Slashdot Mirror
Terabit Fiber (In 2010)
Paul Heavens writes "A Japanese company has developed technology to transmit a two-hour movie in 0.5 seconds, the world's fastest speed achieved with fibre-optic cables in the field, it says. Kansai Electric used fibre-optic cables on power-transmitting steel towers to achieve the speed of one terabit per second, which is more than 100 times faster than inter-city data transmissions currently in use, a spokesman says. The company, Japan's second-largest power supplier, has not decided when to put the technology into practical use but says it is possible that it would come in 2010 or later."
You guys sure know how to bait the MPAA here, don't you?
Yes, but can it stream Linux?
Sorry... had to...
Deja Vu
n. 1. The sensation that you've read this very article before.
Article has little details why is putting fibre-optic cables on power-transmitting steel towers achieves such a speed ?
Visit my site @ http://www.madtorrent.com
How many Volkswagon-sized, Libraries of Congress is that?
Lump lingered last in line for brains, and the ones she got were sorta rotten and insane.
And all the good parts of it before you even click the download button.
could you bump your mtu to 2937498723498, I don't want to keep fragmenting these...
Click here or here.
I'm tired of hearing about all these advances that we will NEVER see. Our public inferstructure budgets are lame, and I'm tired of hearing about a "market-solution". No company is going to spend the massive amount of cash needed to wire even one city with this, especially when there's not much of a percieved market for faster broadband. Why doesn't the FCC get off their ass and mandate this kind of thing instead of doing nothing? Also, why in the world does is this at least 5 years away? I mean, I understand they need to research this and then set up manufacturing and distributing routes, but I just don't understand why that would take more than a year and a half, at most. Stop telling me about things I want, but will never have.
If you throw a 500GB harddrive fo the empire state building, it's not only faster moving data that this, the data is accelerating.
:)
Beat that, japan
That "story" is ridiculously short. What I want to know is, was that over *one* strand of fiber, or a big bundle of fibers with each at a non-record-setting speed?
Ahhh ... just a second ... yep - I've got it right here.
Finally, something to go with http://warp2search.net/modules.php?name=News&file= article&sid=26137
1) They didn't transfer 1 Tbit/s in an actual network, at least it appears that way if you RTFA. I am more impressed with Bell Labs 100 Gbit/s in actual ethernet reported a few weeks ago. As far as I know they could have measured the rate photons got from point A to point B in the cable, worthless statistics, like measuring the speed of electricity.
2) According to other news entries like RTFA, they don't contain any info whatsoever about how the company actually conducted the test. One source, Returters IIRC, says it's "secret". Right.
It seems finally the cables are capable of more bandwidth than a wagon of harddrives...
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
One terabit of network bandwidth ought to be enough for anybody.
I work in a multinational Japanese company. The project management is dire. There is no real structure, just groups of individuals working independently. If things are successful it tends to be through luck or through stressful last minute overdrives. It makes me wonder how the Japanese succeed with these projects while the west lags behind.
But by the time this technology becomes widely used, assuming something faster isn't found by then, we may very well have low-end home systems that can easily handle that much data.
1 Tb of data is approximately 125 GB. The movie they're talking about is half of that, thus 62 GB. And that's probably not compressed. A PC with even just 64 GB of RAM could easily buffer such a movie in-RAM. With 500 GB hard drives being fairly mainstream today, saving such films isn't even that much of an issue, even without taking into account possible space savings via compression.
It's more data that most common people work with now, but overall it really isn't a whole lot.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
The article mentions no details of what this bad boy will actually cost. If it's too expensive, who will actually use it?
Monstar L
I wish my hard drive could keep up with that transfer rate...
We all hope that within 2010 there will be a switching/routing product with enough power to handle such a fast link
I fear that as of today even the fastest links between RAM and CPUs are not enoufh for that!
So that Japanease company is now to partner with someone to investigate/study/implement such an I/O monster!
Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
And a 3 year service committment, penalties apply for early termination. Other services will be bundled on exclusive basis including phone, video which are charged on a per service subscription basis as well.
Remember, Americans; the FCC is designed to screw you.
I would have thought that kind of news would have been on their website.
Nope. Other cool stuff in there R&D section, plus an apology for an accident..
So whats up?
Slow website admin or is this one of those "articles" that appear on slow news days?
Now we humans just need a way to watch that 2 hour long movie in 0.5 seconds
Over the years, I've been tracking the waiting attention span on my downloads and those who got from me. I've ran BBSes since 1200 baud modems were $500.
The 3 minute mark seems consistent over the years as the shortest period of time necessary to acquire something of value. Shorter times are nice but not needed.
To download a 2 hour HiDef movie in 3 minutes, we'd need a connection speed of 222mb/s (28MB/s). I can see little need for a format beyond this at any time in the future. In fact, in 1993 I figured a preferred video resolution would be 2560x1440, not much greater than 1920x1080.
We'll soon see posts about how corporations won't want to spend money running these fibers to the home, but this is pure bullshit. Cities prevent more cable runs, not economics.
Municipal Wi i is a huge waste due to ever increasing wired bandwidths and the costs and latencies of government changes would never keep up with free market changes.
Allow ISPs the freedom to run fiber. Deregulate TV and radio frequencies in exchange for more wireless frequencies. You'll see the most amazing growth of information distribution in history.
Aye Chihuahua!
:|
I'm glad I clicked the link to see the rest of the story
If only 10 gigabit upload service for the user was widely available, one could imagine some great solutions to the problem of offsite backups (perhaps 20 minutes per terrabyte, allowing for necessary overhead in the transfer). Could this be Google's challenge for the next decade?
In the '60s, probably centered on the CDC 6600, an idea was promoted that a balanced' computer would have capabilities in a ratio. The 3 M's was one with 1 MIPS, 1 mbps, and 1 megabit of memory. So, it could executed 1,000,000 instructions per second, communicate to disk at 1,000,000 bits per second (100,000 bytes per second) and had 1,000,000 bits of RAM (one system had 130,000 bytes of RAM, for example).
The box i'm using to edit this note executes on the order of 1 GIPS, with 100 mbps, and 10 gigabits of memory. That is 1,000,000 instructions per second, 100,000,000 bits per second (10,000,000 bytes per second) to disk, and has on the order of 10,000,000,000 bits of RAM (1 GB). (These numbers are rounded, and, no, i'm not terribly interested in my-box-is-faster-than-yours pissing matches - its just an example).
So, if communications speeds will be 1,000,000,000,000 bits per second anywhere by 2010, that implies a computer with at lest 10 GIPS and 10 GB RAM - which doesn't seem that unlikely in five years.
Oddly enough, I'm hoping to still be running this box in five years. Its only two years old, and I don't really want to get a new one. That is, i don't want to spend the money to replace it. More importantly, i don't want to do the administration involved to get a new machine up and running with my current set of capabilities. I ran my 1987 Machintosh II as my primary machine for over ten years and the hardware lasted an additional five years (and counting) to allow for transfer of data. It pisses me off that my most long-lived x86 based PC has lasted only five years. So, i've just finished migrating from the Mac to Linux, and the Mac (with OS/x) now appears to be the better choice (low administrative maintenance) again.
With the recent announcement of low power PPC chips, perhaps Apple will abandon its move to the x86 hardware platform. Still, i've been pretty happy so far with my low-end Athlon's performance and reliability. Who knows? Perhaps i'd be happy with OS/x on AMD.
-- Stephen.
I don't understand the big deal here. Nobody runs a single strand of fiber; if you're going to be laying fiber in the streets, you put 100s (if not 1000s) of strands in there, "just in case". How is 1Tbps over 1 fiber any better than 1Tbps over 100 strands @ 10Gbps/strand (as is easily achievable today)?
The only thing I am worried about is how much faster can I obtain all the internet porn?
This is not a big stretch. You can buy 32 wavelength x 10 Gbps DWDM systems from a number of vendors. That's 320 Gbps per fiber pair, 1/3 of what this article is claiming. Some of these systems are "40 Gbps ready". There's just not the demand for 40 Gbps line cards yet. With 40 Gbps inputs these same systems can carry 1.2 Tbps.
:-)
So the interesting question is not whether it was 1 Tbps on a single fiber (not new tech), but whether it was on a single wavelength, and at what distance. The article doesn't say.
But the article doesn't say "terabit" either. 1 Terabit/second == 125 Gigabytes/second. Or 62.5 GB in half a second. That's a rather big movie file. I guess it's not in mpeg4.
And meanwhile, here in the US, I will still be paying outrageous prices for 16Mb/s connections
It is only impressive if they are doing it by using a single wavelength on the fiber. Systems that could transmit over a terabit on a fiber have been around since the internet boom. See for example:
http://www.ciena.com/products/products_261.htm
Look under Scalable Capacity about two thirds down the page. They can to 1.9 Tb and have been in production for years.
This article, like every other one we read these days, is not reporting, it's public relations. Even the point quoted in the summary, "2 hour movie in 0.5 seconds", is useless for anything but getting a technohick to say "wow". Because no user can get that speed, even just due to RAM/CPU speeds, or will, because they certainly won't be the only user sharing the bandwidth. And because a "movie" is an undefined quantity, especially now that we're dealing not only with DVD and its incompatible competing successors, but also digital cinemas. This reporter could have spend a half hour researching (or paying a researcher) to verify and corroborate the accuracy and relevance of the quotes no doubt faxed by the power company's PR department. Instead, the reporter and their editors decided that their story was "news" solely because it's news to them. But not to nerds - to us, it's "Libraries of Congress per second", which was expectable nonsense when reporters hadn't used the Internet. Now that they use these systems as much as we do, it's obvious that what they do ain't reporting, it's typing.
--
make install -not war
Nippon Telegram and Telephone had succeeded 3Tbps transimission on single optical fiber six years ago. Then what Kansai Electric achieved? They claims terabit transmission in OUTDOOR environment is the first time in the history. See http://www.kepco.co.jp/pressre/2005/1026-1j.html for detailed Kansai Electric's press release, unfortunately written in Japanese.
Mabey by then I could get DSL in my area.
Tb = Terabit = 0.125 TB = 125 GB
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
And if anything, it's worse. performing DWDM (dense wavelength division multiplexing - this fiber most likely carries 1024 or more slower channels that add up to a total 1 Tb/sec capacity) is difficult, more difficult than taking seperate fibers and connecting them to individual machines.
retrorocket.o not found, launch anyway?
Time for internet bootable computers?
Imagine the distributed processing potential of this?
Applicaton and OS rental?
Videophone/videoconferencing almost indistinguishable from being there?
Would it bring new meaning to installing Debian directly from the internet?
Nevermind all that, fire up the Quake server. Deathmatch anyone? Give me a connection like that and will be the LPB from hell.
Can you please read the goddamn topic summary? Like it clearly says, we're discussing data transmission speeds of "one terabit per second."
Please don't join into our discussions if you don't even know what we're talking about.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
...is that different from non-Japanese multinationals?
0.5 seconds? But I want it now!
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of data tapes."
I mean, we all run the same type of hard drives that can barely get over 10 megs of transfer speed a second (if you have a raptor or perhaps a raid array), so why are all these people trying to break the latest record? Where is that going to get us besides making these lines of transmit our backbones for the internet? And my second question is, how did they do this.... did they store the movie in a ramdrive of some sort and transfer it to a ramdrive, becuase its obvious its not possible with CONVENTIONAL rotary drives.
Perhaps a subtler question would we whether they used one wavelength or multiple wavelengths. Modern long-distance fiber optic systems can run several hundred OC-192s over one fiber pair (one strand in each direction) using dense wavelength division multiplexing (DWDM), and can easily exceed 1tbps.
The pages are in japanese but Kansai Electric has a subsidiary- K-Optic ISP. . K-Optic started 1 gigabit shared internet service in september, 05.
For more details on why such high speed access is taking root in japan, read this article from foreignaffairs.org. Broadband nation
Face it, telcos are in it to make money, not serve the public interest.
Are you expecting a capitalist to argue against this statement? There's not really a lot to face, here.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
CNIT in Italy has reached up to 2.5 Tb/s; I do not know the details, but I once witnessed a presentation by one of their scientists, Gianluca Meloni. He seem to have a paper published in proceedings of ECOC 2005, called "10GHz to 2.5THz Optical Frequency Multiplication". Surely that contains more information.
:-)
By the way -- 0.5s * 1Tb/s = 500 Gbit = 64 GByte = 58 GiByte. Pretty long movie, I'd say
Speaking of which, Jack Valenti has used information like this in his MPAA stump speech. Last year, Valenti was an invited speaker at the Roger Ebert Overlooked Film Festival. He spoke at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign in the Pine Lounge of the Illini Union. He gave his usual emotional arguments including how researchers can transmit a 2-hour movie in some short period of time.
It was a one-sided venue, by design. Nobody but the audience was there to speak against any of his points. Apparently, Ebert doesn't want an informative discussion expressing an array of views, so he won't invite articulate speakers like Siva Vaidhyanathan, Prof. Lawrence Lessig, or those who back interesting copyright bills like the old HR2601, the Public Domain Enhancement Act. So giving context with some copyright history, responding to his arguments including Constitutional interpretation, and generally explaining the social value of a leaky copyright system is left up to people who happen to be in the room.
Digital Citizen
1Tb/s? Waste of money, if you ask me. 640K/s should be enough for anybody.
Municipal WiFi/WiMax is a huge waste due to ever increasing wired bandwidths and the costs and latencies of government changes would never keep up with free market changes.
Municipalities are putting up WiFi/WiMax because businesses won't. If they did then local governments won't feel the need to install WiFi/WiMax. Fact is the only way some localities will only get broadband, wired or wireless, is if they put it up themselves. Don't get me wrong, I don't want taxes used to pay for any of it. It should instead be supported by subscribers, er those who use it. It should also be run by business(es) and/or other organizations. What the government can do is issue munis to pay for the infratructure and then have the service payoff the munis.
Deregulate TV and radio frequencies in exchange for more wireless frequencies.
Get rid of the FCC period.
FaclonShould there be a Law?
Don't you mean Liberal and capitalist? Adam Smith who's considered the father of capitalism believed in small government and freedom and was very much a liberal. Unfortunately all too many people confuse their Classical Liberalism with how the word is used today, which isn't the liberalism of small governement or liberty at all.
FalconShould there be a Law?
If you get rid of the FCC there will be no wireless that is even remotely useable. There would be mass chaos,
There might be chaos for a short period but not for long. Chaos will rob businesses of profits and they will be forced to self regulate. Simply mass media won't be able to deal with interference from competitors. If company A were to say increase their broadcasting power this would interfer with company B's broadcasting so B would increase their transmission's power which would interfer with A and with Company C. So either they would get together to eliminate interference each causes the other or they will end up in an arms race. Aa an arms race would increase their costs while reducing income it's more likely they would cooperate to find an answer acceptable to all parties. Quite simply the FCC was started in an era where the airwaves amd communications were limited. The broadcasting technology of that tyme needed a relatively large spectrum of airwaves to broadcast without interference, however using today's tech the bandwidth needed is much more narrow. Fact is today it's the FCC and regulations that prevents or hinders broad availability of wireless broadband and other technologies. "Reason" magazine earlier this year or late last year had an article on this. And the CATO Institute had some studies on it also. You may mention these are slanted to the freemarket but the FCC is biased as well. On the technical front the "IEEE Spectrum had an article on this in the print issue earlier as well saying somwhat the same, that FCC regulations were appropriate at first but that as tech has advanced these old regulations are now hindering advancements, availability of technology.
FalconShould there be a Law?
We don't even use the fibre we have available today. So what's the point?
D00d - like - my Quake 4 ping time will totally rock with this ...
---- "Logoff! That cookie shit makes me nervous!" - A. Soprano
I WANT IT NOW! But then again the other components of the machine wouldn't really be able to keep uo so it isn't the best thing ever made.
Have a good life, earth.
Except that those 8 Opterons still share the same bus
Not necessarily. NUMA is more than just a web fad based on a fat guy lip-syncing to an O-Zone song. Non-Uniform Memory Access refers to an architecture in which each CPU has some of the memory directly connected to it for fast access, but all the CPUs can see all the memory. I'd imagine that it might be possible to do something similar for channel bonded network connections too.
Besides, channels of this speed are typically handled by router ASICs, not CPUs, especially inside Cisco routers (which don't let you see that thong either).
There is 15TB of pr0n movies in existence: 7.2TB of that is made in Japan, and 7.5TB of the remainder contains Ron Jeremy.
The only reason it goes so fast is because the data is going from top to bottom on the towers. Everyone knows the speed of light changes as it accelerates downhill! If they had transmitted from the bottom up I bet it wouldn't have even made it all the way...
...for the first time, my pr0n would finish up before I did?
With speeds like this I'm giving up the Wifi version, but only after I've teleported cables there.
Busy aligning my non-linear thoughts.