like we do today, you could send thousands of these inexpensive aircraft, and they are almost expendable.â

- IMAGE: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/assets_c/2012/07/samarai-drone-lockheed-martin-cropped-proto-custom_28.jpg [talkingpointsmemo.com]

"In June, Lockheed Martin released a video demo of the droneâ(TM)s capabilities, and it is clearly impressive, launched by hand and piloted using a tablet computer, which also displays the droneâ(TM)s live surveillance feed."
- VIDEO DEMO: http://youtu.be/n_q_DD_4LNg [youtu.be]
###

Why facebook? (2)

hawguy (1600213) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579313)

Why does Facebook even care about this? For a fraction of the cost of what they invested in this cable, they could open up a datacenter in Asia and replicate their content closer to their Asian customers.

I could see why someone like Google might want to boost capacity since they are a conduit to other sites, so making everyone faster helps them out, but I don't see what Facebook is gaining.

Facebook's Strategy (4, Informative)

andersh (229403) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579541)

This is all part of Facebook's new strategy.

Facebook will be building a huge new data center in northern Sweden to support the rapid global growth of its users. The new data center in Lulea, Sweden will be Facebook’s first facility outside the United States.

It’s the next step in our ongoing strategy of building our own infrastructure and moving away from leased facilities,” said Facebook spokesman Michael Kirkland. “We are expecting this data center to continue to help us reduce latency for our users in Europe and beyond.

http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2011/10/27/facebook-goes-global-with-data-center-in-sweden/ [datacenterknowledge.com]

TFA doesn't say how much FB invested (1)

k(wi)r(kipedia) (2648849) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579597)

For a fraction of the cost of what they invested in this cable, they could open up a datacenter in Asia and replicate their content closer to their Asian customers.

TFA says "Facebook as well as a few others are joining in by combining $450 million to the cause". So unless you have another source, we really don't know how big a fraction of the cost was footed by Facebook. Facebook could, after all, be merely the pretty face, the celebrity endorser, among investors with a more significant stake in the project.

Re:TFA doesn't say how much FB invested (1)

bastion_xx (233612) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580061)

Most of the newer submarine cable systems have large amounts of participants in the consortium. It's not uncommon for Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, Global Crossing, Tata, BT, and others to be involved in these systems. My guess is that FB wants more control over the capacity of the system or to ensure capacity ends up where they need it, say China. Interesting landing points for China too.

This is strange though. You'd think FB would rather invest in the data centers near big pipes instead investing in transit itself. Maybe they just want to circuits installed in a more timely manner--I'm looking at you Big Red.

Re:TFA doesn't say how much FB invested (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40582375)

It maybe because the transit is the bottleneck itself. Facebook does not want to be left out of these newly formed cables

Re:Why facebook? (1)

AHuxley (892839) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579747)

A http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room_641A [wikipedia.org] for data out of Malaysia?
If you map out private US telco and top provides you see a lot of strange loops and distant over provided hardware.

Re:Why facebook? (1)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580551)

You, sir, are a retarded monkey.

If Facebook builds a DC somewheres in Asia, they will need to pay for the bandwidth used to get between their DCs in the US and their shiny-new in Asia.

There's already moves afoot by owners of network infrastructure to make Big Websites effectively *pay twice* (1) for access at the DC, PLUS (2) some magic number for letting those recently "accessed" bandwidths actually reach their destination.

Owning the network infrastructure yourself fixes this problem TWICE over.

Firstly because you do not now nor will you *ever* have to pay anyone for either the access or the "bandwidth across" your own infrastructure. And secondly you have added insult to injury by not only avoiding proposed future costs but actually you have ceased to be a paying customer *at all* of network infrastructure owners.

Seriously, you wanna screw me over royally?
Up Yours - I'll build my own and NEVER pay you any money ever again!

Rampant Greed and Stupidity looks like it's going to be introduced to a measure of Justice *real soon now*.

Net Neutrality and all that (1)

dutchwhizzman (817898) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580837)

Even if it wasn't for making money on the cable by providing access to others and charging for it, they'd have a large argument why others shouldn't be charging them for access to their consumers. It's the same as having a patent arsenal if you're into software. You won't enforce your patents, if others won't enforce theirs. By owning part of the global infrastructure, you have a successful weapon against (other) Tier-1 TelCos charging you an arm and a leg.

unh-un (4, Interesting)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579333)

I'm just not comfortable with Facebook owning a trans-oceanic cable. There's just no good reason that they should own any infrastructure that crosses international borders and territorial waters.

I also don't want Google to own the Clouds and Apple to own the Moon.

Re:unh-un (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579389)

I also don't want Google to own the Clouds and Apple to own the Moon.

...and git off mah lawn?

Re:unh-un (3, Funny)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579473)

...and git off mah lawn?

No, you are welcome on my lawn as long as your owner picks up after you.

Networks Of Necessity (4, Interesting)

andersh (229403) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579615)

It's a sound strategic move for any large content and service provider including Google, Apple and especially Facebook.

They rely on the networks for their revenue, it makes sense to own parts of this infrastructure yourself if you can afford it. If only to use as leverage and/or offsetting future increases in transport costs. Owning huge datacenters is not enough, any longer, for the very large scale, global enterprises.

The [network] owners have already begun asking companies such as Facebook to pay for their users' data usage. The European ISPs and telecom corporations asked earlier this year for the right to offer "better" service levels to paying clients [slashdot.org] such as Facebook (i.e. Network Neutrality).

Re:Networks Of Necessity (2)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579719)

It's a sound strategic move for any large content and service provider including Google, Apple and especially Facebook.

I'm sure it is. I'm also sure there are a lot of "moves" that would be sound strategy for a corporation that would not be beneficial to the rest of the world.

I haven't yet made the leap of faith to, "What's good for Facebook is good for the World".

Mutual Interests and Finding A Balance (1)

andersh (229403) | more than 2 years ago | (#40579999)

Yes, I see your point and it's well founded, however for the moment I see no reason to wish for interference.

The best way to resolve the issue is in the form of competition. The two sides, content providers and network owners, are struggling to finding a balance between who pays and owns what.

Regulators and consumers need only sit back and watch, if there is a need for regulation the watchdogs can step in and force their hand(s). This latest wave of changes has barely begun, who knows where and how the lines between the two sides will end?

As it stands the content providers interests happen to match that of the consumers, both want the lowest possible price for [their] users' free and unrestricted access.

Re:Mutual Interests and Finding A Balance (2)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 2 years ago | (#40581411)

The part that bothers me is private industry owning structures that physically cross borders, international waters, etc. I know it's already been done but regulation becomes fuzzy with these trans-national projects. Does the country at one end regulate or the other or both or none?

I also don't want corporations having their own foreign policy or their own military. Both already exist, but I'm not happy about it.

Re:unh-un (2)

Crypto Gnome (651401) | more than 2 years ago | (#40580523)

I also don't want Google to own the Clouds and Apple to own the Moon.

Why not? Oracle already owns (the) Sun [oracle.com] !

Nothing to do with harvesting data (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40579919)

It's a way to turn the cash into something hard for the for the original shareholders that looks like it's related to their industry to stop the shares crashing and make the floatation look anything other than a float-and-run.

TPP Agreement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#40580315)

Malaysia? Korea? Japan!? Whew! Hopefully the #TPP Agreement will be in place by the time this MEGA Time Dotcom link comes on-line. Citizens might just think about downloading copyrighted material over this backbone! Well... if not, at least the Japanese will rot in jail [wired.com] for killing the Creative Industry!

Why not connect the Philippines as well? (1)

jakkals (1036974) | more than 2 years ago | (#40581401)

Looking at the map in TFA, I can not help wondering why there is not a connection to the Philippines as well. The cable is going to be laid down relatively close to the Philippines, and having a link to a nation with 90+ million people could be... er... profitable?

Philippines? (1)

inhuman.games (1590643) | more than 2 years ago | (#40583105)

From the map, it looks like they are skipping the Philippines. I wonder why. I thought the Philippine population was blowing up, and I think they are also heavy Facebook users.

Re:Philippines? (1)

MunkieLife (898054) | more than 2 years ago | (#40585457)

I remember reading that the Philippines was suppose to be connected in the first version of the APG, but later was removed because of funding or political issues in the Philippines. My memory is a bit fuzzy though, so go google it.

But, on the same vein, I was also wondering why Indonesia was not connected... seeing as it's the 4th largest country in the world and the 4th largest number of facebook users (per country). http://www.socialbakers.com/facebook-statistics/ [socialbakers.com]

Re:Philippines? (1)

jrumney (197329) | more than 2 years ago | (#40587575)

This is a cable from Malaysia to Japan/Korea. The branches are to places where some company has offered to share some of the cost in return for possibility to lease some of the spare bandwidth on the cable. Currently, all the international bandwidth to Malaysia is provided by leasing spare bandwidth on cables that run past Malaysia (mostly from Australia to Europe, or Singapore to Japan and Europe), and that spare bandwidth is fast running out. Having ownership of the cable should provide some guarantees for the future, at least for customers of TIME.com.my. Philippines has access to the cables circling the Pacific Rim between Australia/NZ and Japan, which probably have a lot more spare bandwidth on them than the SE Asian cables. Indonesia is not well placed for this cable, only Sumatra and Kalimantan are close to Malaysia, but the population centres in Indonesia are mostly on Java. As a result, Indonesia's international bandwidth is almost exclusively via Singapore until such time where an Indonesian company sees enough profit in commissioning their own cable to Japan, Europe or elsewhere.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?