Slashdot Mirror


The Information Factories Are Here

prostoalex writes, "Wired magazine has coined a new term for the massive data centers built in the Pacific Northwest by Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo! Cloudware is, ironically, a return of the centralized data and bandwidth power houses caused by the decentralized and distributed nature of the Internet. George Gilder thinks we're witnessing something monumental: 'According to Bell's law, every decade a new class of computer emerges from a hundredfold drop in the price of processing power. As we approach a billionth of a cent per byte of storage, and pennies per gigabit per second of bandwidth, what kind of machine labors to be born? How will we feed it? How will it be tamed? And how soon will it, in its inevitable turn, become a dinosaur?'"

27 of 126 comments (clear)

  1. Supply of fiber too low for a revolution? by Salvance · · Score: 4, Insightful

    At some point massive data centers won't provide incremental benefits unless the massive increases in processing power are met with proportional decreases in bandwidth prices. Sure, bandwidth prices have dropped, but not by nearly the rate of price/teraflop processing has. Companies like Google recognize this, and are investing in their own fiber to compensate. But the telecommuncations companies are the ones that originally build these lines, and it's unfortunately in their best interest to keep the supply of spare bandwidth very low.

    --
    Crack - Free with every butt and set of boobs
  2. Synonym Myths. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    " And how soon will it, in its inevitable turn, become a dinosaur?'"

    I don't know if you realize this, but the idea that dinosaurs were an incapable species is a myth? They obviously didn't last millions of years because of any defects. But when a big-ass meteor comes crashing into the planet, any species capable or not would be hard-pressed to survive.

  3. it's people by User+956 · · Score: 5, Funny

    what kind of machine labors to be born? How will we feed it? How will it be tamed? And how soon will it, in its inevitable turn, become a dinosaur?

    How will we feed it? Read the article about the robot that identifies human flesh as bacon and see if that answers your question.

    --
    The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
    1. Re:it's people by gramji · · Score: 3, Funny

      or for the movie freak - Humans as batteries (The Matrix).

      --
      Open Source and Computer-aided Design (http://ossandcad.blogspot.com)
  4. Losing the difference between here and there by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    When we look at our current situation, we see that we have data 'here' and data 'there'. When we want to have more data, we need to go 'there' to bring the data 'here' for viewing. In the most extreme (and common) case, the data is only temporarily copied from 'there' to 'here' and once we are done with the data it is deleted from 'here'.

    The future will eliminate that differentiation. Data will not be 'here' or 'there'. Rather, it will be. Data will simply exist and we will access it as if it were immediately 'here' all the time.

    It will take quite a bit more technology to make this a reality, but the Internet is the first baby step away from separation of data repository and the user. Now, users can access data 'there' on a browser which is 'here' with a few keystrokes. In the future, this action of 'getting' data will be eliminated completely.

    How I think that will occur is neither here nor there, but I guarantee that this is what will happen.

    1. Re:Losing the difference between here and there by caluml · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Data will simply exist and we will access it as if it were immediately 'here' all the time.

      And precisely where will this data be stored, and how will it get to us? It's not some entity, omnipresent, floating around everywhere, that you can put your hand up, and pull out a load of data.
      It has to be stored somewhere. And it has to get from where it's stored to where it's needed.

    2. Re:Losing the difference between here and there by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Where is the data for Yahoo!s servers located? Where is the data for Microsoft's servers located?

      Your GMail account's data? Do you know where that is?

      No, of course you don't. Because you don't need to. You log in, access the data from the intarweb, fiddle with it, then log off. You aren't doing any of the copying, and the physical location of the data is totally irrelevant for all intents and purposes.

      The intartubes are the first step towards removing the requirement of "transferring" data. While some data is pretty well virtualized, a lot of it like files over FTP and large downloads over HTTP are still cumbersome. Beyond that, there is still a differentiation between files on your computer and files on the Web. Why should you need physical access to your computer to access some files? Why do you need to connect via VPN to access those same files from a remote location?

      When all things are connected seamlessly you won't ask where the data is stored because it won't matter. What matters is only your ability to access it when you need it.

  5. Why Gilder Is Telecosmically Wrong by miller60 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Everything is getting cheaper but power, which for some data centers now costs more than hardware. Nicholas Carr explains why Gilder's assumptions are problematic:

    "What Gilder calls 'petascale computing' is anything but free. The marginal cost of supplying a dose of processing power or a chunk of storage may be infinitesimal, but the fixed costs of petascale computing are very, very high. Led by web-computing giants like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Ask.com, companies are dumping billions of dollars of capital into constructing utility-class computing centers. And keeping those centers running requires, as Gilder himself notes, the "awesome consumption" of electricity"

    As I noted in our commentary at Data Center Knowledge, the power issues with high-density blade server computing has been understood for years. Back in 2002, Liebert and APC and other equipment vendors were developing products that could address huge heat loads. They saw it coming, and sensed a market opportunity. So where were the chip makers? Even as cooling vendors prepared for the results of the huge power and heat loads, little was done to address their source.

    1. Re:Why Gilder Is Telecosmically Wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's what I'm concerned about. We already have problems supplying human society with enough electricity. These data centers are being situated near power centers like the hydroelectric dams of the Pacific Northwest.

      How long will it be until we start running into dilemmas concerned with whether data centers or people have priority over available electricity?

      Has this already happened?

      Once the economy cannot operate without the data centers, do we reach a scenario where keeping the data centers running must have priority over supplying electricity to homes?

      At what point do the machines decide that instead of competing with humans for power, humans would make a useful power source?

      (hm, interesting..."please type the word in this image: 'autonomy' ")

  6. The machine that labors... by tcopeland · · Score: 5, Funny

    > "what kind of machine labors to be born?"

    As the saying goes, don't anthropomorphize machines: they hate that.

  7. death of copyrights by argoff · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What is going to happen, or what is happening, is that the service value of information is exceeding the content value of information, and will continue to do so at a greater rate from now on. The information age is doing to information services what the industrial revolution did for production. Eventually, information restrictions like copyrights will be such an incredible and annoying hinderence on providing information services that the financial pressure to kill them will become unbearable.

    1. Re: death of copyrights by dch24 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      the service value of information is exceeding the content value of information
      Eventually, information restrictions like copyrights will be such an incredible and annoying hinderence on providing information services that the financial pressure to kill them will become unbearable.
      I think you've got it. The Ask Slashdot - How Do You Make a Profit While Using Open Source? - is demonstrating the same thing: Open Source software is one more way in which the service value of having all the source code outweighs the value of executing the code.

      Whether it's the MPAA/RIAA, or Microsoft, the meteor has hit the ground. The dinosaurs that cannot adapt may make a lot of noise in their death throes, but they will fade into irrelevance.

      I think the .com crash is evidence of how poorly the mainstream understands this. Some of them talk about "Software As A Service," or "Video On Demand," but that's just commoditizing bandwidth instead of the physical media of the '90's. Open Source and Google will wipe them out by delivering more value.
      my 2 cents.

      [ Parent ]
  8. Re:power doubles about every two years by 80+85+83+83+89+33 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    the saying goes that computing power doubles every 24 months. but i have found that in the real world, the number is closer to 30 months.

    the benchmark: Content Creation Winstone 2000. it works out all the parts of a pc.

    (under windows 2000):

    (introduced in May 1997)
    intel pentium II 300Mhz
    score: 15

    (introduced in Oct 1999)
    intel pentium III 733Mhz
    score: 30

    thats 29 months to double

    under windows 98SE:

    april 1998
    intel pentium II 400Mhz
    score: 19.5

    nov 2000
    intel pentium 4 1500Mhz
    score: 42

    thats 31 months to double

    OUTLOOK FOR NEXT FIFTY YEARS
    (for thirty month performance doubling rate):

    in 30 months: TWICE the performance.
    in 60 months: FOUR TIMES the performance. ...
    in 25 years we will have ONE THOUSAND times the performance.
    and, in 50 years we will have ONE MILLION TIMES THE PERFORMANCE!!!!!!!


    will that finally be enough to make our computers as smart as we are? how many watts of electricity will it consume?

    CPUmark99 doubling:
    24 months

    sysmark 2000 double time: 27 months

    ccwinstone04 double times 30 months

    --
    i disable sigs
  9. The last page of TFA... by d474 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    This is pretty cool writing:
    "The next wave of innovation will compress today's parallel solutions in an evolutionary convergence of electronics and optics: 3-D and even holographic memory cells; lasers inscribed on the tops of chips, replacing copper pins with streams of photons; and all-optical networks in which thousands of colors of light travel along a single fiber. As these advances find their way into an increasing variety of devices, the petascale computer will shrink from a dinosaur to a teleputer - the successor to today's handhelds - in your ear or in your signal path. It will access a variety of searchers and servers, enabling participation in metaverses beyond the ken of even Ray Kurzweil's prophetic imagination. Moreover, it will link to trillions of sensors around the globe, giving it a constant knowledge of the physical state of the world, from traffic conditions to the workings of your own biomachine."
    Makes me want to read a William Gibson novel.
    --
    Authority questions you. Return the favor.
    1. Re:The last page of TFA... by radtea · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As these advances find their way into an increasing variety of devices, the petascale computer will shrink from a dinosaur to a teleputer - the successor to today's handhelds - in your ear or in your signal path.

      Technological prognostications are almost always wrong in two directions.

      1) The ability of current tech to scale up indefinitely is always eventually proven false. For six decades new aircraft designed increased their average crusing speed from about 100 mph in 1920 to 700 mph in the 70's. Then they stopped getting faster, and have been at just under 600 mph ever since. The jump to 700 mph in the '70's was with the introduction of the Concord, which also gave the average crusing speed a huge variance. No one knows what the "speed of sound" for computing will be, and as always it will be a matter of economics rather than pure technological possibility, but what we do know is that it is out there somewhere, and eventually we will hit it, although possibly not for some decades yet.

      2) The uses to which tech is put, the directions and consequences of the speed and size improvements that do happen, are always almost completely wrong, as are the costs. As Asimov once said, the challenge is not to predict the automobile but the parking problem. Lots of people predicted some of the social consequences of the 'Net, but I don't think anyone predicted spam. These sorts of things may create limits that come into play earlier than other economic limits (and not incidently, create major opportunities for companies with solutions able to overcome them.)

      As near as I can tell, the "parking problem" of the brave new world of ubiquitous interconnected computing, is the identity issue. Computers deal with proxies for everything. Unlike human beings, they are a realization of Plato's Cave, dealing only with the numerical shadows of reality. And one shadow can be made to look very much like another.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
  10. I have signed up for S3 and EC2 by MarkWatson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ... but I have not used them yet. My plans are to use EC2 for occasional machine learning or neural network training runs instead of tying up my own computers. I wrote about this on my AI blog (http://artificial-intelligence-theory.blogspot.co m/2006/08/using-amazons-cloud-service-for.html) a while back.

    In general, I think that it makes sense to "outsource" basic infrastructure. I used to run my own servers, but after figuring the costs for electricity, bandwidth, and hardware costs, I switched to leasing two managed virtual servers - paying for the CPU, memory, and bandwidth resources that I need. I view Amazon's EC2 service the same way: when I need a lot of CPU time over a short time interval, simply buy it.

  11. Earth History 2025 by secondhand_Buddah · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...and in 2025 the Galactic publishing company, well known for their travel guide, The Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy, bought Google to include their data as a subset of the entry of a little planet in the backwaters of the universe, called earth. Just in case someone wished to travel there ....

    --
    Participatory Governance : The only feasible option for a real democracy, where everyone really does have a say.
  12. It doesn't matter by sillybilly · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't matter if computing performance doubles if the software that runs on it decays in performance at an even greater rate. Back in 1988 MSDOS used to boot in less than 10 seconds after the BIOS POST. Who cares if you'll have software with features greater than your brain, with capacity to even guess your thoughts, wishes and desires, if it will just do what you want without mouseclicks of speech commands, who cares for all these features if it takes 5 years to boot up on a computer a gazillion times faster than today's computers, and its processing speed is uttering 3 words per decade while consuming 900 gigawatt of electric power? Case in point: Windows Vista.

  13. I have a weird related story... by Sargeant+Slaughter · · Score: 3, Interesting

    One day, about 4+ years ago, when I was working at a porn shop, this Russian computer scientist came in. He seemed pretty smart and was yakkin about optical computers and some project he had worked on in the 90's in Russia or something. Anyway, he said this would happen, the return of the paralell mainframe. He said that we were reaching the limits of current silicon and copper materials. With optical still a long way out, he said we would probably build mainframes for a while again. He also said CPUs made out of diamonds with optical high speed interfaces were the future but nobody was putting money into it (for various reasons...), and that was why he didn't have a job. He said he figured companies would be clamoring for peopel like him once the materials, like manufactured diamonds, were more readily available. I still believe him, but nobody ever listens to me when I talk about that guy. I met quite a few kewl people at the 'ole porn ship actually.

    --
    I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand. -Confucius
  14. Yes and no. Mostly you missed the point, sorry by Moraelin · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Even if you take the meteor hypothesis as absolute truth, the fact is: other species survived. Not only mammals, but also lizards. Heck, even some species of dinosaurs survived. (Birds _are_ technically dinosaurs.)

    We're not talking just a massive shockwave killing anything squishy on the planet instantly. Even for the dinosaur there's no D-Day when everyone died. The disappearance of the dinosaurs is a very very very long and gradual period of their declining numbers into extinction. For most of the planet we're talking "just" a climate change. _That_ is what killed the dinosaurs, one way or another. Some species survived that, and in fact even thrived in the new conditions, some species didn't.

    Note however there are more hypotheses about that event. The decline in oxygen content in the air in that period, for example, would also be perfectly enough on its own to make a very large beast non-viable. The change in the flora is another candidate. It's entirely possible that the new kinds of plants were either toxic or not nutrient-rich enough for the old lizards.

    At any rate, what killed the dinosaurs was _change_. Something changed (take your pick what you think was the killer change there). And some species could deal with it, some species didn't. Dinosaurs (except birds) didn't cope well with the change and their numbers went downhill from there.

    Yes, they were a capable species for the old environment, but then the environment changed. And the dinosaurs were suddenly very incapable in the new environment.

    So, yes, the dinosaurs are the _perfect_ metaphor for someone or something who can't cope with a change and becomes obsolete.

    Change happens. One day you have a nice business hammering scythes and sickles for a village, and the next day someone goes and buys a tractor and a combine harvester and everyone wants _those_. Or you have a nice job calculating tables of numbers by hand and then the CEO goes and buys one of those new "computers". Tough luck. Either you adapt or you're a dinosaur.

    It happens with computers and programmers/admins/whatever every day. And some people adapt, some become relics trying to stop progress and return to the good old days. God knows half of the IT departments at big corporations have too many of _those_. Maybe they were once capable and competent. The dinosaurs were too at one point. Now they no longer are. And just like the dinosaurs, sadly it takes a long long time to gradually get rid of those relics. But just like the dinosaurs they _are_ on a slow painful path to extinction.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  15. I'm sorry by Colin+Smith · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The future will eliminate that differentiation. Data will not be 'here' or 'there'. Rather, it will be. Data will simply exist and we will access it as if it were immediately 'here' all the time.


    But this is the biggest load of new age bullshit I've heard in years.

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:I'm sorry by oc255 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      But this is the biggest load of new age bullshit I've heard in years.

      No need to get all worked up, you'll never see it.

      I'd say with enough memory on the user's machine, there would be no concern about storing information twice. Just as a BS example, imagine they get something like atomic memory working where a sugar-cube sized device can cache all the information we have. Now imagine that we have perfected quantum teleportation (I know, I know). All data could be replicated and cached instantly and there would be no delay in keeping the massive distributed grid sync'd. In this case, I nod at the OP. The data is just here or even there. It's all just existing.

      Of course, the flipside is that tech will just complicate itself into a giant mess. And even though we have instant ISPs, we can't find the Linux driver to make our quantum modem work. Ok, so then you find the driver but the massive amount of traffic causes your 42.0 yottabyte /var parition to fill up with logs because you were running with DEBUG logging.
  16. Re:power doubles about every two years by doti · · Score: 2, Insightful
    will that finally be enough to make our computers as smart as we are?
    Raw power is not what will make computer as smart as we are.
    First, what makes computer "intelligence" is the software, not raw power. And we will need a substantially new software paradigm to get near our intelligence. I can't imagine how software can get consciousness and awareness. There are parts of the human thought that can't be simulated with a series of conditional numeric operations.
    --
    factor 966971: 966971
  17. The future has been forseen by Sierpinski · · Score: 2, Funny

    Computers getting too "smart", we've seen it before.

    Star Trek: The Motion Picture
    Incredibles (even though it turned out to be something different, the idea was still there)
    Superman 3
    Wargames
    Terminator 1/2/3

    All of these movies depict computers getting too smart then at some point start "thinking" for themselves. One of these days I'll finally get to publish my theory on how to prevent this. I'll give a short summary belo...

    <Connection terminated by remote host>

  18. What will we feed it? What we always feed it: by muellerr1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Tons and tons of porn. And mp3s. And some spam for dessert.

  19. "There are parts of the human thought that can't by phunctor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    be simulated with a series of conditional numeric operations."

    You did say it was impossible. You didn't say anything about a new paradigm. Why you'd want to lie about your own publicly visible words totally escapes me.

    Still, in case there's a there here: Are you claiming there is a class of problems, such as simulating a thinking human brain, that cannot be executed by a Turing machine? That is an extraordinary claim, and needs extraordinary evidence. Cite?

    --
    phunctor
    "here's a shovel, keep digging"

  20. In the age honored slashdot tradition... by tttonyyy · · Score: 2, Insightful
    ..I'll point out an error in the article.

    Replicating Google's 200 petabytes of hard drive capacity would take less than one data center row and consume less than 10 megawatts, about the typical annual usage of a US household.

    It's the old rate-of-energy-consumption vs energy-consumed misused once again.

    An average household consuming 10 megawatt-hours in a year is pretty dull. An average household consuming 10 megawatts - now that'd be impressive! (Got to power all those gadgets, y'know!)

    I think he means that the data center row would consume in an hour the same amount of energy that the average US household consumes in a year.
    --
    biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!