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 Seeks to Develop Parallel Internet?

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the they-came-from-above-we-had-no-chance dept.

Google 408

KhanReaper writes "As reported on On the Media and Business 2.0, Google appears to be purchasing dark (unused) fiber optic cable across the United States with the intention of building its own alternative parallel internet that would presumably be called GoogleNet. Possessing such a thing could allow Google to offer internet access in the form of free wifi or other means and create a powerful captive marketing audience which Google could monopolize. Outside of these marketing opportunities, such a development in infrastructure could help reduce Google's long-term content delivery costs were it to take on more bandwidth-intensive activities in the future."

cancel ×

408 comments

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

Well... (1, Insightful)

Snoolas (910809) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422904)

I suppose better Google than Microsoft, right...?

Free internet. (5, Funny)

Poromenos1 (830658) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422926)

Hey, if it's free internet, I don't care if it's from SCO, sign me up!

Re:Free internet. (3, Insightful)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422949)

Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it.

Re:Free internet. (0, Troll)

Donald Ferrone (863523) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423021)

Big words, TOUGH GUY. I'ma fuck you up, nigger!

Re:Free internet. (4, Funny)

nmb3000 (741169) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423132)

Then I'll take an island filled with naked women (real nice tits please), with an all-you-can-eat buffet, an obscenely active metabolism, and a foot long pecker.

Oh, and lube. Lots of lube.

I'll let you know if anything else comes to mind.

Re:Well... (2)

zardo (829127) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422940)

As Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto said after the attack on Pearl Harbor "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."

Re:Well... (4, Interesting)

aussie_a (778472) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422960)

Of course it is. After all, Google does no evil [/sarcasm] If this is truly the purpose they have for the fiber optic, they have truly taken Microsoft's "embrace and extend" to a whole new level (and would officially be evil, let the google apologists begin). Having said that, this is all speculation on why they want the fiber optic, it could just be they want to open up an ISP or to create an intranet only for their own data centers (and not for the public).

Re:Well... (5, Insightful)

hattig (47930) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423001)

What it would do is create more competition in the backbone internet connectivity market and internet market as a whole.

However, Google presumably decided it was cheaper to buy entire fiber links between datacenters in the long run than renting capacity from existing network providers. And who is to blame them? I'm sure that Microsoft own lots of fiber, I'm sure that lots of 'evil' and 'cuddly' companies own fiber, it doesn't mean they are making 'Intarwebnet Two' or whatever, and you don't get stories about it here.

It is just random speculation because Google are newsworthy.

Re:Well... (3, Insightful)

topper24hours (853597) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423068)

Yeah... last time I read about this (maybe 18 months ago?) it seems like the theory was they were going to offer free telephony and put Ma Bell outta biz. The truth is: these articles are scarcely more than conspiracy theories... we'll know their intentions when they annouce them.

Only if... (5, Interesting)

EtherAlchemist (789180) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422964)


...They get it right.

In my opinion, what Microsoft seems to suffer from is getting things to market as fast as possible to remain (or at least appear to remain) competitive. The problem is, that once a product is in the wild, a lot of bugs and security flaws turn up which results in patching the software for the remainder of the time you own it.

The release and patch process is what the Mozilla Foundation seems to be falling into lately as well.

Google, on the other hand, seems to take a more "future use" approach to what they do, giving their products better longevity and as a result, a better experience to their users.

If they (Google) can "get it right" with a parallel network, they basically trump everyone in the market today who has laid claim to making the Internet better. If Google applies their anti-spam engine to network nodes, spam virtually faces extinction. And you know, if they watch what I surf and how I surf and it results in a better experience for me then I for one welcome our new Google overlords.

Re:Well... (1)

thegrassyknowl (762218) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423041)

I suppose better Google than Microsoft, right...?

No s'pose about it. If Microsoft did it you know what the data charges would be like... unaffordable to all but those who earn a larger salary than the GNP a small island nation. Not to mention that they'd try to listen to every single byte transmitted and be the GAC's that they are about it.

If Google do it, at least their "don't be evil" policy would make me feel a little better about using it.

Or Maybe (5, Insightful)

varmittang (849469) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422909)

Its to connect datacenters together so that all of Googles search databases have the same information. Just maybe that is the reason the would need a high speed internet of their own.

Re:Or Maybe (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422972)

Well, that would be the logical reason. However, this is slashdot. We need more Google conspiracy posts.

Separate Internet Unlikely (5, Insightful)

wintermute1974 (596184) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423010)

Google to create its own Internet? Unlikely.

The whole reason that Google is an important company is that it crawls through the publicly-accessible parts of the Internet in order to index its contents.

If Google is to retain its premier position in the search engine market, then it will very much so remain firmly connected to the existing Internet.

This is why I agree with the parent post: It is quite reasonable to believe that Google might require this bandwidth for its own purposes.

There is nothing at all wrong with this. The Internet, after all, is merely a network of networks. All this means is that behind Google's accessible IP addresses lurks a mammoth network of its own.

Re:Or Maybe (4, Insightful)

sumdumass (711423) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423025)

It may be to offer download quicker and cheaper too.
I'm sure the bandwidth fees going from next door of your current ISP the to your house is sustantialy cheaper and probably faster then going from CA to Middletown ohio and fighting trafic of evereyone else involved in the process.

They would still have to transmit it from CA to Middletown but on thier own lines would be cheaper and more efficient. Who knows, it might be somethign for future VIOP offering too.

I'm not sure why some people see this as some evil act. The existing line aren't doing anything constructive as it sits. If at minimum, it reduces trafic or increases the internets ability ot handle the traffic, i'm all for that.

Re:Or Maybe (1)

fm6 (162816) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423031)

Right you are. This is the second time this story has appeared on Slashdot, and the "trail of clues" is as unconvincing as it was last time.

Google is many things, but Santa Claus [slashdot.org] is not one of them.

Re:Or Maybe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423071)

Its to connect datacenters together so that all of Googles search databases have the same information.
They don't need to have the same information. In fact, ensuring that they do have identically the same information would be a major performance drain for no measurable improvement in the user experience.

If we want to go out on a limb. (5, Interesting)

mcc (14761) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423072)

That's the obvious and reasonable interpretation, yep.

However, it might not be particularly unrealistic to suspect that Google might be considering starting an ISP.

Right now the ISP market is kind of shrinking because last-mile issues are effectively preventing anyone from providing broadband service unless they already own a high-bandwidth wire going directly into your house. However if 802.16 and similar technology delivers on its promises, it could remove this obstacle-- meaning that you'd be able to break into the ISP market with little more than the kind of purchases Google is making right now.

This theory is most definitely a stretch! However, unlike Business 2.0's "make a second internet and provide free access for some reason!" theory, at least it isn't stupid.

Also, who's to say Google even has a plan as to what to do with this dark fiber? As even Business 2.0 notes, now is a really good time to buy this stuff; you can get it cheap. Anybody ever heard of buy low, sell high? :P

THOUSANDS ARE ABOUT TO DIE BY KATRINA'S WINDS (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422910)

and all you can think about is Google? Get some priorities!

Re:THOUSANDS ARE ABOUT TO DIE BY KATRINA'S WINDS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422947)

And what do you want us to do about it?

Re:THOUSANDS ARE ABOUT TO DIE BY KATRINA'S WINDS (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423110)

Survival of the fittest. They should have fled or barricaded themselves in a secure location. It's not like they didn't know the damn storm was coming.

Also, look at yourself before chastising /.

THOUSANDS ARE ABOUT TO DIE BY KATRINA'S WINDS and all you can think about is posting useless, unhelpful shit about it on every fucking /. article? Get some priorities!

If it's so damned important, then get off your ass and do something helpful you fucking hypocrite.

Wow, scary! (1, Interesting)

alex_guy_CA (748887) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422912)

As much as I love Google as a search engine, I do have to say that this one is just a little bit scary. Can they really create their own internet, and still do no evil? Already, they are complicit in censorship in China. It doesn't make me really trust them with a project of this scope (though free wi-fi is cool...)

Re:Wow, scary! (3, Insightful)

stlpct706 (910884) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422922)

Free Wi-Fi.... It'll be free, but think of Gmail and AdWords and privacy.

Not that scary. (4, Interesting)

SeaFox (739806) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422956)

As much as I love Google as a search engine, I do have to say that this one is just a little bit scary. Can they really create their own internet, and still do no evil?

So what if they do. Just because Googlenet shows up doesn't mean the old internet ceases to function. If it becomes a draconian mess, no one will use it, and it will slip into irrelevance like Gopher.

Re:Wow, scary! (2, Insightful)

superyanthrax (835242) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422958)

The whole censorship thing has been blown out of proportion and has been beaten to death (and beyond) on Slashdot. Please don't bring that up again. Personally, I think that they don't have any moral obligation to oppose censorship, but they do have a moral obligation to follow the laws of the countries that they're doing business with, and so they are justified in complying with Chinese requirements. You can denounce the Chinese internet policies as much as you want, but I don't think you should be blaming Google.

Free wi-fi is a very cool idea, except some cities have tried to do it and the process is getting bogged down in court. It is possible that the same may happen to Google in its attempt.

Re:Wow, scary! (4, Insightful)

hattig (47930) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423044)

Free wifi is getting bogged down in court because it is the government competiting with companies, and you can see the point of the companies who want to make a livelihood from these services.

Google is a company. There is nothing wifi providers can do if suddenly GoogleWireless is free or cheap across the country. Google is hardly a monopoly, just a rich company, and if this expansion of services will lead to longer term benefits to the company (there will be a few duds, of course) then they should be doing this stuff.

What I'd do if I was a company is offer free wireless whereever you can, but rate limited to 5KB a second or so unless you are subscribed to the service. If you are poor yet somehow have a wifi enabled computer/PDA/phone/toaster, then you will still be able to get wireless access everywhere, which is the point of these free metropolitan networks.

Re:Wow, scary! (1)

alex_guy_CA (748887) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423121)

"The whole censorship thing has been blown out of proportion and has been beaten to death (and beyond) on Slashdot. Please don't bring that up again."

Can you not see the irony of asking me not to talk about censorship?

Re:Wow, scary! (4, Insightful)

dq5 studios (682179) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422966)

Already, they are complicit in censorship in China.

Yes, how dare they obey the laws of a land they are opperating in. I suppose you also think Google is evil for complying with DMCA takedown notices in the USA or the anti-nazi laws in Germany or the competition in advertising laws in France?

Re:Wow, scary! (1, Flamebait)

01101101 01100101 (904861) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423077)

No. But from a company that sells itself on 'don't be evil', I dont expect censorship.

'nuff said.

Re:Wow, scary! (3, Insightful)

alex_guy_CA (748887) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423111)

"Yes, how dare they obey the laws of a land they are opperating in. I suppose you also think Google is evil for complying with DMCA takedown notices in the USA or the anti-nazi laws in Germany or the competition in advertising laws in France?"

Well, yes, I think a strong case can be made that obeying an evil law (and I do think censorship is evil) is itself evil. Interesting that your short post should mention the existence of Nazis, as I do believe that in Nuremberg, it was decided that in FACT obeying evil laws was still a crime. Now, before I have to pull 10 people out of my throat because they jumped down it, I am not saying that censorship is as bad as say death camps. But that doesn't make censorship not evil, just because something else is more evil.

Re:Wow, scary! (5, Insightful)

a_greer2005 (863926) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423103)

Right now, 5-10 "baby bells" controll the whole internet, and pretty much price it at cartel-like levels. If Google can have as much bandwidth as an AT&T, SPRINT/UUNet, Quest or Verizon, I say good. Competition is great. and maybe a non-telco owning a huge chunk of bandwidth can intencify the pricing war, and maybe strip out the fake shit, like $19.99 for 2 months and $69.99 thereafter.

Google may also be more geek friendly with their TOSs too. They have a track record of not being dickheads, so you never know.

All I want is 3-5Mb/s down and 1-3Mb/s up...and an ISP where I can say what protocalls/ports get open or blocked and where I can run some basic servers (no, I do not want to run a website from an ADSL, but too damn many things fall under the "Non-permissible server" title as defined by most ISPs.)

GoogleNet? (5, Funny)

wmspringer (569211) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422913)

At least there's never any confusion over what google's inventions are going to be called.

Curious to see exactly what they have in mind..

SkyNet (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422930)

They would have to change name to Sky, but you never know...

Re:GoogleNet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422936)

Or Macintosh for that matter...

Re:GoogleNet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423000)

In soviet russia, GoogleNet has a curious mind.

Sorry, you seriously asked for it.

i don't think so (0, Troll)

coffeisgood (910748) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422917)

I don't think they should do that.

i think so (1, Funny)

XMyth (266414) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422935)

I think they should do that

I don't know (4, Funny)

iotashan (761097) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422970)

I'm indifferent on the matter

Re:I don't know (1)

nmb3000 (741169) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423083)

I like cheese.

Who read that as... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422929)

... "Google Seeks to Develop Parallel Universe?"

Re:Who read that as... (1)

hungrygrue (872970) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422998)

My guess would be someone who has been awake far too long with too little coffee?

Just You (4, Funny)

DumbSwede (521261) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423115)

You appear to be the only person in this universe to hvae read it that way, but several thousand people in a parallel universe where the only difference from this one is that the universe is known as the "interverse" made this mistake.

You people are insane. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422933)

Google hires an operating system engineer.

Clearly Google is writing the operating system to a super space robot that will be used to eradicate Microsoft!

Google buys a company that makes photo organizer software.

Clearly Google is doing this so that they can recreate iPhoto, as a preliminary step to creating competing products to iCal, iDisk, Apple Mail, and finally Mac OS X itself!

Google hires a janitor.

Clearly that janitor is secretly a superhero with super-strength which Google will use to eliminate all crime on earth!

Google buys up some disused fiber-optic cable.

Clearly Google is going to make their own internet!

Re:You people are insane. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422959)

Hopefully they call it the 'intarwebnet'.

Re:You people are insane. (3, Funny)

Thnikkaman (818752) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423024)

"Clearly Google is doing this so that they can recreate iPhoto..."

Have you heard of a little thing called Picasa? [google.com]

Re:You people are insane. (1)

BackOrder (592581) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423096)

Google hires a janitor.


Clearly that janitor is secretly a superhero with super-strength which Google will use to eliminate all crime on earth!


Actually, you've got it right! http://www.spyanotherday.com/ [spyanotherday.com]

tenth post? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422939)

tp?

Damnit (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422941)

They're forking the internet again!

why not charge ? (1)

kayen_telva (676872) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422942)

it shouldnt be hard to compete with the greedy likes of sbc/comscast/etc on price/bandwidth ratio...everything google does need not be free to be a success

Re:why not charge ? (1)

someonewhois (808065) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423038)

Charging would do nothing but start a price war. Being free allows them to continue their advertising model and build their advertising network into an even larger empire than it is today.

Re:why not charge ? (1)

vansloot (89515) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423091)

"Charging would do nothing but start a price war."

Price wars benefit the consumer by forcing prices down. I wouldn't call this "nothing."

Yea, and it will get married in white too. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422943)

There would be no bigger prize than GoogleNet. Like the internet and Internet2 before it, GoogleNet will be hacked and polluted with porn, movie uploads, warez and viagra spam.

I don't give it a month before it loses its virginity in the back seat of a Cisco router.

Re:Yea, and it will get married in white too. (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422979)

Well, I've always said that it's a bad idea to name your product with any word that rhymes with "Crisco".

Steve Jobs once said ... (5, Interesting)

SamSeaborn (724276) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422945)

Steve Jobs once said (circa 1998) that the only place in technology where there's true innovation is the internet because Microsoft doesn't own it.


This GoogleNet idea is an interesting one, but I expect such a proprietary internet would lack would be shunned by the hackers and outlaws that bring true innovation to the technology world.


That being said, Google is much more open to developers than the other monopoly we're familiar with. And they have been collecting money and PhDs at an alarming rate -- they have something big planned.


Clearly Google realizes (like Microsoft before them) that he who owns the platform wins. By building a "better" internet, GoogleNet could be the next Win32 API enabling Google to have an earth-shattering money machine. Perhaps Google's stock is not over-valued afterall.


Sam

Re:Steve Jobs once said ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423142)

"...the hackers and outlaws that bring true innovation to the technology world..."
Oh yeah, like the brains that originated UNIX, TCP/IP, GUIs. How are Google's researchers not in the same league?

Not sure how you meant the word "hackers," of course, but your respect for "outlaws" certainly seems well misplaced.

You're a kid, right?

Parallel Internet eh? (1)

richdun (672214) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422950)

So is this the Internet where we took a shottie to the Vulcans, or is it the one where Biff found a book about all the World Series back in 1950s?

In other news! (3, Funny)

Eminence (225397) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422953)

In other news "Microsoft Seeks to Develop Parallel Universe".

Re:In other news! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423045)

I believe Steve Ballmer is already in it - what we're see and hear from him is only a projection from said universe.

It would explain quite a bit.

Re:In other news! (1)

MadMidnightBomber (894759) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423138)

I think you mean: "Microsoft lives in parallel universe". Hope this helps, etc.

Coincidence? I think not. (4, Funny)

ScaryFroMan (901163) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422954)

"GoogleNet" sounds a bit too much like "SkyNet" for my sensibilities. Of course, if any company were to bring about Armageddon, I'd trust Google to do it in the most efficient, user-freindly and non-evil way.

speculation but wow (1)

smoondog (85133) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422963)

Wow this could be cool. Google could offer high bandwidth, secure content unlike anyone else (although at this point this is speculation). Not only could they be an incredible application service provider they could provide nearly endless bandwidth. google is certainly seems to be doing the right things.

Google (4, Insightful)

CSHARP123 (904951) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422968)

So is Google about to offer free Net access to everyone?

May be at First. After they have consolidated required market share, charges will apply to anything you do. It is a corporation, you got to think of shareholders and their profits.
We are seeing another monopoly happening.

Re:Google (1)

WormholeFiend (674934) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423076)

they might pay for it with GoogleAds

if you build it (1)

Fyre2012 (762907) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422974)

if you build it, they will google

Occam's Razor (5, Insightful)

Saiyine (689367) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422981)


Couldn't be just that they need cheap conection between their computing nodes?

--
Dreamhost [dreamhost.com] superb hosting.
Kunowalls!!! [kunowalls.host.sk] Random sexy wallpapers (NSFW!).

Re:Occam's Razor (4, Funny)

Thnikkaman (818752) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423037)

I think Occam's Razor is pretty much considered blasphemy on /.

Slashdot chages their minds... (5, Insightful)

jmcmunn (307798) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422984)


If there is one thing I have noticed as of late, it is the fact that the Slashdot audience as a whole, especially those in charge of posting stories, have had a sudden swing in viewpoint about Google. Now all of the stories about Google have negative undertones, and there's always a hint of disdain in the way the story is worded.

The gradual making of a new evil entity, and new Slashdot scape goat is nearly complete! We're all being set up to hate Google now. Gotta love it, Google has not charged me for a single thing. They provide me with excellent free email, outstanding search, a nifty map site, and even a suitable chat client now. And how much have I paid them? Nothing. I for one still love Google, say what you want about them buying the world.

Re:Slashdot changes their minds... (3, Funny)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423022)

Lemming.

Re:Slashdot changes their minds... (2)

F452 (97091) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423080)

Who is the lemming? I think this is about it for me in reading comments in slashdot. Really has become too tiresome, with the boring anti-MS blah, blah, blah. And now possibly as the parent suggests, anti-Google blah, blah, blah.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

Yes and no (2, Insightful)

Jeff Molby (906283) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423061)

You're right that the tone has changed, but it isn't completly unwarranted. We like Google for all of the products and services they've offered us (free), but only a fool could watch a business acquire the kind of widespread power and dominance Google is working towards without atleast a little apprehension.

Re:Slashdot chages their minds... (1)

crisper (12620) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423075)

Its like a drug dealer giving you your first couple hits or bags for free. They always get you in the end!

Not much different than many corporations :).

The Singularity Has Already Occurred (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422989)

I know it. [analogsf.com]

It's just meting out technology, at a rate primitive human minds can handle.

Google Monopoly (1)

CSHARP123 (904951) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422990)

So is Google about to offer free Net access to everyone?


At First yes. After they have required number of market share, charges will be applied to anything you do with it. They are a corporation, they have to think of shareholders and their profits. We will be seeing an other company rise to monopoly.

Missing the point (5, Interesting)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422992)

I think that some of us are not paying too much attention. All the buzz lately, in technology communications industries, the USPTO, the FCC, and just about anywhere you turn on the Internet, has been about broadband, wired, wireless, mesh, all kinds of broadband... for Google to buy up a small part of the worlds existing as-yet-unused-broadband infrastructure only means that Google wants to still be relevant in 3 years time. I don't think it means anything more than that... it is what every telecomms company should be doing to ensure relevance in the comming All-IP all the time world.

In other news... (3, Funny)

nmb3000 (741169) | more than 9 years ago | (#13422995)

Google technicians have lost the ability to administer part of their server farm. It appears that a group of systems has independently begun buying up unused networks for a yet unknown purpose. Wireless access points popping up all over the world with the SSID GoogleNet have prompted some paranoid conspiratorialist to claim an autonomous attack on privacy is underway. Others claim it's a plan create an alternative network, and once completed will overcome and destroy the Internet. At this point Google could levy any access fees they feel like and reach total network dominance.

When asked for a comment, a Google representative just shrugged and said, "Uhhh, dunno, but if I don't run I'm going to miss my free lunch."

Re:In other news... (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423097)

How else do you think Skynet controls those giant tanks in Terminator? Wi-Max, that's how. In fact most Terminators are merely controlled via Wi-Max by Google^H^H^H^H^H^HSkyNet. The ones that were sent into the past had to have a large part of SkyNet itself compressed into their systems.

Wi-Max is evil and should be stopped. If all those terminators and tanks and stuff were all connected via very long ethernet cables it would have been easy for us humans to overthrow them.

We have only ourselves to blame for the inevitable future ...

What a team! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13422999)

Google Tarkin and Dark Fiber--only they could be so bold!

Yawn (1)

Jeff Molby (906283) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423012)

If you say so.

Parallel Internet as compared to serialintyernet (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423014)

Instead of transmitting data 1 bit at a time, it will transmit 8 bits, so will be 8 times faster.

What I'd call it (1)

proverbialcow (177020) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423023)

Google Ubiquity.

GoogleNet sounds soooooo 1982.

Google, meet Motorola (3, Insightful)

mosel-saar-ruwer (732341) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423029)


Yo, Eric Schmidt* [cnn.com] , let me tell you about this little debacle called "Iridium", wherein a once proud US technology titan, name of "Motorola" [you might have heard of 'em - back in the day, they had this bitchin' little CPU called the 68000 series], thought they could dominate [maybe even monopolize] the US communications bidness, by launching a whole mess of satellites into geosynchrynous orbit; invested billions of dollars in the thing, which, at one point, was widely believed to have been the largest privately financed infrastructure expenditure in the history of mankind.

Care to venture a guess as to the return on their investment? A big fat goose egg, that's what. Actually even less than that, if you factor in the fees that the bankruptcy lawyers must have charged them.

*It's a real testament to Novell engineering that this moron didn't drive them into bankruptcy, as well...

Parallel/Alternative? (2, Interesting)

hungrygrue (872970) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423032)

I don't quite get the description. It appears that they might provide another avenue for Internet access, and add to existing infrastructure, but how exactly does this ammount to a parallel internet or separate entity from the rest of the internet?

Re:Parallel/Alternative? (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423069)

Well, given the billions of dollars it takes to be a downstream provider and roll out that last mile, I'd say that most likely it would put them in the backbone business, going head-to-head with the likes of AT&T, UUNet and others. Sure, you could call it a "separate Internet" if you like, but if they want to provide services to people they'll have to connect through the "regular Internet". Unlike existing backbone companies, however, Google would probably have uses for that capacity that have nothing to do with simply selling bandwidth.

Wait a second... (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423035)

Didn't I hear that Google hired Al Gore? Maybe they are making their own internet...

Gentlemen, start your .GOO registration engines (5, Funny)

ScentCone (795499) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423036)

Why not. Perhaps it's better if all of the Googleness, including all of the breathless press coverage, could be confined to a stand-alone network. All of those that have been Touched By The Googly Appendage will live blissfully within a completely self-containted universe where all news is about, and reported by Google. CommanderToogle's new site, slashdot.goo, will have new and improved moderation choices:

1) Completely About Google
2) Mostly About Google
3) At Least Somewhat About Google
4) Funny, But Not At Google's Expense
5) Troogle
6) Undergoogled
7) Overgoogled (very rare - can there be too much Google?)

The internets? (1)

SeekerDarksteel (896422) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423050)

Hey, maybe this would bring a whole new meaning to when people talk about "the internets."

Dark Fiber (4, Informative)

AndyST (910890) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423051)

afaik, dark fiber refers to a rented optical fiber without any service attached to it, the customer must deal with light transmitters and receivers, as opposed to a fiber that is live with some IP/tunnel/data/whatever service. Dark fiber does not mean "unused".

Two Sides to that (4, Funny)

infonography (566403) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423136)

While normal Internet companies use lit fiber Google has turned to the Dark Side. I am not sure how what jives with their Don't be Evil policy but consider the cost savings of not having to use light to transmit data. NO bulbs, no receivers no routers. Just pure net to your door. Perhaps the lit fiber is Evil and Google is showing us the way. Without having to mess with light and it's speed limits our browsers will just fly.

Most Geeks will attest to their dislike of the Sun (not SUN MICRO), this will work better as public acceptance grows. No more will we have to waste money on Foreign oil to light our internets.

And most important of all, on a dark internet nobody knows your downloading porn.

Imagine... (1)

DrifterX79 (824302) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423056)

that soon we can be utilizing google's capabilities for piracy.....err wait.... everyone does that now. But a private network controlled by one giant...err wait... isn't that why AOL is failing?

If they are building a big parallel network (1)

Sygiinu (226801) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423062)

you can bet it is for googlegrid (domain names already purchased).

Maybe they can fix spam? (2, Interesting)

JPriest (547211) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423070)

Maybe if they _do_ form their own seperate network they can implement more secure (thus incompatible) mail protocols.

Google levying position vs Cable / Telco Giants (1)

Phalnix (714052) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423085)

As telco companies have been splitup (the babybell's) they've been scrambling to pickup wider markets. Introducing Phone, internet, and TV through yoru phonelines (Yahoo! & SBC are doing it, keep an eye out) Cable companies are following the same practice: Ok we have TV, but now you have dvrs, Home security, and Telephone serivce (voip) As this convergence happens, Google realizes that they were too late to the show. Yahoo! already partnered with SBC, and The cable co's already have thier proprietary technology. Googles response? well Free internet for everyone, why would they pay for the lined services? Dark Fiber + Wireless, is going to allow Google to get its stepping point in, as a 3rd alternative..... I dont see it being a seperate internet, just a rise against the 2 powers : Phone / Cable. take it for what you will.

Re:Google levying position vs Cable / Telco Giants (1)

Phalnix (714052) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423123)

I guess I should have been more specific. Look to Yahoo! offering video broadcasts for what is typically a tv audience show. Basically like Yahoo!'s version of HBO, however begining free, and providing shows like "The Apprentice." This has already started.

Google may just be trying to offer another out, so they dont get swept away, when the grand unification begins.

As good as google is, and as well though out as thier products are. There is only so much you can do against mass commercialization and marketing.

I dont blame them for not wanting to get into a linux vs microsoft type struggle.

wouldnt.. (1)

dotpavan (829804) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423089)

.. it be better if it stays in this sphere and compete with the players, bring innovation here and hence attract more customers than create its own empire where it is the only player and it therefore becomes the king due to lack of players rather than good performance.

google is innovative, and it might be helpful if it stays with the mainstream. a little conservative view..

Will they add a beard to the Google logo? (1)

FrankieBoy (452356) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423109)

"Lieutenant Kyle, your agonizer, please."

I for one... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423116)

welcome our new all-singing all-dancing super-searching masters.

Cheap Broadband for the Proletariat!

Parallel Internet? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#13423120)

This is the one in which Bill Gates has a beard.

Thinking outside the box (Well sorta) (5, Insightful)

bernywork (57298) | more than 9 years ago | (#13423122)

In all honesty, and it's been talked about already in this topic. That Google is simply buying fibre to connect their networks.

Now with the amount of fibre they could be buying, why not put up free access points and come up with a good advertising delivery mechanism behind it. Could well be the targetted location based internet advertising that so many marketing companies have wanted to do for so long. "Buy a coffee at Joe's! Mention this ad an get a free donut!"

As well, could you imagine the communication costs that they are incurring as we speak? The amount of data that would be traversing their network at the moment would be out of control. Why not just buy some fibre now, setup another company to manage it and slash your comms costs? Especially if they are ordering in the hundreds of gigabits of data which I am guessing they probably are (Think about it for a second)..

Gmail going live, there's another few terabytes worth of data burnt each week having to store all that... All the extra internet content that gets loaded on each day, and they have to index it... Site redundancy.... The lists go on and on...

So what if they setup a second internet? Let them! If it encourages competition, why the hell not? MCI and AOL and everyone else isn't exactly going to sit on their hands and let their market dissapear in front of them are they?

In all honesty though, what are the chances of them making a change in business tactic from being a content search facility and marketers to being an internet service provider.. I don't think it fits in with their business model.

The only thing I think they could be doing is connecting datacentres and possibly (Not having seen WHERE they have bought fibre) they could quite easily be trying to get peering arangements with all the major ISPs to try to distribute the input load onto their network as it could quite well just be getting beyond the point of stupidity and manageability.

BTW, how much are they paying Akamai at the moment?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?