Home > Uncategorized > Title goes here

Title goes here

I made a new image for the front end of iggdawg.com. I just wanted something (anything) to replace the boring text file that I had there. Its prime function seemed to be deterring random travellers from actually entering the site. So I surfed till I found something to make fun of the internet with. Since the internet IS a series of tubes, and I fix the internet for a living, I figure this image shows what it must be like to do my job:


Right now it’s just a link that leads to that new blog I mentioned till I get some form of interesting content.

Originally published at The IggBlog. You can comment here or there.

Categories: Uncategorized Tags:
  1. August 10th, 2007 at 17:16 | #1

    His analogy was wrong in the specifics (he was mixing up scales and methods) but, essentially, it IS a series of tubes at least in the sense that electronic data in a wire can be said to be in a “tube”.

    Ted deserved a hammering, but for other, less easily mockable things.

    • August 10th, 2007 at 17:37 | #2

      Even if the analogy was proper, which it really isn’t, his complaint that the “tubes can be filled” with traffic is completely wrong. A huge amount of data circuits are “decentralized”. You have the start and the end points, and they pass through the “internet cloud” via an arbitrary pathing of routers. The protocol in place choses the “path of least resistance” through the ISP’s network, so if one pathing of routers is getting hammered it can go through another. The only place you find congestion is the “last mile” through the customer’s equipment. And a few million people watching youtube has no affect on that whatsoever. The way he was speaking of the internet was as if everyone has a point-to-point connection to some central delivery hub, and that’s just not how it works. Traffic gets routed through the cloud around congestion.

      His analogy of wires to tubes is not really all that bad, but he took it too literally. And his earlier comments about traffic keeping his “internet” from getting to him for like a day really made it look an awful lot like he had no clue what he was talking about. More like he was prepped on how to talk about the internet, and was made to run with it beyond his ability.

      • August 10th, 2007 at 19:23 | #3

        What is the max uncongested capacity of the net then? What would is take, say in the Eastern United States (because at a certain level, the local and intermediate infrastructure matters. If a billion people moved to Tahiti, not only would Tahiti get congested, so would a few layers of connecting lines back from that – probably California, Australia,and Japan.

        Was the telecom claim about improving speed of operations due to YouTube congestion just bogus? What am I missing?

    • August 10th, 2007 at 17:53 | #4

      Sorry for the brain dump. See what happens when you push my “tech” button? Really all I was going for in that image was to make fun of the internet in general, and myself a little in the process.

  1. No trackbacks yet.