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!

Online Population now Half Billion

CmdrTaco posted more than 12 years ago | from the they-can't-all-fit-in-my-living-room dept.

The Internet 273

mattvd writes "According to CNN, the number of people with Web access at home by the end of 2001 was 498 million." Not surprisingly, Asia is growing the fastest. It's amazing that in only 10 years or so, the net has exploded so far, so fast, and now touches 10% of the earths population.

cancel ×

273 comments

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

sit down... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125601)


> >
> > > You really should be sitting down when you read this one.
> > >
> > > Gold Star Mothers is an organization made up of women whose sons were
> > > killed in military combat during service in the United States armed
> > > forces. Recently a delegation of New York State Gold Star Mothers made
> > > a trip to Washington, DC to discuss various concerns with their
> > > elected representatives. According to published reports, there was
>only
> > > one politician who refused to meet with these ladies.
> > >
> > > Can you guess which politician that might be? Was it New York Senator
> > > Charles Schumer? Nope, he met with them. Try again. Do you know anyone
> > > serving in the Senate who has never showed anything but contempt for
> > > our military? Do you happen to know the name of any politician in
> > > Washington who's husband once wrote of his loathing for the military?
> > > Now you're getting warm! You got it! None other than the Queen
>herself,
> > > Hillary Clinton. She refused repeated requests to meet with the Gold
>Star
> > > Mothers.
> > >
> > > Now -- please don't tell me you're surprised. This woman wants to be
> > > president of the United States --- and there is a huge percentage of
> > > voters who are eager to help her achieve that goal.
> > >
> > > Sincerely, Cdr. Hamilton McWhorter USN (ret)
> > >
> > > PS: Please forward this to as many people as you can. We don't want
> > > this woman to even think of running for President. May you sleep in
> > > peace always...and please...hug or thank a Veteran or active military
> > > for that privilege.
> > >
> > > Think about this one !!! Don't forget, our girl, Hillary Rodham
> > > Clinton, as a New York Senator, now comes under this fancy
> > > Congressional Retirement and Staffing Plan. It's common knowledge
>that,
> > > in order for her to establish NYS residency, they purchased a million+
> > > dollar house in upscale Chappaqua, NY. Makes sense. Now, they are
>entitled
> > > to Secret Service protection for life. Still makes sense.
> > >
> > > Here is where it becomes interesting. The mortgage payments hover at
> > > about $10,000 per month. BUT, an extra residency had to be built
> > > within the acreage in order to house the Secret Service agents. The
> > > Clinton's now charge the Secret Service $10,000 monthly rent for the
> > > use of said Secret service residence and that rent is just about equal
> > > to their mortgage payment, meaning that we, the tax payers, are paying
> > > the Clinton's mortgage, their transportation, their safety and
>security,
> > > their 12 man staff, and it's all perfectly legal.
> > >

Re:sit down... (-1, Offtopic)

douglips (513461) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125648)

Bullshit. [about.com]

Re:sit down... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125830)

I am a veteran and am availible for hugging, assorted stroking, or fondling at most any time.

Still (-1)

Ralph JewHater Nader (450769) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125612)

The kikes control the internet. The more people use it the more people the jews can spy on.

On Spam. (2, Funny)

forged (206127) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125619)

Let's hope all these new sexy users won't spam my mailbox [mailto] more than it is already :)

Re:On Spam. (2)

Mr_Matt (225037) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125734)

They already are, dude. Heck, I could've said there were a half-billion people online three months ago...I got at least that many "I send you this file for your advice" spams. :)

Re:On Spam. (-1, Offtopic)

Mr_Matt (225037) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125759)

D'oh...I guess virii aren't really spams...need more coffee. Crap! :)

Population == pollution (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125620)

Just as we strained the environment during the Industrial Revolution, so too does our Information Revolution strain the environment.

Let's kill off the populations of users so as to keep our environment in balance. Good bye, AOL lusers.

AOL Market Share? (1)

delphin42 (556929) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125819)

The most recent number I could find was 25 million for the number of AOL users. This would make them 5% of all users. AOL is the largest ISP in the world, but at 5% of the total it (thankfully) doesn't seem all that significant. I don't know why AOLers get such a bad name. Sure, there are lots of stupid kids on there, but I think the only reason they are singled out is because the population size is so large. Get 25 million people together anywhere and there will be a ton of "lusers" in the group. AOL doesn't seem like such a bad choice for dial-up service. I'd definitely go with them before MSN. Maybe Earthlink would get my $$$, but it's a moot point, since I've moved beyond my dial-up days.

Yeah, and? (-1, Offtopic)

CovertSquirrels (456836) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125621)

Just let me be the first to say, "Who else likes wood?"

Wait (2, Insightful)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125626)

When 600 million Chinese, 100 million japanese, 300 million indians, and 40-50 million africans get online, thats when the real online revolution will take place.

Right now we need to make sure they all have the choice to use Linux, give them some good development tools, graphics tools, and just wait for them to produce information which benifits the world, hopefully they wont be as capitalist as us and patent everything or else we'll be at their mercy.

Re:Wait (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125688)

Do you expect to receive mod points for this?

Re:Wait (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125689)

>When 600 million Chinese, 100 million japanese, >300 million indians, and 40-50 million africans >get online, thats when the real online >revolution will take place.

whoa whoa whoa!
easy there hot rod!

we still have to wait for the first 40-50 africans to get online, yet alone millions...

Re:Wait (-1)

DonkeyHote (521235) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125719)

I didn't think you could teach the monkeys to type? Hazzah!

Re:Wait (1)

wpmegee (325603) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125699)

Don't you mean 1.3 billion Chinese? Also, regardless of whether they use Linux, dumb terminals, or that Other Operating System, this would be a huge step forward for free speech and democracy.


Although it's not likely to happen anytime soon, having China connected would more than triple the percentage of humans that use the web.

Actually (2)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125756)



I dont believe 100 percent of every chinese personn will be connected. But i do believe maybe 70 percent will.

Re:Wait (2, Informative)

sc_demandred (309821) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125761)

Although it's not likely to happen anytime soon, having China connected would more than triple the percentage of humans that use the web.


Sure, but if you read this article [weeklystandard.com] , it seems unlikely that the Chinese government will allow much in the way of freedom over the internet. The US would do well to squeeze China into relaxing the iron fist of censorship in order to promote freedom of Web... then we will see some serious innovation and the realization of the internet's potential.

The USA isnt about freedom, the USA wants this (2)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125882)


The USA wants the government not to control the Chinese internet, so their our US Capitalist big businesses can take control.

We dont have freedom on the net ourselves, China wont have it either, its about control, the US wants to dominate the internet and China is a big market, by opening them up it opens them up to Capitalism.

China is most likely to use linux than we are, i thought we were all about freedom.

Re:Wait (-1)

Mayor McPenisman (557253) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125701)

When 600 million Chinese, 100 million japanese, 300 million indians, and 40-50 million africans get a stable infrastructre and a peaceful political climate, not to mention human rights issues etc. THAT will be when the real revolution takes place.

Re:Wait (1)

Dancin_Santa (265275) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125760)

If they got all that you mentioned, I'd assert that the real revolution will have already taken place.

Re:Wait (-1)

Mayor McPenisman (557253) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125879)

You are a dummy dumb dumb.

Re:Wait (-1, Offtopic)

kiwipeso (467618) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125757)

Linux is dead [slashdot.org] , why am I not surprised to see the communists argue for it?
600 million chinese won't get online until it's free of cost, free of liberty and free of democracy.
Only 100 million indians can afford to eat 3 meals a day, how are 300 million starving indians going to care about the internet?
There isn't 40-50 million white or rich people living in africa, 10 million is more realistic.

Nobody needs the internet if they are censored or starving, there are more important things to worry about.

Re:Wait (2)

interstellar_donkey (200782) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125815)

When 600 million Chinese, 100 million japanese, 300 million indians, and 40-50 million africans get online, thats when the real online revolution will take place.

Revolution for whom? Us, or them?

It just seems that at best, open and cheap Internet access for Asia and Africa will have them devouring our culture, not the other way around.

It's not that our culture is so bad... wait, yes it is.

Re:Wait (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125838)

This has nothing to do with Linux, you fucktard. Why do you need to go preaching your religion on other people and forcing it down their throats. Linux is about CHOICE. Why not let people CHOOSE?

Just Imagine (-1)

DonkeyHote (521235) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125630)

A Beowulf Cluster of these....

If Angelina Jolie would ... (-1)

The MoMo King (562894) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125633)

return my emails ... it could be Half Billion + 1.

Re:If Angelina Jolie would ... (-1)

DonkeyHote (521235) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125654)

Good for you, knock up the wench, that at least would keep her from making any more terrible movies.

HAHAHA 1st postage!!!!11111 (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125636)

First post bitches!!!

ONE RING TO WANK THEM ALL
One ring to cum them
ONE RING TO BRING THEM ALL
and in the darkness rape them

Yeah but.. (1)

ZaneMcAuley (266747) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125646)

What do they use it for? Surfing? Shopping? IM? what? I think that information would be more useful than just a numbner.

Re:Yeah but.. (0)

SweetAndSourJesus (555410) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125662)

News. America's "free press" is probably what lots of people are after.

If they only knew...

Re:Yeah but.. (-1, Offtopic)

satsujin (238098) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125755)

Internet for shopping? Surfing? C'mon.. They're all using it for pr0n!!

--sj

498 million seems like so much... (5, Insightful)

suso (153703) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125651)

But 10% seems like so little. As John "Maddog" Hall says, that just means that 5 billion people haven't choosen their operating system yet.

Re:498 million seems like so much... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125735)

But the real number IS alot more then 10%!
Only 10% of the users have computers at home, but who knows how many people have other means of access. I know in China very few people actually OWN their own computer, but hundreds of millions have to be using the internet cafes one can find on every block.

Re:498 million seems like so much... (1)

inerte (452992) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125780)

Or don't have the hardware yet.

Ten percent of the what? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125655)

There are SIX billion people on Earth, Taco, not 4.98 billion.

(But what's a billion people or so between friends, right?)

Re:Ten percent of the what? (-1)

DonkeyHote (521235) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125682)

I think all the pre-marital sex is knocking him off his game, its only a matter of time till she takes aways his computers...

1/2 shouldnt be counted, FUCKING CHINKS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125659)

and indian fags too

a bigger number (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125667)

wonder what's the online troll population by now

Re:a bigger number (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125875)

actually i was half serious there. some day the net may have more "people" than there actually are on this planet if not already.

in 2020 spam lists with less than trillion addresses will be pointed at and laughed.

Re:a bigger number (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125878)

It appears to be the same three immature, prepubescent, sexless morons with nothing else to do and no ability to do anything else. This is just a guess.

Half of Half a Billion (5, Funny)

slipkid (442316) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125668)

...And, in related news, half of the Online Population still believe that "the Internet" and "AOL" are synonymous (the same half, incidentally, who thought 'The Net' was a great film).

Re:Half of Half a Billion (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125687)

I wish that half of those users used AOL. Then maybe my AOLTW stock wouldn't be in the tanker.

Re:Half of Half a Billion (2)

suso (153703) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125714)

You mean "The Net" was a film?

Re:Half of Half a Billion (2, Funny)

slipkid (442316) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125737)

Only in the loosest sense of the word...

Re:Half of Half a Billion (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125876)

Speaking of loose, I heard Sandra Bullock was in that movie.

Re:Half of Half a Billion (1)

inerte (452992) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125821)

The other half download "The Net" on "The Internet" :-)

Slight correction (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125670)

...and now touches 10% of the earths population.

That should be "now cause 10% of the earths popultion to touch themselves."

Re:Slight correction (0, Troll)

kiwipeso (467618) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125844)

Potential Linux users [slashdot.org] alert ! Slashdot should now promote WANKER linux.
Windows Alternative Network Kde Environment Resource is perfectly suited to those of us who touch themselves [slashdot.org]

I predict mass acceptance of WANKER [stallman.org] linux [linux.org.uk]

End of the WWW (3, Interesting)

DCram (459805) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125671)

With news like this comming out it makes me wonder what these people who say that the WWW is going to die are thinking. With a base as large as that it is near imposible to kill it. Im sure there will be new tech that comes along and makes the WWW better faster and friendlier but die? I don't think so.

Now the problem is with all these people fighting over bandwidth when are chaeper faster pipes be available for us to use? When can I say hey there are 1 mill users hitting my site and there is no lag?

I also wonder what these people are looking at. 90% porn and the other 10% refrence material and such.

Re:End of the WWW (0)

The MoMo King (562894) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125888)

Yeah ... the railroad didn't think it would die either. There is always the posibility of new tech replacing existing tech. Will it happen ... who knows ...

1/2 a billion... (2, Funny)

SuperCal (549671) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125672)

I find it amazing that there could be half a billion people online and I still can't find decent content... Slashdot excluded of cource.

Re:1/2 a billion... (1)

TrollMan 5000 (454685) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125730)

Where have you looked? There are dozens upon dozens of online journals [oup.co.uk] , reference sites for law [cornell.edu] medicine [medicinenet.com] , etc.

Why not try Google [google.com] and find some intelligent content for yourself?

Re:1/2 a billion... (1)

pornaholic (242268) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125738)

You know, you're just looking in the wrong places. There's PLENTY of free pr0n out there, you've just gotta look for it

Re:1/2 a billion... (-1, Offtopic)

SuperCal (549671) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125781)

Have you ever said something you thought was funny and then the more you thought about it the more obvious it became that it wasn't... I extend my deepest apologies.

Re:1/2 a billion... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125814)

I thought the funny part was where you sarcastically included Slashdot into the "interesting content" category.

Re:1/2 a billion... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125837)

Re:1/2 a billion... (Score: -5, Troll, Redundant, SOB)
by l33t d00d on Thursday March 07, @01:23PM

That's because online content is unsafe and insecure. With passage of laws similiar to the DMCA and SSSCA around the world, people will feel more secure in putting their information online.

Supporting these laws is the only way we can ensure that information now being withheld will become available.

The world will be a better place when people feel safe to share their information. Power to the people!

Population figures (2, Interesting)

Reedo (234996) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125679)

How much of the earth's population has access to TV?

There are 6.2 billion people [osearth.com] on the planet now, by the way.

Not amazing (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125683)

The Asian tendency toward unprotected sex and nonstop propagation is the real phenomenon. Big deal.

Pretty close (3, Interesting)

quantaman (517394) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125691)

With the current population 5,995,544,836 that makes the percent of the people online only about 8.3%. In reality it's probably even lower when you think about how many millions of those are using AOL connections;)

Re:Pretty close (3, Funny)

Dephex Twin (416238) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125798)

With the current population 5,995,544,836

Man, the census has gotten accurate in recent years!

mark

Re:Pretty close (2, Funny)

inerte (452992) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125801)

I don't know about you, but I am hoping this weekend I will lower this percentage.

Re:Pretty close (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125842)

Which side of the division sign do you expect to alter this weekend?

Online population / Total population

Re:Pretty close (2, Funny)

inerte (452992) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125852)

Total, of course, but the results might only come in nine months :-)

Just imagine.... (1)

CptNoSkill (528594) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125693)

400+ million people going to the same site at the same time... and you thought 'slashdot effect' was bad ;). IMHO with the diversity of the net, how can one government control it? US laws are fine for US citizens, but how can we pass laws that will affect the world... We don't control it?! It really makes you wonder who really *controls* the net? So many people, from so many countries, how can anyone possible have the 'authority' to decide what happens to the net. It may have started in the US (thank you mr gore, ;)) but now it is beyond our borders. IMHO so it is beyond our 'laws'.

Slashdot/Asia? (2)

dcigary (221160) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125704)

Let's just hope there's no Slashdot-Asia planned for the near future. That would REALLY take the Slashdot effect to a new level....

Re:Slashdot/Asia? (5, Informative)

President Chimp Toe (552720) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125769)

Let's just hope there's no Slashdot-Asia planned for the near future. That would REALLY take the Slashdot effect to a new level....

Erm, there is dude. Check it out, its japanese [slashdot.jp] .

When we get chinese slashdot, then we really start frigging worrying.

Speed it up (1)

mnordstr (472213) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125707)

Yes, now let's implement IPv6 before these 'netless' people come online. It will be easier with less people, so start speeding things up =)

Re:Speed it up (2)

phaze3000 (204500) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125857)

I couldn't agree more.

Of course, it'll also mean many more technology jobs, which is exactly what we need right now.. who needs y2k? :)

Last I heard (0, Redundant)

pornaholic (242268) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125709)

We have over six billion people on the planet now - quickly approaching seven. 498 million isn't 10% of that. More like 8.3%.

Still cool though.

--And the Geek shall inherit the earth

Uh, right (1)

Cinnibar CP (551376) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125718)

And how many of those 500 million "people" are actually 'bots, spam-email accounts, and extra slashdot troll accounts?

Unix/Linux peformance enhancement (-1, Offtopic)

Foldetroll (564980) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125721)

A little known factoid about the linux kernel. It has an additional 'development' mode, known as 'exec' mode. Basically what this does is search through a binary whenever you start a new program, and pre-caches files it's likely to access. There were a few stability problems initially, which is why it's not on by default (kernels from 2.4 onwards have this support).
To enable it, simply add the line 'exec true' to your /etc/profile.
It should be enabled in global files, to allow all users to gain the benefit.

Re:Unix/Linux peformance enhancement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125778)

Let me guess - wrong article?

Oh bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125726)

Most of the people of the world haven't even made a phone call. This is one those "400 million people watched the Superbowl" statistics.

"Earths" -- I love it (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125736)

Just when I think I've seen every abuse of apostrophes possible here on Slashdot, I find a new one! Bravo!

AC

Updated lyrics.... (1)

bobdehnhardt (18286) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125739)

By the time we got to www.woodstock.com,
We were half a billion strong.....

900 million porn web sites (0)

lukecs (548904) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125744)

I guess this means theirs two porn sites for every person on the internet

Re:900 million porn web sites (0)

lukecs (548904) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125827)

a google search pulls up only 19 million web pages iwth "porn"... guess I was worng

am from india.... (5, Interesting)

univgeek (442857) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125749)

And although systems are expensive, and most college students do not have computers/internet access from home, there are hundreds of internet cafes in each city. The rate for access is around 25c to 50c an hour. They also allow gaming, voice chat etc. Since the cost of local and international long distance is quite high in India (cross-subsidizing the rural areas) a lot of illegal (currently) voice chat takes place in the browsing cafes.


Most students in the cities have email and access the net quite regularly, if only for gaming or chat through these cyber-cafes and not at home. Also gives privacy ;-)....


And once the government legalises VoIP there is definitely going to be a huge boom in the use of the cyber-cafes.


I am pretty sure that this must be the case in most developing economies. Of course like this article says [indiatimes.com] it needs to become a productivity tool.

Just when linux was dead on the desktop (2)

HanzoSan (251665) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125859)


Well you see, theres only billions of people left and millions of internet cafes and terminals in 3rd world countries who need an OS thats easy to use and cheap.

Say hello to linux on the desktop.

Not to mention Linux on the desktop would actually help promote innovation through contribution via GNU.

Age 'not a factor' (1)

pinkUZI (515787) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125764)

I think if you look around you'll notice this in discussion boards accross the online realm. A statistic a remember from a few years ago said that GenerationX [of course] was the fastest growing while the baby-boomers, of all people, were the second fastest. But, of late, I've noticed a more well rounded internet community.
Of course, some age groups are still more likely to participate in voicing their opinions than others...

Oh, and though a bit off topic - I just can't get used to that Hong Kong, China thing... its just... weird.

With these numbers... (-1)

DonkeyHote (521235) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125765)

Just imagine what the next "CodeRed" type of worm will be able to do with 50% or more of the population online...

A little perspective... (4, Informative)

isaac (2852) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125768)

I'm not surprised that the internet has reached 10% of the world's population - it's the richest 10%. I'll be more (pleasantly) surprised when the internet reaches 30% of the world's population - because then it will truly have made inroads into currently unserved or underserved populations - i.e. the 85% of the world that lives in what people in the US, EU, Japan, S. Korea, etc. would call abject poverty. (People in the 80th or 70th percentile, though, are themselves significantly wealthier than the 60% of the world's population that could truly be described as economically poor.)

For a little perspective, check out the brochure [itu.int] from the ITU World Telecommunication Development Conference 2002. A hopeful note, according to that link: "Africa now has more than twice as many main telephone connections as Tokyo and 85 percent of today's world population share 45 percent of all telephone lines (see Figure 1). In comparison, in 1984, 90 percent of the world's people used only ten percent of all telephone lines."

-Isaac

What concerns me is... (-1, Offtopic)

big_groo (237634) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125774)

- all trolling aside - how many of those people will have access to goatse.cx? Porn. Nazis. KKK. Scientology. The Catholic church. Seriously. We take things like that for granted. Sure there's half a billion people online but without true freedom of information - there will be no online revolution.

Spam (-1, Offtopic)

lobsterGun (415085) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125775)

No wonder we're getting so much Spam.

We're Gonna Need a Bigger MMORPG (1)

ZombieFrog (119809) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125779)

With over 600 million and more on the way, we are gonna have to come up with more adjectives to describe our Massively Multiplayer Role Playing Games.

I'd like to think it would be something easier to pronounce this time around, but it will probably end up being WWSMEPOOSRPG (World Wide Super Mega Entire Population On One Server Role Playing Game).

Touchy (0, Offtopic)

Placido (209939) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125784)

...and now touches 10% of the earths population.

And I'm pretty sure that 10% of the population touch themselves while surfing pr0n.


sorry... my bad

Re:Touchy (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125813)

Honey, I'm pretty sure that 100% of the earth's population touch themselves from time to time.

Bad statistics. (1)

Penguinoflight (517245) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125793)

First, there's over 6 billion people in the world, not 5 billion, so the 10% figure is a little off.

A 32 bit number (ipv4 address are 32 bits) can have 4 billion numbers in it. With the 10.*.*.* (16 million) and 192.168.*.* (65 thousand), there's less, and of course we have routers... so if we have only 200 addresses available on each subnet, we get 1.6 e+09.

That makes 1,600,000,000 1 billion, 600 million. If we really have a problem with too few IP addresses, there's a lot more than 490 million internet users.

Re:Bad statistics. (1)

DCowern (182668) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125816)

You're forgetting about people having multiple internet connected devices... one at home... one at work... maybe their cell phone... PDA. I also seriously doubt they count things like commercial web servers, DNS servers, mail servers, etc as "people". Just my $0.02.

There should be more than one IP per person (1)

Edmund Blackadder (559735) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125843)

The idea is to have a bunch of internet connected devices all with their own ip addresses. And each person may own several of those.

Also the allocation of IP addresses is not completely efficient. I dont remember exactly how it works, but there are groups of addresses differentiated by the first digits, and different organizations own those groups, so one group may be over crowded while others are empty.

Nielsen/Net Ratings - more data (4, Informative)

fleener (140714) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125803)

Here is the PDF from Nielsen [nielsen-netratings.com] . It contains more data than the CNN story.

Re:Nielsen/Net Ratings - more data (0)

lukecs (548904) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125849)

CNN isn't /. so you have to put up something that can be /.

It's just too bad (2, Funny)

suckwhat (562959) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125805)

...that some of these people haven't downloaded the latest version of the Internet. I actually went out the other day to buy a new version of the Internet, and the sales guy looked at me like I was stupid. So I smacked him.

Web Access at Home (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125807)

... may be a rather meaningless statistic in most third world countries. The fact is, if you go to India you tend to see a cybercafe on just about every other corner in the big cities. This is how a lot of computer literate folks over there get their e-mail and access the web; they don't have a computer in their house.

So who knows how many third world mom and dads are walking down to the cybercafe every weekend to see if their son in America has sent any new e-mail - but I'll bet it's a pretty high number.

side-topic (-1, Offtopic)

President Chimp Toe (552720) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125822)

Heck, this may be offtopic - but is the world getting richer? Is this a side effect of a more balanced globe?

I recently read that obesity is now a bigger world health problem than starvation. Maybe this is linked to big fat fibre optics becoming more common than shitty little modems.

Heck, half the US is now apparantly broadband [theregister.co.uk] . Despite all the negative publicity recently, it does feel like the net is a big old snowball that just wont stop rolling.....

Liniar growth? (1)

CrackerJackz (152930) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125826)

Yes, the population is going up, but will this trend continue to accelerate of is there a glass ceiling that we will hit with the large chunk of the world the can barely get a phone connection (if that, in most areas...) we will run out of existing infrastructure shortly in these countries, and good infrastructure cant be put in place overnight...

Inflated numbers (1)

dosun88888 (265953) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125829)

My parents have a high speed connection at their home, but it's for me when I visit. Calling them members of the online population would be sort of misleading. Now we're down to 497,999,998 people actually using the internet from home. Sure they have access, but that means next to nothing in terms of how much they'll purchase online - and THIS is what I assume those numbers will be used for when shady CEO's are trying to convince their board members that they'll be selling 10x as much whatever online in a year, and that the funding is a good investment. ~D

technology and puffery (2, Insightful)

Petrox (525639) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125833)

So as I don't come off sounding too cynical, let me first say that I think the Internet is a powerful and important set of technologies. It has changed the way I work, play and interact with others.

We cannot lose sight of the fact, however, that it is not the only way to work, live and be social. As the article states, 90% of the world is still not online, and it's a safe bet to say that many of those have probably never even heard of the Internet, and perhaps have no interest in it. While the propogation of these types of technologies throughout Asia and Africa would no doubt improve many lives and perhaps even give credibility to the notion that technology can help people transcend constraining economic, social and political barriers, we must still remember that we are living in a mostly offline world in which technology and modernity has just as often been used to oppress, homogenize and destroy.

So yes, the growth of the Internet is amazing, but, as with everything else, we should no be surprised to find unintended consequences from its growth.

Commercialism and the fears of others (1)

DohDamit (549317) | more than 12 years ago | (#3125856)

Whether we like it or not, there are people who fear, loath and hate the western view of life, or at least the materialistic and individualistic aspects of it. Life will not be cozy when these people realize that the internet is yet another way that western thought is invading their culture.

If I was one of these individuals, I would do everything in my power to either destroy or neuter the liberating effects(or as they see it, perverting) of such a worldview. As I see it, we should concentrate on infrastructure security now, before these individuals realize the threat that comes knocking via the net. Instead of worrying about content provisions(yes they are important, but the market rules the people you fear) we should be more concerned with methods for shutting down DDOS's and tracking and stopping of virus makers who would want nothing more than to bring this medium to its grave.

Internet is not owned by Americans (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3125887)

Not trying to troll but,

I just hope Americans will stop thinking that Internet is American soil, it aint.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?