It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Science Breakthrough. Internet 100x faster - at no extra cost.

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:
MBF

posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 10:21 PM
link   
I connect at 21.6K, I just don't see anything getting much slower. ANYTHING would be a big help.




posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:16 PM
link   
Lol, I feel for you, I used to connect at those speeds... of course, that was back in 1998. I can't imagine going back to that.


Now, I've noticed a few people with misconceptions on this topic.

No, modems aren't going to have to be upgraded. This technology does NOT apply to modems. It applies to the switches on the internet itself... here.


[YOU] -> [ISP's local hub] -> [ISP's main hub] -> [International hubs... lots of them] -> [ATS's Server Hosts ISP's Hub] -> [ATS's Server Hosts Hub] -> [ATS's server]

That is a generalized description of what you're connecting to when you connect to a website, like ATS. (Very generalized, don't flame, I know it's incomplete and basic, I used to work in the industry).

It's the International hubs (switches) that would get the big speed boost out of this. EVERYONE transmits through those things, and the bottleneck effect caused by this is incredible.

If the ISP is rich enough to afford fiber lines out to the international hubs, they might consider using this on their own personal switches as well. But it's not likely.


So no, your modem wont be upgraded, and your ISP will likely not be upgraded either. Its the international hubs which lease connections to the ISP's that will be doing the upgrading on their end.


Unfortunately for the above poster (I turn attention back to you now), your connection wont improve because of this. You are limited by your modem too much to enjoy the benefits of any upgrades on the switches end. This will affect broadband users only I'm afraid.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:21 PM
link   
I have a feeling this technology will finally make the telecoms comfortable with turning Multicast on finally, if this percolates down to the neighborhood switch level that is.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by sardion2000
 


I can't see this making it to the neighborhood switches... but hey, I'm willing to admit I can be wrong... who knows, this may be the trigger that causes ISP's to want to push more into fiber optics.

But for the meantime, I can't see it being financially feasible for them.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:41 PM
link   
Faster internet = faster loading advertisements. Yay etc bleh meh.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:42 PM
link   
this is an excellent find!!!

i have see quantum computing done with photonics (theoretically) using excitons, phonons, or plasmons (and usually some kind of quantum tunneling effect) to act as a 'switch' for the circuit. this methodology is so simple it is elegant and beautiful.

you gotta love it when someone comes along with the most simple solution. when someone asks what time it is, you don't always have to build an atomic clock.



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dulcimer
Faster internet = faster loading advertisements. Yay etc bleh meh.


Flashblock ftw!



posted on Jul, 9 2008 @ 11:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnsky
reply to post by sardion2000
 


I can't see this making it to the neighborhood switches... but hey, I'm willing to admit I can be wrong... who knows, this may be the trigger that causes ISP's to want to push more into fiber optics.

But for the meantime, I can't see it being financially feasible for them.


Multicasting is what will make it feasible. It will give the Megacorp Media Telecom corporations a vast distribution channel for video on demand services. Being able to stream in real time Hi Def content is going to need some MAJOR neighborhood switch improvements because that is where most of my connection problems are coming from because most of the people using Bell in my area use it for Torrents and
Kazaa or Limewire
as well as Youtube and a bunch of other sites as well. (I live next to a low income housing coop where Piracy is rampant) As a response Bell has already been laying Fiber in our area for the last two years, they just connected my house up to the new network. It's much snappier(very very low latency now as opposed to just average a few months ago) though it still peaks at 5 Mbps. (Advertised as 7
)



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 09:12 AM
link   
Im thinking that the trend towards billing for internet usage is going more and more towards actuall usage. My internet in a crappy little town on the caost of washington has gone form 40 a month to 150 a month because i use so much band width. So im thinki9ng that any increase like this will be throttled unless you want to pay the big bucks.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 09:53 AM
link   
No extra cost!


When has a large telecommunications company ever given it's customers something for nothing, even if that's what it cost them!!



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 10:32 AM
link   
My uncle is an internet engineer, and he's working in that kind of stuff. He said to me last week that a new technology 32 times faster than the highest bandwith on optic fiber could be reached with no change on technology... only changing the signal.

So we could all have 1 gigabit connections with the technology already installed in our home, with no extra cost. Of course this will only work if you already have optic fiber in your home... imagine that, we could put everything in that... internet acces, phone and TV, in the same cable.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 10:38 AM
link   
Yeah I've heard of that, though this is not that I believe. This article is talking about a new type of switch. It is possible that the author of the article doesn't know a switch from a signal however.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
I'm amazed everyone posting in this thread has completely missed the point of this "discovery" and how it ties in with another recent news topic.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

You make the speeds faster, suddenly you've got people who, instead of reaching their cap and going into extra cost per gig mode with a few days left in their billing cycle, are now exceeding their limit in the first week of their billing cycle. Anyone who's ever had a cell phone and accidentally exceeded their monthly minutes knows what I'm getting at. You get you bill and open it, expecting to see your usual $70 a month bill and instead you're confronted with a $275 "WTF!?!?" bill thanks to accidentally going over by an hour and a half for the month. This will equate to the exact same thing. Figure that the average person spends 1 hour a day online (ha ha!) surfing various websites. We are selective in what we download and watch from sites like youtube and various news/entertainment video links because even with broadband right now there are some sites where you have to sit for a minute or two before the video is downloaded, buffered, and ready to play. Now imagine that process was smooth and took only a matter of seconds. You could accidentally click on a link to a 50 MB video file and by the time you click cancel it's already halfway downloaded... whoops, in 5 seconds you've just used up a sizeable chunk of your monthly bandwidth.

So this "at no extra cost" yeah, riiiight! The extra costs will find you one way or another.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by burdman30ott6
 


that is not a correct assumption. Part of the reason companies are tyring to meter bandwidth usage is because of congestion on their servers. If you can increase the speed that the switches process requests, you decrease the load on the servers.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


That's the excuse they have used. Do you really believe that once bandwidth caps and overlimit charges have been enacted the providers will remove them and go back to one price for everyone if their congestion issues go away? When in the history of capitalism, aside from commodities, has this ever happened?



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 04:16 PM
link   
I think this switching technology would reduce the LATENCY perhaps by a "up to" 100 times -- not necessarily the speed.

Then we need a technology, to make the Telcos pay for the $500 Billion in infrastructure the taxpayer gave them, and invest in this with new subscribers, not use MORE customers as an excuse to throttle bandwidth.

"Hey, you got more business -- oh no, that's just going to mean more infrastructure! Time to raise prices." Wow, there goes the pipe dream of the invisible hand of the marketplace making things more efficient and cheaper.

Notice how communications is NOT getting cheaper while technology is? A computer can be bought for $500 or you can upgrade Windows and Microsoft Office. One is an actual competitive market and the other is the example of a monopoly or cartel. Communications in this country is a Cartel.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by burdman30ott6
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
 


That's the excuse they have used. Do you really believe that once bandwidth caps and overlimit charges have been enacted the providers will remove them and go back to one price for everyone if their congestion issues go away? When in the history of capitalism, aside from commodities, has this ever happened?


every time competition has caused it. Consider wireless. Each provider throws out freebies as gimmicks. Free nights and weekends, myfaves....

T-Mobile (one of ATS bigger advertisers) just launched hotspot@home as an entry into landline business. It is freaking brilliant, and if they succeed, the pressure on landline companies will be excruciating. and Verizon will be forced to reconsider their bundled packages (and the infrastructure that lies therein, especially in the face of 3G technology).

the free market provides for exactly what you refer to, as the provider competes for customers.

That is why telecom was deregulated...to provide for more competition. Right now the infrastructure hasn't grown as fast as the technology has (who COULD keep up with something like the tech boom? it was just yesterday we were all on 56k modems), and servers are becoming clogged trying to process these requests. not only are we doing more streaming, but we are doing it in multiple windows. I will open four or five video's at once, and pause them all while i go through and watch them. It is nice to not have to buffer.


Once you alleviate the bottlenecks, you begin to stabilize the "supply and demand" a little more. this will allow providers to start offering "unlimited" packages again to woo new customers.



posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Sorry if someone posted this before. cause the time I spend on this site increases with everyday so I connot possibly read every post anymore. But this was mentioned on the Howard Stern show on Sirrius Radio but the difference was they were talking about utilizing the TV broadcast channels after the HI DEF kicks in . Supposedely if thoose frequencies are used for the internet we could all enjoy a 100X or more times boost without paying a dime. But dont forget you never get something for nothing. And it will probably never happen unless someone can find a way to make a profit or to market your web searches for cash.. Money makes the world go round.




top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join