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!

Google Is Backing a New $300 Million High-Speed Internet Trans-Pacific Cable

samzenpus posted about 2 months ago | from the greased-lightning dept.

Google 135

An anonymous reader writes Google has announced it is backing plans to build and operate a new high-speed internet Trans-Pacific cable system called "FASTER." In addition to Google, the $300 million project will be jointly managed by China Mobile International, China Telecom Global, Global Transit, KDDI, and SingTel, with NEC as the system supplier. FASTER will feature the latest high-quality 6-fiber-pair cable and optical transmission technologies. The initial design capacity is expected to be 60Tb/s (100Gb/s x 100 wavelengths x 6 fiber-pairs), connecting the US with two locations in Japan.

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

Big Challenge (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649779)

Can they make it NSA tamper proof?

Re:Big Challenge (3, Informative)

scuzzlebutt (517123) | about 2 months ago | (#47649843)

Nope.

Re:Big Challenge (1)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 2 months ago | (#47650053)

The Chinese will be able to hack us 100 times faster.

Re:Big Challenge (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650087)

I'm not sure if I'd rather have the NSA spying on my or China trying to steal my intellectual property.

Re:Big Challenge (4, Insightful)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about 2 months ago | (#47650103)

I'm not sure if I'd rather have the NSA spying on my or China trying to steal my intellectual property.

I don't believe this is an either/or situation.

Re:Big Challenge (1)

FatdogHaiku (978357) | about 2 months ago | (#47651539)

I'm not sure if I'd rather have the NSA spying on my or China trying to steal my intellectual property.

I don't believe this is an either/or situation.

And if you're not sure what that means, Google "double penetration"... but maybe not at work.
Then again, with Google in the mix it will be "triple penetration"...
bottom line is everyone will have your data and you will be screwed, like now but faster!

Re:Big Challenge (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650113)

You mean "copy." And "intellectual property" is just a vague propaganda term designed to lump a bunch of concepts that are only somewhat similar together so as to confuse people and make them believe that it's related to real property.

Re:Big Challenge (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650141)

I doubt that you're worth spying on. I also doubt if you own any intellectual property of any value.

People here tend to think they're much more important and interesting than they actually are.

Re:Big Challenge (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650481)

Or maybe people here wisely understand that being interesting is the biggest risk you can take.

Re: Big Challenge (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650703)

Sadly for you my name is Mark Zuckerberg and you already signed your intellectual property over to my company. Muchas gracias.

Re:Big Challenge (-1, Offtopic)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 months ago | (#47650219)

Lke orta plunikaty retazil amopatec noomba.

Re:Big Challenge (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650277)

You kids these days with your crazy ideas. What made you think Google isn't actually a front for the NSA?

Huh?? Google ARE the NSA (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650301)

hahahaahahaha it's so funny how people think google are just a company and not a direct arm of the world government. the idea the USA is it's own country is just an illusion put on sheeple shits so that they feel good about their enslavement

Re:Big Challenge (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47651597)

NSA ? How about making it Chinese proof? It's not a secret that china loves to spy on everybody as well, they even go as far as installing chips in coffee maker and what not, so this being managed by chinese company doesn't reassure me in the least.

Finally some Asian LPBs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649801)

Looks like we've reached the point where Google is actively looking for things to blow their multi-billion dollar cash hoard on. They could do worse than laying cable.

Re:Finally some Asian LPBs (3, Funny)

iggymanz (596061) | about 2 months ago | (#47649819)

they can do worse than making us a nice fat pipe for quality anime and JAV

Re:Finally some Asian LPBs (2)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 months ago | (#47650213)

I can't argue against faster-loading pregnant furry futanari tentacle porn.

Did I miss any fetishes?

Re:Finally some Asian LPBs (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 2 months ago | (#47650369)

yes this weird niche one where there are women having sex.

Re: Finally some Asian LPBs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47651027)

> yes this weird niche one where there are women having sex.

Gross.

Re: Finally some Asian LPBs (1)

iggymanz (596061) | about 2 months ago | (#47651345)

you think that's weird, they even have bizarre specially named sub-genre of that kind where material is deposited in the women's tract at conclusion of sexual activities by the male.

Re:Finally some Asian LPBs (1)

rahvin112 (446269) | about 2 months ago | (#47651935)

Yes, A LOT. I'm not sure of the rule number, but the minute you think you've listed all fetishes you didn't actually get them all.

Loli, Vore, TS, transformation, gassy, and on and on and on.

Slight problem (5, Funny)

Andurian (1162629) | about 2 months ago | (#47649831)

60Tb/s is fine for me, but what about the other people who want to use it?

Re:Slight problem (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 months ago | (#47650205)

You'll have to share with the others, otherwise you won't get any dessert.

Re:Slight problem (1)

Tokolosh (1256448) | about 2 months ago | (#47651587)

You can have it, but with your download limit of 250GB, you will be throttled after 0.004 seconds.

Re:Slight problem (2)

WillAffleckUW (858324) | about 2 months ago | (#47651589)

My first thought too. We have two 100 GB/s pipes within a block of me, and lots of 40 GB/s pipes spread throughout campus, so (does math) ...

If we do some high def surgical research and genome swaps with collaborators in Japan, S Korea, and China this might fill up fast.

And that's just this campus.

My tax dollars at work. (1)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about 2 months ago | (#47649833)

Or at least I assume so, given how much this would benefit the NSA.

Send your data to the CCP faster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649837)

Not that they haven't already tapped all the pipes in the ocean, but isn't Google a little worried about giving the Chinese direct access to all trans-Pacific data?

Re:Send your data to the CCP faster? (2)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 2 months ago | (#47650095)

Why are you so confident they don't already have it?

Between spies infiltrating endpoints and fiber-tapping subs (If the US has one, which they do, China almost certainly does too), it's best to assume all data is or can be captured in transit and focus on end-to-end encryption.

Re:Send your data to the CCP faster? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650355)

So is it even worth it for governments to tap undersea cables? It is easy to negate the attack using end-to-end encryption. The sub also has to have the capability to record and store terabytes worth of information a second. I don't know of any recording device capable of that.

CATCHA: intent

Re:Send your data to the CCP faster? (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 2 months ago | (#47651871)

So is it even worth it for governments to tap undersea cables? It is easy to negate the attack using end-to-end encryption. The sub also has to have the capability to record and store terabytes worth of information a second. I don't know of any recording device capable of that.

CATCHA: intent

Actually, all the sub has to be able to do is take the data and feed it back into the fiber with different destination addresses. Which means that the sub doesn't even have to stick around after pulling off the intercept. This DOES mean that the next group to intercept the data gets to see a whole bunch of encrypted (or not) data flowing to a mystery address, however.

Beta? (5, Funny)

RussR42 (779993) | about 2 months ago | (#47649841)

The cable will never leave beta and then be discontinued in a year.

Re:Beta? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650285)

The cable will never leave beta and then be discontinued in a year.

You mean like Gmail?

Re:Beta? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650393)

The cable will never leave beta and then be discontinued in a year.

Yup. Just like gmail.

Re:Beta? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650427)

The cable was probably coiled up on that barge they just sold.

Only 6 pairs? (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649859)

You'd think that since the sheathing probably costs more than the fiber, and the labor/paperwork/engineering involved in laying it probably dwarfs the equipment cost, they'd put in a lot more than 6 pair.

Re:Only 6 pairs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649881)

each fiber has amplifiers every so far to keep the signal above the noise floor

Re:Only 6 pairs? (2)

Rashdot (845549) | about 2 months ago | (#47650011)

The other 660 pairs are for the NSA.

Re:Only 6 pairs? (1)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 2 months ago | (#47650471)

That doesn't even make sense.

Re:Only 6 pairs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47651697)

But NSA

Re:Only 6 pairs? (2)

Rashdot (845549) | about 2 months ago | (#47651887)

Does a total of 666 make sense?

Re:Only 6 pairs? (4, Informative)

Shatrat (855151) | about 2 months ago | (#47650111)

The limitation is in the amplifier equipment in the festoons on the ocean floor. In terrestrial cables we don't have that limitation and you'll frequently see 288 count cables on long-haul routes and 48 count cables going through neighborhoods and subdivisions.

Re:Only 6 pairs? (3, Interesting)

hackertourist (2202674) | about 2 months ago | (#47650153)

For each fiber, you need an amplifier every 50 (?) km. You may run into a weight limit where the amplifier pack becomes too heavy to be suspended by the cable during cable laying.

Re:Only 6 pairs? (1)

Nkwe (604125) | about 2 months ago | (#47650509)

For each fiber, you need an amplifier every 50 (?) km. You may run into a weight limit where the amplifier pack becomes too heavy to be suspended by the cable during cable laying.

And those amplifiers require power, which is hard to transmit over a cable at those distances. (Well maybe not "hard", but the length imposes practical limits.)

Re:Only 6 pairs? (0)

baka_toroi (1194359) | about 2 months ago | (#47650531)

I think those amplifiers are passive, but don't quote me on that.

Re:Only 6 pairs? (3, Informative)

hackertourist (2202674) | about 2 months ago | (#47650593)

They use optical amplifiers. The signal stays in optical form, and is guided through a special section of fiber. A laser pumps energy into that fiber section, some of that energy ends up amplifying the signal. So it still needs power to drive the laser.

Re:Only 6 pairs? (4, Informative)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 2 months ago | (#47650789)

Delivered through a system as practical as it is insane-sounding: There's one power cable, doubling as an armor layer. The station at one end drives it +lotsofvolts relative to ground, the other drives it -lotsofvolts. All those amplifiers are hooked up in series.

Re:Only 6 pairs? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650749)

Typically 70-150km depending on the equipment.

http://www.laserfocusworld.com/articles/print/volume-33/issue-8/world-news/optical-amplifiers-speed-data-flow-undersea.html

Isn't this pointless? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649869)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that there was plenty of undersea cable that's under-utilized or sitting dark.

Don't we keep inventing new ways to send orders of magnitude more data through the same old fibers? Isn't this the reason of the original WorldCom market collapse? Isn't this still the case, and there is tons of dark fiber and bandwidth available?

I doubt this makes any economic sense, so I'm just suspicious that Google just wants to own and snoop more traffic.

Re: Isn't this pointless? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649941)

Those were 1Gb/s, these are 100Gbs with 100 WDM. Suitable for linking data centers, not just offices

Re: Isn't this pointless? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649997)

They were originally 1Gb/s, but aren't they potentially much faster now? There have been improvements in fiber transceivers, and that's what I'm talking about. Old 1G links are now 40G. Looking for references....

Re: Isn't this pointless? (3, Informative)

wiredlogic (135348) | about 2 months ago | (#47650133)

Transoceanic cables have repeaters positioned along their length. They can't be upgraded to newer tech without help from the US Navy.

Re: Isn't this pointless? (1)

master5o1 (1068594) | about 2 months ago | (#47651033)

So really, it's cheaper to lay new than to upgrade existing.

Re: Isn't this pointless? (4, Informative)

Shatrat (855151) | about 2 months ago | (#47650135)

No, because those submarine cables also include the amplifiers/regenerators spaced out across the ocean floor which aren't compatible with the slick new coherent optics. Most of the old ones are hardwired to regenerate Sonet framed signals.

Re: Isn't this pointless? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47652441)

If I goto /. minus the bword why the hell am I on the "b" site? WTF is wrong with Dice did they fuck goats in a previous life or is it something more recent? do they beat their wives? whats next the ask toolbar install? when the fuck does this stop? what part of "no" do they not understand? They must all have a background in marketing. FB

So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (3, Interesting)

ron_ivi (607351) | about 2 months ago | (#47649899)

Google ... China Telecom Global ... KDDI ... SingTel

Does that suggest at least 4 countries with NSA-like taps into the data.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (2)

timeOday (582209) | about 2 months ago | (#47649951)

Yeah, I guess. It's like pointing out that overseas freight might be opened by Customs - which is to say, yeah, it might. I practically got a proctological exam just crossing over into Canada this summer. What is more secretive and nefarious is the tapping of a line between 2 nations (or within one nation) by a third party.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (1)

onkelonkel (560274) | about 2 months ago | (#47650149)

"I practically got a proctological exam just crossing over into Canada this summer"

That's probably because of the guns. Too many Americans "forget" they have a Desert Eagle in the glove box, even after the customs guy asks them 3 times.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (4, Interesting)

timeOday (582209) | about 2 months ago | (#47650257)

I will admit what triggered suspicion - I forgot to bring a birth certificate for my 15-year-old son, and my wife wasn't with us. I don't see what a photocopied birth certificate proves (with regard to either kidnapping or smuggling contraband on my motorcycle) - but either way it was made abundantly clear to me that "privacy" is not a relevant concept at an international checkpoint. In fact the Canadian agent even claimed I shouldn't be taking him between US states without documentation, since I had no way to prove I had "permission", which really made my head spin.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (1)

wanax (46819) | about 2 months ago | (#47650705)

Many years ago, when I was 6 or 7, my grandparents drove me up to Prince Edward Island for a vacation. Getting through the border into Canada took about 45 minutes, with my grandparents getting grilled and the agents asking me about a dozen times whether I wanted to be with them and whether my parents knew where I was etc etc.. Getting back into the US took about 2 minutes. It seems like it's a Canadian neurosis.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47651349)

You mean taking a young child back into the the country where he lives was easier than taking the same child out of the country? Yep, sure boggles the mind.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47651931)

https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/268/kw/minors%20leaving%20the%20us/related/1

"While CBP may not ask to see this documentation, if we do ask, and you do not have it, you may be detained until the circumstances of the child traveling without both parents can be fully assessed. If there is no second parent with legal claims to the child (deceased, sole custody, etc.) any other relevant paperwork, such as a court decision, birth certificate naming only one parent, death certificate, etc., would be useful."

"Adults traveling with children should also be aware that, while the U.S. does not require this documentation, many other countries do; failure to produce notarized permission letters and/or birth certificates could result in travelers being refused entry (Canada has very strict requirements in this regard)."

Canada, on the other hand, says that they don't require the documentation, however many other countries do...

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (1)

rahvin112 (446269) | about 2 months ago | (#47651955)

Non-custodial kidnapping is the most common kind of kidnapping. Something like 99.99999% of all the kids on milk boxes are custodial kidnappings. But Christ, you're his Dad and he's 15, they could have asked him.

The world's gotten a bit insane.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (4, Funny)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 months ago | (#47650191)

I practically got a proctological exam just crossing over into Canada this summer.

Free medical checkups are one good reason to live in Canada.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (3, Insightful)

TheDarkener (198348) | about 2 months ago | (#47650045)

Does it really matter at this point how information traverses the Internet? It is a PUBLIC network. Do yourself a favor and encrypt all your traffic and you won't have to worry about which route your data takes to get to its destination. Doing it any other way is just not going to cut it these days.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650151)

It's not that simple. If you want both privacy of the communication and content. One without the other isn't good enough in many cases. Unfortunately the issue is more along the lines of privacy of the communication rather than the communications themselves which is at issue here. We need significantly more research and hackers working on projects like Tor (and even stronger really, Tor is low latency, and not the best possible solution at privacy).

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (2)

ledow (319597) | about 2 months ago | (#47650193)

A fact that even Google, Facebook, etc. are learning, as they start to encrypt ALL traffic between their datacentres and not just rely on the promise of privacy from governments / ISPs.

This is the natural evolution of the Internet, prompted by such spying and interceptions - being used for nothing more than transporting encrypted packets whose payload cannot be determined to any significant degree. The Internet is fast becoming a darknet of its own.

I know that, for years, I haven't accepted unencrypted communication for FTP, telnet etc. and now it's progressed to the point where Google are pushing people towards using TLS, etc.

Even my SMTP server lets you talk TLS to it if you try. Not everyone who emails me tries, of course, but it will let you do it so my "end" is secure.

I find it ironic that all the wiretapping etc. controversy has achieved is to make it even HARDER to spy on people.

But I have to say, I'm still wary of EC at the moment - being pushed as "the" alternative for a variety of problems such as PFS, etc. - I can't help wondering that while we're looking for the next "trick", it's already been done to us.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 2 months ago | (#47650811)

I've been pushing (In the most annoying of manners) for my regular contacts to set up Retroshare as a secure IM program.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (1)

WuphonsReach (684551) | about 2 months ago | (#47652503)

Even my SMTP server lets you talk TLS to it if you try. Not everyone who emails me tries, of course, but it will let you do it so my "end" is secure.

I just checked our server logs for the last month. Out of the connections, less then 4-5% negotiated TLS.

Now, granted, about 90% of those connections were probably spam, so maybe as much as half of legitimate mail servers now negotiate TLS.

(Anyone got better data? I didn't feel like trying to figure out whether a particular connection was or was not a spam connection.)

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (1)

Shatrat (855151) | about 2 months ago | (#47650159)

Probably, but anyone who cares, such as google, should be assuming that is happening and using wire-speed encryption hardware on both ends. Even without collusion, it's not that hard to sneak a 90/10 tap into an optical signal at a NAP and take a peek.

Re:So which agencies' backdoors are in there? (1)

Lanboy (261506) | about 2 months ago | (#47650599)

Not really. It is the internet, consider it pre-tapped. USA capture on the edge in LAX (Thanks AT&T) , China captures on the GFoC. Doubt Japanese government or Singapore does much of their own taps.

In any case, who wants to support a tap a 5000 feet down?

Yes! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649903)

good bye comcast, you fucking fuck!

Hmmm (1)

DaMattster (977781) | about 2 months ago | (#47649921)

I'd rather Google come in and bust the telecom monopoly in my home town where I have a choice between Verizon FiOS and Comcast Xfinity ... if you want to call that a choice. The lesser of the evils is Verizon FiOS. At least the FiOS is truly fiber optic!

Re:Hmmm (4, Interesting)

DoofusOfDeath (636671) | about 2 months ago | (#47649943)

I'd rather Google come in and bust the telecom monopoly in my home town where I have a choice between Verizon FiOS and Comcast Xfinity ... if you want to call that a choice. The lesser of the evils is Verizon FiOS. At least the FiOS is truly fiber optic!

That sounds great, but what happens when Google obtains monopoly status in your area?

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650023)

Then we ask verizon/att/comcast/tw to come back

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650201)

There is no competition - when they all place nice together.

Take that away - give them an arena to fight in - and you'll see the competition begin.

Then and only then will the competition actually benefit the consumer.

Re:Hmmm (1)

MiniMike (234881) | about 2 months ago | (#47650169)

That sounds great, but what happens when Google obtains monopoly status in your area?

A quick internet search indicated that there will be no problems, and that we shouldn't worry at all about this. I was then given a link to a free game download. BBL.

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47649987)

Atleast you have an option I have comcast and oh wait thats it

Re:Hmmm (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 months ago | (#47650181)

And what's your monthly cap with Comcast? Is it higher than 35GB?

Re:Hmmm (1)

present_arms (848116) | about 2 months ago | (#47650455)

aww bless comcast users and monthly caps :) Usage for August 90.18GB Your download allowance: Unlimited that's me in the UK though.

Re:Hmmm (1)

JDeane (1402533) | about 2 months ago | (#47650877)

Must suck balls to have limits so low... I have a Netflix account with 4 HD connections (4 TV's) and I average 450-500+ GB's a month is usage. Already past 153GB's for this month. (Loving this Gargoyle firmware on my router.)

Although I did read a story on here that Comcast was trying to merge with my current ISP Time Warner/Brighthouse. if that happens I may need to switch to Verizon's FiOS and uuugghhh I would rather cut off my testicles. Customer service is well shit... one time I had to cut about 200 feet of phone line they refused to bury in my yard, after calling them for 3-4 months straight I called them on my cell phone and told them to turn off my land line and swore they would never get another penny from me.

Re:Hmmm (1)

DaRyuujin (1686268) | about 2 months ago | (#47650155)

I'd rather Google come in and bust the telecom monopoly in my home town where I have a choice between Verizon FiOS and Comcast Xfinity ... if you want to call that a choice. The lesser of the evils is Verizon FiOS. At least the FiOS is truly fiber optic!

I'm right there with ya, only the monopoly in my area is shitty Verizon DSL, talk about being stuck with a single bad choice.

Re:Hmmm (2)

alen (225700) | about 2 months ago | (#47650243)

WTF do you expect google to do? even on google fiber netflix tops out at 10mbps

you can splooge your shorts watching your speedtests all day long, but in reality it won't be that much faster since all the services you access won't be buying enough bandwidth on their end for you to take advantage of it

i have 2 LTE phones and Team Stream takes forever to update even though i can do a 20mbps speed test at the time. welcome to the internet

Re:Hmmm (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650501)

how is it living in a third world country

overheard on the trans-pac cable (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650005)

everything.. keeping cool??? https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wmd+weather speak no evile... hear no evile...... never ends hopefully... see you there

all things being equitable.. any notion of real justice is based entirely on mercy, the centerpeace of momkind's heartfelt connection with creation

being spiritually & creatively merciful with each other takes out the (media/fear) drama of the hateful fear & loathing punishment features. are we not each our very own reward? punish as we would wish to be punished? WMD on credit 'weather' is not punishment enough? https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=wmd+weather+media news http://www.globalresearch.ca/weather-warfare-beware-the-us-military-s-experiments-with-climatic-warfare/7561

Due to excessive bad posting from this IP or Subnet, anonymous comment posting has temporarily been disabled. You can still login to post. However, if bad posting continues from your IP or Subnet that privilege could be revoked as well. If it's you, consider this a chance to sit in the timeout corner or login and improve your posting. If it's someone else, this is a chance to hunt them down (&/or demonize them....) based on speculation of ill intent... peace out /. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m39DWVFK-Bw

Does not compute (1)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | about 2 months ago | (#47650167)

Google has announced it is backing plans to build and operate a new high-speed internet Trans-Pacific cable system called "FASTER." In addition to Google, the $300 million project will be jointly managed by China Mobile International, China Telecom Global, Global Transit, KDDI, and SingTel, with NEC as the system supplier. FASTER will feature the latest high-quality 6-fiber-pair cable and optical transmission technologies. The initial design capacity is expected to be 60Tb/s (100Gb/s x 100 wavelengths x 6 fiber-pairs), connecting the US with two locations in Japan.

Isn't China doing missile tests toward Japan right now? Why the %$@#%$@ would Japan let China have anything to do with connecting them to this new network?

Does not compute (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650565)

You're thinking of North Korea, they've been launching test missiles near/over Japan for years. While relations between Japan and China have never been particularly warm they're not outright enemies. They've had some disputes over an island chain in recent years and I don't think China feels Japan has apologized enough for WWII atrocities but that's about it.

Re:Does not compute (1)

SuricouRaven (1897204) | about 2 months ago | (#47650823)

They are still arguing about things like school history textbooks - China accuses Japan of whitewashing their atrocities, Japan accuses China of exaggerating some of them or presenting them in a way that makes them seem like current practice. But it's a peaceful debate involving much slinging of insults and very little slinging of missiles.

Everything you wanted to know about undersea cable (2)

hackertourist (2202674) | about 2 months ago | (#47650209)

Re:Everything you wanted to know about undersea ca (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650411)

Will James Cameron be involved in this?

Re:Everything you wanted to know about undersea ca (1)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 2 months ago | (#47650517)

I know that article is old as shit because I had a subscription to Wired when it came out. Fantastic stuff, though.

I just finished reading Snow Crash again last week. I almost never re-read books, but that's a classic. It was written in 1992 and set 20 to 25 years in the future, AKA right about now. The reason that Facebook purchased Oculus is because they want to basically create the Metaverse.

Net Neutrality (1)

DarthVain (724186) | about 2 months ago | (#47650503)

I believe Google just fired a salvo into the Net Neutrality war.

Comcast et all: Hey content providers, it'd be a real shame if your speeds got real slow. A real shame. Howsa about some protection money, y'know just in case?
Google: Gee Comcast, seems your connection the the rest of the world is awfully slow, might be we just bypass you altogether...

Seems sort of like Backbone VS Last Mile: Fight!

At the very least a bit of future hedging going on. Google also has last mile service in a few areas. Imagine if they also own FASTER backbone infrastructure as well. Competition probably sucks if your not used to it.

Across the wide Pacific? (1)

tomhath (637240) | about 2 months ago | (#47650715)

Seems they could just run it from Alaska to Russia. Wouldn't even lose sight of the ship laying the cable.

Re:Across the wide Pacific? (1)

rahvin112 (446269) | about 2 months ago | (#47652009)

Only if you are Sara Palin. (I'm not sure you understand the distance involved)

Seriously though, it's actually probably cheaper to lay it across the equator than try to put a cable across the bearing straight. The ocean is pretty turbulent in the straight, it's pretty turbulent any time you get closer to the poles. There were articles the other day that global warming has opened up so much water this summer north of canada that they've had 15' (3m) waves. You need calm water (including underwater currents of which there is a big one in the straight) when dropping miles of cable to the bottom of the ocean.

Consider for a moment you're in water a mile deep laying cable. The total suspended amount of cable from the boat to the bottom of the ocean is more than 2 miles, and with the armoring and other features may weigh several thousand pounds and have enough cross-sectional area that a couple mile per hour current passing over the cable could capsize your ship, drag the ship under or shear the cable in half. The forces they deal with when laying the cables is HUGE without waves and strong ocean currents. They need massive boats, calm waters and very careful monitoring to put these cables down. If you tear the cable in half while laying it you've got to find the end, drag it and several miles of cable off the bottom, cut the end and resplice everything including the power and armoring, water proof the splices and then relay the whole thing along with continuing to lay new cable.

Where possible they run the cable over islands to make the runs through the ocean shorter. But trying to lay the cable across the bearing straight would be a major challenge. It would be an even bigger challenge once you got it across the bearing straight to get it anywhere because it's about 2000 miles from anything on either end and it would come ashore in some of the most hostile territory on earth (such as all the ground being permafrost which means you can't really bury the cable).

ugh (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47650925)

That 95% of america will never reap the benefits from, whatever they may be.

It's not Google (2)

zedaroca (3630525) | about 2 months ago | (#47651127)

From the announcement in the quoted article [nec.com] :
"A consortium of six global companies announced that they have signed commercial agreements to build and operate a new Trans-Pacific cable system to be called “FASTER” (...) The six-company consortium is comprised of China Mobile International, China Telecom Global, Global Transit, Google, KDDI and SingTel."
The OP gives the wrong idea that Google backs up the project and the others are involved only in management, which seems incorrect from the original announcement in NEC's page.

Can't wait for 60 Tbits/sec to my home (1)

Streetlight (1102081) | about 2 months ago | (#47651257)

Then I can reach Comcast's data cap in, what, 5 or 6 milliseconds.

Let's mix China, Japan, & ... (1)

CaptainDork (3678879) | about 2 months ago | (#47651617)

... the NSA ... what could possibly go wrong?

Does this fiber go anywhere near Bend, Oregon? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47651909)

I wonder if this cable goes anywhere near Bend, Oregon. It seems that that's where most of them end up or branch too. Hmmm, I wonder why?

Ah Cryptonomicon (1)

Gothmolly (148874) | about 2 months ago | (#47652115)

Once again, scifi leads the way.

Only need 600 Napatech analysis cards to tap it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 months ago | (#47652223)

Not bad to tap a continent... Not bad at all.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?