×

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!

Google Outage: Internet Traffic Plunges 40%

samzenpus posted about 7 months ago | from the have-some-google dept.

Google 352

cold fjord writes "Is 40% anything to worry about? Sky News reports, 'Worldwide internet traffic plunged by around 40% as Google services suffered a complete black-out, according to web analytics experts. The tech company said all of its services from Google Search to Gmail to YouTube to Google Drive went down for between one and five minutes last night. The reason for the outage is not yet known, and Google refused to provide any further information when contacted by Sky News Online. According to web analytics firm GoSquared, global internet traffic fell by around 40% during the black-out, reflecting Google's massive grip on the web. "That's huge," said GoSquared developer Simon Tabor. "As internet users, our reliance on Google.com being up is huge."'

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

352 comments

Details on Google Apps Status Dashboard (5, Informative)

Novus (182265) | about 7 months ago | (#44605547)

See Google Apps Status Dashboard [google.com] for more details (hover over red outage dots for times).

Re:Details on Google Apps Status Dashboard (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605571)

See Google Apps Status Dashboard [google.com] for more details (hover over red outage dots for times).

"We're aware of a problem with Gmail affecting a significant subset of users. The affected users are able to access Gmail, but are seeing error messages and/or other unexpected behavior. We will provide an update by 8/16/13 5:37 PM detailing when we expect to resolve the problem. Please note that this resolution time is an estimate and may change.
The incident lasted 1-5 minutes."

Re:Details on Google Apps Status Dashboard (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605587)

"See Google Apps Status Dashboard [google.com] for more details (hover over red outage dots for times)."

No need. I read everything in my local newspaper's site yesterday.

Re:Details on Google Apps Status Dashboard (4, Funny)

arglebargle_xiv (2212710) | about 7 months ago | (#44605613)

Did their certificates expire?

NSA Wiretap installed (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605779)

NSA installed one of it's man.in.the.middle data centers perhaps.

Google.com? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605555)

I use google.fr, you insensitive clod!

Re:Google.com? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44606039)

Do you mean google.de ?

As I keep having to say to my older family.. (5, Informative)

sjwt (161428) | about 7 months ago | (#44605557)

Pro Tip: Rather than Googling 'Facebook' you could use a bookmark, or try www.facebook.com

Facebook (4, Interesting)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 7 months ago | (#44605619)

Pro Tip: Rather than Googling 'Facebook' you could use a bookmark, or try www.facebook.com

Facebook is definitely Googles main threat (when will they release their own search engine). Its why Google are throwing everything behind Google+. I have been astonished how Microsoft/Apple have been prepared to squander their respective advantages by not having a social network, preferring to support Facebook against Google.

Re:Facebook (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605649)

I have been astonished how Microsoft/Apple have been prepared to squander their respective advantages by not having a social network, preferring to support Facebook against Google.

Probably because they're not fools.

You know who talks about G+? G+ users. That's about it. The value of a social network is based on the number of people involved, and Google failed hardcore at attracting users. Having blown their load, G+ is about as much of a threat to Facebook as MySpace is.

Google+ is growing (5, Interesting)

tuppe666 (904118) | about 7 months ago | (#44605705)

Probably because they're not fools.

Except Googe+ is growing, and even though it is in no way eclipsing Facebook. Yahoo was dominant in search; Apple was dominant in smartphones; Hotmail was dominant in internet mail. How is the fact that there is strong player in the market relevant, both Apple and Microsoft could benefit from having their own social network, and Facebook is a threat to both.

Re:Google+ is growing (2)

BrokenHalo (565198) | about 7 months ago | (#44605975)

A murrain on both their houses. Maybe I'm an antisocial old fart, but I (for one) could not care less if Google and Facebook waste their shareholders' dollars trying to capture the same market.

Re:Google+ is growing (5, Insightful)

mcvos (645701) | about 7 months ago | (#44605999)

As a Google+ user, I definitely don't want Google and Facebook to capture the same market. People are definitely part of the reason why I prefer G+ over Facebook.

Re:Facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605699)

Facebook isn't even in the same league. Googles ads are all over the internet and they administer the second most prevalent operating system. Soon to be first.

Facebook like buttons track people on sites and they have adds on facebook.com

Just compare the stock value and realize Google could buy Facebook on a whim if it cared to.

Re:As I keep having to say to my older family.. (1)

Silpher (1379267) | about 7 months ago | (#44605637)

Why is this, Who can explain this behavior? It's like lemmings running of a cliff or the herd mentality of larger herbivores.
My Parents also adopted this behavior and nothing keeps them from doing it.. Why?!

Re:As I keep having to say to my older family.. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605695)

If you type in the url wrong, you go somewhere wrong. You also have to get the . and the com right. To top that off, they already need to use a search engine for other things, so by using it for everything they have one less thing to think about. It makes perfect sense. You are like a carpenter wondering why everyone else doesn't have $100k worth of woodworking tools lying around. What if they need a triangle-shaped saw, you ask, what are those fools going to do then? Why won't they invest the time and money into learning the right tool for the job? Because they don't need those specialized tools that you and I use.

mod parent up (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605789)

Typing URLs in the search bar works. That's all that matters. The one downside is an extra click, which is obviously bothering GP much more than it is bothering GP's parents: i.e., not at all.

Re:As I keep having to say to my older family.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605747)

Why is this, Who can explain this behavior? It's like lemmings running of a cliff or the herd mentality of larger herbivores.
My Parents also adopted this behavior and nothing keeps them from doing it.. Why?!

Why shouldn't they? There is nothing wrong with using search for navigation. You might have to do an extra click vs typing in the full URL, but you don't have to type the complete URL, and you avoid misspellings. Yes, geeks prefer typing things correctly _where they are meant to_ and organize a bookmark collection etc. but if other users prefer their way who are you to tell them they are wrong?

Re:As I keep having to say to my older family.. (2)

gagol (583737) | about 7 months ago | (#44605703)

At least 40% of people I know type their url in google... send a non referenced address to your friends and see!

Re:As I keep having to say to my older family.. (2)

LameMonikerGoesHere (267761) | about 7 months ago | (#44605729)

The young ones, too. My 12 year old step son uses the browser search bar for everything - even "youtube". It's maddening!

Re:As I keep having to say to my older family.. (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605731)

I couldn't imagine all of those people, nagging, moaning. "mommmm, the internet isn't working", "hey son, every time I try to open facebook it does nothing, is it working?"
OH GOD MAKE IT STOP.
Even after telling those people, they still never learn.
Even after saying "HEY LOOK, SEE THAT THING THAT POPS UP WHEN YOU TYPE FACEBOOK, THE ONE CALLED FACEBOOK.COM? CLICK THAT"
Even after saying "click that tile that says facebook"
Even after setting the homepage to facebook, they still find some way to complain.
I. Hate. People.

Sometimes I really do wish there was an internet licence. Obviously only officially since you could never police something like that easily.
If it stopped even a fifth of this, it would be worth it.
It isn't like they just lack some knowledge, they are genuinely thick. I feel bad for them for being shafted by the education system, nobody should be that thick, nobody, unless they had some severe case of mental illness.
Maybe "the general public" have a mental illness?! Wait, no, best not let them get classed as that, they will want pills to make it better. We are already wasting loads of money on sugar pills for retards.

Re:As I keep having to say to my older family.. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605775)

This is why Google is #1 and Facebook respectively is #2

Re:As I keep having to say to my older family.. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605831)

Pro Tip: Rather than Googling 'Facebook' you could use a bookmark, or try www.facebook.com

I like how this is modded +5 Informative. Thanks for the handy tip! I shall bookmark this page in perpetuity so that I never forget.

Actually, Tragically Funny == Informative (3, Informative)

Overzeetop (214511) | about 7 months ago | (#44605979)

Just a note for those who don't mod frequently and might wonder about the actual utility of this post for /.ers.

Re:As I keep having to say to my older family.. (5, Funny)

yotto (590067) | about 7 months ago | (#44606009)

I'll just search for "site:slashdot.org how do I get to facebook without using google"

Duh! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605561)

Due to other recent activities, Google can no longer support their motto of "do no evil". That's an opportunity, for the next latest and greasiest, "where you at?"

How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (4, Insightful)

captainpanic (1173915) | about 7 months ago | (#44605565)

I wonder for how many people the internet becomes completely inaccessible without Google? (I also still occasionally meet people who do not know what a 'browser' is, and who think that IE is their only option).

Google is a good search engine, but there are alternatives. If Google stopped working, I wouldn't suffer very much, I think. (When Gmail crashes, I think that for gmail users this is another issue... but I use alternative email).

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (2)

mybeat (1516477) | about 7 months ago | (#44605577)

Google being down is not a problem for /. people, however I know a few who are literally incapable of doing anything without google (mail/search being the important ones).

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (3, Insightful)

PSVMOrnot (885854) | about 7 months ago | (#44605665)

The trouble is that Google that what you see as Google's services is only the tip of the iceberg. To most people Google is search, Gmail, Youtube, etc. What they don't see is the GoogleAPI javascript stuff they host which is used by hundreds of sites all over the net. Try surfing with noscript for a while and see what effect it would have on you.

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (1)

gagol (583737) | about 7 months ago | (#44605749)

Using third parties for small scripts, that may be unavailable, upgraded and break your code and cause more DNS request is not exactly a good idea most of the time.

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (4, Informative)

Richard_at_work (517087) | about 7 months ago | (#44605801)

GoogleAPI gives you the ability to choose an exact version of the script, and maintains that as a permalink, so when the next version becomes available your code isn't broken.

The advantage of using GoogleAPI far outweighs your perceived negatives - Google has a far better uptime and availability than any other free host, they often place the most frequently used scripts into the Google search homepage using the same link as you would, so stuff like jQuery et al are already cached by a high percentage of your visitors, and it goes someway to cut down a small percentage of my traffic, especially if I maintain multiple sites or subdomains that use the same scripts.

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (1)

PSVMOrnot (885854) | about 7 months ago | (#44605835)

Out of interest, do you have a way of automatically failing over to a self hosted version of the scripts if google is for some reason unavailable?

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (4, Informative)

jkflying (2190798) | about 7 months ago | (#44605879)

I had an issue where my ISP's homepage used google scripts, so when I was capped (yes, that happens here, we pay ~$2/GB) their page wouldn't load completely and I couldn't top up my account, even though they allowed requests to their page while capped.

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (4, Funny)

jez9999 (618189) | about 7 months ago | (#44605719)

Yeah, when Google crashes it's no problem for me; find some other search engines and bing! I'm surfing again in no time.

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (5, Funny)

JustOK (667959) | about 7 months ago | (#44605971)

but how can you find other search engines without googling them?

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605721)

Gmail was down fully for 1 minutes, and completely up for everyone within 4 minutes. And this was first downtime I have ever experienced with it.

No "alternative email" can't beat that track record.

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (5, Informative)

mcvos (645701) | about 7 months ago | (#44606035)

The fact that a minute downtime is big news is definitely saying something. Both about the reliability of Google's servers, and the impact of their products.

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 7 months ago | (#44605809)

what does it matter when the traffic analytics is done via google analytics..

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44606017)

How many will bother using an alternative for a 5 min outage?

Re:How many people don't know a 2nd search engine? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44606047)

People at my work have Bing set as their default search so they literally Bing, Google click on the link and then Google what they were actually looking for, it's insane.

Cause (5, Informative)

DarkOx (621550) | about 7 months ago | (#44605567)

How much of the plunge was due to lack of search / app availability vs third party pages not loading properly do to analytics and other google dependencies?

Re:Cause (3, Informative)

tommeke100 (755660) | about 7 months ago | (#44605761)

I'd say 99% AdSense not responding, analytics not responding, social media buttons not responding....there goes your website ;-)

40%? No. (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605573)

This is how the "40%" looked in real life:
http://www.crackajack.de/2013/08/18/google-goes-down-for-2-minutes-fucks-up-100-of-all-journalists/

(Mind the circle in the yellow graphics: It shows the real decline in internet traffic at the German Internet Exchange (DE-CIX), the largest internet exchange point worldwide.)

Further reading: What is DE-CIX? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DE-CIX

Re:40%? No. (4, Interesting)

petermgreen (876956) | about 7 months ago | (#44605933)

What is an internet exchange?

It's a place where providers peer when they are not exchanging enough traffic to justify private peering. Exchange point connections are cheap compared to transit but expensive compared to private peering links. Traffic from major access providers to the likes of google is unlikely to go through an internet exchange because with that volume of traffic private peering is more economical.

Which is not to say the 40% figure is true, it's just to say that traffic on an internet exchange is not a reprepsenative sample of internet traffic

Re:40%? No. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605973)

They're just implementing the German wiretap.

Not surprising (5, Interesting)

tuo42 (3004801) | about 7 months ago | (#44605575)

I lost count of how many people and customers I know who no longer use the address bar to enter an URL, but Google. Open Browser, Google as start page, enter for example "slashdot.org", click the first hit.

Many of them even access their own company website like this. Or their social networks etc. While I never understood why they do it (or use a browser which actually works this way like Chrome or Safari, where the URL bar also is the search field), this if course means a single point of failure. If they are not able to access google, they don't how to access the website they "search".

And while I am of course not talking about technical adept people, most of them are no morons who are simply not able to comprehend the difference...it's just the way they access the internet...through google (so they think).

Re:Not surprising (4, Insightful)

Tukz (664339) | about 7 months ago | (#44605599)

It's a bit like the early 90's.
I had almost everyone's telephone number memorized, then cellphones got popular and slowly I forgot everyone's telephone number as they were now coded into my cellphone.

I suspect something similar is at play here.
People* don't really remember full urls any more, they just search for the closest and Google sorts the rest.

* When I say people, I mean the general public.

Re:Not surprising (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44606027)

I had almost everyone's telephone number memorized, then cellphones got popular and slowly I forgot everyone's telephone number as they were now coded into my cellphone.

Your analogy compares better with bookmarks though.
What people are doing now is calling like 411 every time they want to call their friends.

Re:Not surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605657)

most of them are no morons who are simply not able to comprehend the difference...it's just the way they access the internet...through google (so they think).

Then they're morons.

Re:Not surprising (5, Interesting)

tuo42 (3004801) | about 7 months ago | (#44605895)

Don't think so.

Some of them have not only very high scientific degrees, but are also on the board of larger (>600 employees), successful companies.

They might not have the computer knowledge you have, but I wouldn't be so ignorant to call anyone a moron because he is not savvy in one partical field or is simply not interested in becoming more savvy, as the way he operates the internet until know worked for him and he does not have the need or interest to expand his knowledge there.

How many bright people drive cars without even knowing the simplest things about combustion engines and drivetrains? Are they all morons? There, that's our car analogy for this topic.

Re:Not surprising (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605781)

Don't call someone who does not know how to use the web very well a moron. Some people just are not as computer savvy as others.

Re:Not surprising (4, Funny)

Meneth (872868) | about 7 months ago | (#44605991)

Remember when some blogger replaced Facebook as the first search result for "facebook"? He got tons of comments asking why they couldn't log in anymore.

NSA? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605579)

Reason for the outage:

NSA has been tinkering with google servers, to milk as much info as possible before more google customer draining happens.

Re:NSA? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605639)

Possible, but they (NSA) likely have other reasons, as google is known for NEVER delete any old data.

Re:NSA? (1)

rtb61 (674572) | about 7 months ago | (#44605869)

Actually that is far more likely to be true than funny. This seems very much like a core psy vs spy configuration change, whether it was to take something out or put something in remains to be seen. In light of recent exposure taking something out seems more likely.

At the end of the day, this should be a major wake up call for Google and having a more regionally distributed system, which of course is what the internet was originally designed to be so that no single point of failure can take down the entire system.

False economy might make a centralised system look more appealing but a major failure can bring those savings crashing down and turning into a massive cost. Additionally more regionalism designs allow for testing new products, methods et al in smaller markets or even customising to suit particular markets.

A complete system wide failure certainly puts a black mark on Google's future value.

NSA deintegration (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605593)

showed their hand with - "Google refused to provide any further information when contacted by Sky News" - secret court order?

Re:NSA deintegration (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605627)

tin foil hat time: Weird how two unserious NSA posts appear above mine when mentioning NSA - when's the slashdot outage due?

Re:NSA deintegration (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605659)

Soon, dude. Stay calm at home, mind your own business. The transition is about to come.

Google isn't part of the internet anymore (5, Funny)

Arancaytar (966377) | about 7 months ago | (#44605601)

The internet is now part of Google.

Re:Google isn't part of the internet anymore (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605825)

THIS internet...

Needs a decentralised alternative (2)

Jesrad (716567) | about 7 months ago | (#44605843)

We (as in, we users of the Internet) should not be so reliant on a single entity's web services, just as we (as computer users) are not reliant on a single entity's OS. Guess what, you can participate in a decentralised web search engine right away, with project YaCy [yacy.net], by running a node on your computer(s). There are very few nodes at the moment given the potential, and the search will only get better as more people join.

/. Tagline right now. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605617)

HOST SYSTEM NOT RESPONDING, PROBABLY DOWN. DO YOU WANT TO WAIT? (Y/N)

some extra text for the capslock filter... even more text for the filter.

Didn't notice, I use DuckDuckGo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605629)

Didn't notice as, I guess, many of us since we use DuckDuckGo [duckduckgo.com] or other sites and don't use Google evil tracking apps either.

Re:Didn't notice, I use DuckDuckGo (1)

philipmather (864521) | about 7 months ago | (#44605661)

Yeah but I bet duck-duck-go, Bing, Yahoo and everyone else noticed. With no idea of the scale behind it, would duck-duck-go cope if Google went away?

Re:Didn't notice, I use DuckDuckGo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605759)

Yeah but I bet duck-duck-go, Bing, Yahoo and everyone else noticed. With no idea of the scale behind it, would duck-duck-go cope if Google went away?

Well both Yahoo and duck-duck are using Bing, so the question would be what kind of traffic Bing could handle. I guess quite a lot. Not at least since I believe they had hoped to have much more traffic than they have.

Re:Didn't notice, I use DuckDuckGo (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605777)

I thought DDG was using Yandex as their backend search database? http://www.yandex.com/

Re:Didn't notice, I use DuckDuckGo (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605851)

I thought DDG was using Yandex as their backend search database? http://www.yandex.com/

They list a number of sources [dukgo.com], including Bing _and_ Yahoo (which is Bing). I believe I have read that Bing is their main source, but they might be gearing up use of Yandex more now.

It's not so bad (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605667)

It's not so bad when internet traffic plunges. What would be truly catastrophic is when a faggot's erect penis plunges... into another man's anus.

So. It has come to this. (2, Interesting)

martin-boundary (547041) | about 7 months ago | (#44605673)

Chinese hackers just have to hack Google, and 40% of the internet can be down on demand. The original visionaries at DARPA must be rolling in their grave...

Re:So. It has come to this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605717)

Nah. Users would learn to route around Google in about 30 minutes maximum.

I just think it shows how vulnerable Google's business is if they can go completely black.

Re:So. It has come to this. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605807)

Several years ago it took less than 5 minutes to most smart people to dump Altavista as soon as they spoiled their front page with adds.

Now 30 minutes seems fair to jump off Google's boat.

Re: So. It has come to this. (2)

nbritton (823086) | about 7 months ago | (#44605857)

The original visionaries at DARPA must be rolling in their grave...

Not likely, the network is functioning beyond expectations. Hypertext is merely one of many protocols operating on this global network, and in twenty years it may not even be used. IP however, and probably TCP/UDP, will still be used a hundred years from now. Hopefully we'll have migrated to IPv6 by then...

Very likely it is something very simple... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605679)

Like a major power transformer failing/catching fire/exploding and causing damage to the primary backup generator.

Failover at that point can take two minutes or more, depending on how many backup generators you have.

If the failure occurred at a primary router junction I can see it taking out the router... and the alternate path discovery taking a few minutes to kick in.

Youtube (1)

rroman (2627559) | about 7 months ago | (#44605681)

I think the drop was significantly because of Youtube. It was at night, when most people are just relaxing and everybody today watches YT in HD, which is quite a lot of data per second.

Re:Youtube (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605793)

A lot of websites use Google Analytics and Doubleclick servers, most of the ads out there are served by Google now, and they almost on every site you visit.

Re:Youtube (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44606031)

If it was night everywhere at the same time then that could be a reason for it, yes.

Could've been worse (5, Funny)

Sockatume (732728) | about 7 months ago | (#44605683)

Imagine if the NSA servers went down, nothing would be getting through.

Re:Could've been worse (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605799)

They passively monitor the net, so that wouldn't happen.

Re:Could've been worse (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about 7 months ago | (#44605813)

They also monitor only a small percentage of 'net traffic, but I thought that it was worth a little inaccuracy for the sake of a joke.

I was mistaken.

Re:Could've been worse (1)

lxs (131946) | about 7 months ago | (#44605903)

The man in the middle
Went out for a piddle
And the whole web went suddenly dark.

It was quite a riddle
To the man with the fiddle
All these geeks playing tag in the park.

How much? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605707)

How much of this was ads? Youtube? jQuery?

Come on people, this is why you just sync the copy of jquery you have in a cron job, not rely on the third party hosted.

Not that big of a deal. (5, Interesting)

Jah-Wren Ryel (80510) | about 7 months ago | (#44605741)

The short duration exaggerates the issue. If Google were to go away for a day or a week, most everyone would switch to some other service like Bing, etc. But when it goes down for just a few minutes people don't even have time to figure out that google is the problem itself rather than a hiccup in their internet connection. Most people will just hit reload a couple of times, curse, check their phone for text messages and by then everything has recovered and they quickly forget that there even was a problem.

Fake numbers (5, Insightful)

longk (2637033) | about 7 months ago | (#44605753)

40% did NOT drop. 40% measured by this one stats agency dropped. They don't measure Bittorrent, Usenet, Netflix or other bandwidth eaters. The real number is likely to be much much lower.

Re:Fake numbers (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605821)

Most likely they use google analytics to mearue the bandwidth ;)

So bittorent is not that high in % (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605767)

Some people (copyright holder , ISP) pretended bittorent was swamping them with more than 75% traffic being bittorent... But if traffic fell 40% with google outage, and there is anyway other type of traffic, then bittorent cannot be that high in volume.

Re:So bittorent is not that high in % (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 7 months ago | (#44605963)

Some people (copyright holder , ISP) pretended bittorent was swamping them with more than 75% traffic being bittorent... But if traffic fell 40% with google outage, and there is anyway other type of traffic, then bittorent cannot be that high in volume.

these asshats didn't look at the backbone statistics.. just page refreshes on pages which didn't load due to relying on google scripts!

Yandex (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605783)

http://www.yandex.com/

The Russian alternative to Google. Could make a good disaster recovery backup, and only the KGB would then have your search results and Yandex.com emails. ;-)

Re:Yandex (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605993)

It's called FSB nowdays.

Switch to new NSA data center in Utah (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605845)

Occurred during maintenance window. 5 minutes is acceptable. Good job.

No comments from Google. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605863)

..an NSA analyst must have done a wildcard query :)

Type Google into Google (1)

MrIlios (2524820) | about 7 months ago | (#44605881)

This is what happens when you type Google into Google... (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqxLmLUT-qc - YouTube - IT Crowd)

So (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 7 months ago | (#44605931)

Chinese hackers just have to hack Google, and 40% of the internet can be down on demand.
RE : http://hilearsivlerim.blogspot.com

How does google account for 40% of traffic?! (2)

Seumas (6865) | about 7 months ago | (#44606045)

Something I haven't seen explained in the couple articles I've read on this is why all google services going out would account for 40% of all internet traffic. Am I supposed to believe that at any given moment, 40% of all internet traffic is consumed by gmail, youtube, and web searches? And out of that, how much of the traffic was accounted for by youtube? That is the ONLY seemingly viable element that could really contribute that much, because of the sheer amount of data each transaction with youtube consumes. I mean, doesn't Netflix consume something like 35% of all data traffic at night? So if Netflix went out for five minutes, you could probably say "Netflix outage causes 35% of internet usage to drop" . . .

Rather than telling us how much data usage changed (or if you do, at least break it down for us), isn't a much more relevant statistic one of what percentage page requests/transactions dropped during those two minutes?

It's jumping to irrational conclusions for people to go around saying "oh noes, at least 40% of the internet is dependent on Google to remain up!"

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...