Internet2 Taken Out by Stray Cigarette

AlHunt writes "A fire started by a homeless man knocked out service between Boston and New York on the experimental Internet2 network Tuesday night. Authorities say the fire, which also disrupted service on the Red Line subway, started around 8:20 p.m. when a homeless man tossed a lit cigarette. The cigarette landed on a mattress, which ignited and led to a two-alarm fire."

Comments

obligatory

[Anonymous Coward]

Obligatory firewall joke here, please...

Re: obligatory

[spyder-implee]

Forget hardhack, this is hobohack!

Re:obligatory

[maxwell demon]

It actually was a successful test of the ultimate firewall. It prohibited all malicious hacking on Internet2.

Re:obligatory

[sporkme]

In other news, a molehill has become a mountain. Here's tom with the weather:

I am reminded of This 2001 train accident in Baltimore, where a tunnel fire severed a major internet backbone among other things and disrupted local communications as far away as Africa. It seems that while decentralized and robust on the massive scale, the internet is vulnerable as a child to small accidents or attacks, whose ramifications can be felt worldwide. It is too big to be defended or destroyed.

Re:obligatory

[renegadesx]

results of the test say: Internet2 got pwned

Re:obligatory

[SkyDude]

I am reminded of this 2001 train accident in Baltimore, where a tunnel fire severed a major internet backbone among other things and disrupted local communications as far away as Africa. ...the internet is vulnerable as a child to small accidents or attacks...

One would hope, in the nearly six years since that event, it couldn't happen again because in that time - nearly a lifetime by 'net measurement - more redundant connectivity is in place. However, the story seems to point to a vulnerability in the nascent internet 2.0 connectivity.

Re:obligatory

[plover]

The same thing happened here in Minneapolis in the mid 1990s. As I recall, some homeless people had built a fire under a bridge, and it destroyed a couple of conduits mounted beneath the bridge deck. The conduits held the main fibers of US West connecting Minneapolis to the backbone, blacking out the city. Apparently US West was unaware that their backup fiber providers leased space beneath the same physical bridge as their own fibers.

Since then, more carriers have installed more fibers. I don't know if carriers ever sit down and compare "bottlenecks" but I doubt that a single point of failure remains here.

As far as the Africa thing you pointed out, it's a case of a single application being down because the required servers were offline. It's certainly not a reflection of weakness with "the internet" but with that corporation's architectural design -- if they were dealing with a mission critical application, why didn't they have geographically diverse redundant data centers? The answer could have been "money" or it could have been "inexperience". Either way, the internet didn't fail the people in Africa, WorldCom failed their subscribers (there's a news flash.) It's a huge difference.

Re:obligatory

[CmdrGravy]

I worked somewhere once which had one main comms link and then a backup comms link if the first one went down. They had bought each one from a different carrier to be on the safe side only they hadn't realised one carrier was simlpy leasing space on the other carriers link, the exact same link their main one ran over.

Re:obligatory

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, at least they can say they didn't know any better at the time. The geniuses where I work (government contractor) have knowingly purchased their "backup" link from the SAME FUCKING CARRIER. (And yes, they are on the same main line.) The people in position to do something about it refuse to listen to the underlings that know better. Our internet connectivity goes out on average once a week or so, generally for 15 minutes or more (up to several hours).

If a cigerrette can

[Splezunk]

take out the internet... what hope do we stand against nukes?

Re:If a cigerrette can

[Anonymous Coward]

You think this is bad? A candle almost burned down a nuclear plant in 1975 with 2 power reactors. The plant was saved with only $100 million in damage.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[iabervon]

This is what happens because the internet is designed to deal with nukes. If a nuke took out the Longfellow Bridge, Internet2 users in Boston wouldn't be complaining about their network connection to NYC, or doing much of anything else. The internet is only designed to route around damage at larger-than-blast-radius scales, and the affected area was actually quite small by those standards.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[Anonymous Coward]

take out the internet... what hope do we stand against nukes? No need for anything that elaborate, terrorists will just send a DMCA notice to ATDN/AT&T/GX/LVL3/Verizon/NTT/Qwest/SAVVIS/Sprint informing them that their core routers are caching the IPv6 address 09F9:1102:9D74:E35B:D841:56C5:6356:88C0 inside the routing tables.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[Anonymous Coward]

This is what happens because the internet is designed to deal with nukes.

This is common misunderstanding, so you have nothing to be ashamed of. Internet and Internet2 were first built for fast porn delivery, later military got interested and started using it for reliable porn delivery under nuclear attack.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[lakeland]

I'm not sure you're right. Well, you are right about it being designed against nuclear attack, but I don't remember anything in DARPA being specific to smaller than nuclear?

Everything is based around: "oops, that route is down, lets try another". That sure doesn't sound scale specific to me.
I would hazard a guess that either: a) Internet2 isn't designed along the same goals or b) cost cutting has lead to a structure far more similar to a tree than a graph and nowadays a well targetted bomb could take out most of the internet.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[Jesus_666]

As far as I know Internet2 isn't quite as big as the "regular" internet. Maybe there just aren't enough nodes (and thus routes) to allow for effective damage mitigation.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[ronanbear]

You fool! The entire online porn industry is just a way to fund the NSA. What better way to ensure they have enough bandwidth and ability to shift lots of data than to control a huge chuck of it. When the time comes the porn will be the first thing they switch off to keep their access. This way they have a network backup operational and ready to operate at the flick of a switch.

[/tinfoilhat]

Re:If a cigerrette can

[dcam]

Yeah. Except for DNS, but nobody needs that.

Wait...

Re:If a cigerrette can

[dmsuperman]

After which, without investigating whatsoever, the AACS will promptly sue them, for *puts pinky to mouth* one billion dollars!

Re:If a cigerrette can

[0xygen]

Indeed, http://www.internet2.edu/pubs/200402-POS-AN.pdf seems to confirm that only the top-tier has any redundancy at all, and what it does have is quite limited. Most likely your explanation of it being cost-related is spot on.

Maybe the network topology info at http://noc.net.internet2.edu/i2network/maps.html will provide more info.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[Secrity]

The internet was originally designed to deal with nukes. Now, the Internet is simply a commercial communications medium that has limited self healing capabilities. The corporations that own the Internet on the whole have built a robust national network, HOWEVER there are many areas that have limited or no alternate routing capability.

The entire Internet2 network has very limited or no alternate routing capability.

In and around many cities, fiber optic cables are concentrated into underground conduits and tunnels. When something happens to or inside one of those conduits or tunnels a large amount of the data capacity of several different providers can be affected. Having people living in the same tunnels as exposed fiber optic cables is just asking for trouble.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[Anonymous Coward]

A cigarette can kill a cockroach.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[danpritts]

The entire Internet2 network has very limited or no alternate routing capability.

Not really true - backbone nodes are connected to two other backbone nodes, and the network is deliberately engineered to provide enough capacity to route traffic the long way around.

It is more complicated than that with the new network, which operates at layers 1 through 3; the old network was layer 3 only. Layer 3 rerouting should happen automatically; layer 1/2 outages would require manual failover, I believe.

I'm not sure what the effects of the boston fiber cut were; they may have cut off access to the layer 3 backbone to new england until the noc could cut them over to an alternate fiber path to the NYC router; however, I believe said alternate fiber path is in place on the network already. It is definitely planned.

Here's a layer 1/2 Network Map of the new network.

disclaimer: i work for internet2, but am not a network engineer, so i may have something wrong.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[Secrity]

I understand that at least the initial restoration (that took like six hours) was a manual restoration and was done using commodity internet circuits, not the special high speed arrangements that Internet2 normally uses.

Re:If a cigerrette can

[Workaphobia]

My god, it never occurred to me that that could be represented as an IPv6 address. I wonder how many RFC's I'd shatter by assigning that inside a LAN?

Re:If a cigerrette can

[iabervon]

Well, it's always been the case that there are lots of routes available for any long distance, but a particular site may have only one link, which could be taken out by a backhoe or a fire.

Also, Internet2 is designed to move large quantities of data (like databases of brain images) around between research sites. The regular internet is the alternate route for it, and you just can't move as much data if the high-speed link is down.

Hmmm.

[CannonballHead]

I wonder if there will be a new Internet protocol for protection against malicious smoking hackers.

Re:Hmmm.

[deftcoder]

Is IPv6 flame-retardant?

Re:Hmmm.

[MichaelSmith]

I wonder if there will be a new Internet protocol for protection against malicious smoking hackers.

Wherever you see a user name "benson" the password will be "hedges", and vice versa.

Re:Hmmm.

[hoojus]

Damn Greenpeace making us remove the flame retardants from Internet 2. So what if they cause pollution when we discard Internet 2 for Internet 2.1

Re:Hmmm.

[Aliriza]

I wonder if the internet2 is protected against alcohol :) Someone can throw a beer can on the cables.

Re:Hmmm.

[thc69]

Is IPv6 flame-retardant?

I'm sure that's written on the "Under penalty of law, do not remove" tag. Doesn't IPv6 have one of those?

I bet the bum didn't bother reading the tag on the mattress before he flicked the cigarrette...or maybe someone removed it and should have gone to jail.

Re:Hmmm.

[smittyoneeach]

Is IPv6 flame-retardant?

No, but the concept of web services is.
Oh, wait...retardant , not -ed . First day, new eyes.

Re:Hmmm.

[StikyPad]

Even better: It's made out of fire. Burning it only makes it work better!

reliability?

[phantomcircuit]

The Internet was designed originally as a means of communication in the event of nuclear war.

What does it say that Internet2 is defeated by a homeless guy with a cigarette?

Re:reliability?

[dread]

The Internet was designed originally as a means of communication in the event of nuclear war.

No it WASN'T. It was certainly financed through DoD but go read a book on the subject instead of talking out of your ass. Where wizards stay up late is recommended, nay required reading.

Re:reliability?

[maxwell demon]

That it wasn't designed as a means of communication in the event of a homeless guy dropping his cigarette?

Re:reliability?

[ComaVN]

Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!

Re:reliability?

[Half a dent]

It is still safe this was just a lucky strike.

Re:reliability?

[louisadkins]

A side note, I remember when I was a senior in high school this was considered a fact.

Re:reliability?

[Anonymous Coward]

In that book the author specifically denies it was meant to withstand nukes and stuff; the original aim was simply to "share resources".

Re:reliability?

[Anonymous Coward]

A pall mall attack is hard to forcast also.

Re:reliability?

[ubrgeek]

Good call on referencing the book. When I spoke to the authors a number of years ago they were appreciative that I read it and asked me to pass the word as the sales (at least at the time) were low. It's definately an interesting read about the intents, PDPs, etc. But, if I recall (and like I said, it's been years) the actual initial thought had to do with some general not wanting to remember different passwords for two divergent systems/networks and so thought that one, large network would make things easier and allow computers involved with different projects in different locations to communicate.

From Wikipedia, "the ARPAnet came out of our frustration that there were only a limited number of large, powerful research computers in the country, and that many research investigators who should have access to them were geographically separated from them."

(I do seem to recall the bit about the lazy officer, but can't find my copy of the book.)

Re:reliability?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of this is just FUD. I2 *wasn't* taken out. One of the backbone links was affected. Traffic routed around the failure. End of story.

Re:reliability?

[AndersOSU]

Reminds me of business quarterly reports. Earnings were up $0.56/share less one time items (our headquarters burning down).

Or, Earnings were up $0.56/share less one time items (that seem to happen every year for some reason).

Re:reliability?

[SL Baur]

I think they're just confused with a different quote.

"The network interprets censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore

http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/people/reagle/inet-qu otations-19990709.html

Re:reliability?

[Anonymous Coward]

Bzzt- Wrong. Packet RADIO was designed for that. Internet was not.

Please read up on real history and not what they tell you in Hacker movies.

Re:reliability?

[westlake]

No it WASN'T. It was certainly financed through DoD but go read a book on the subject instead of talking out of your ass.

But after having said all that: it still seems fair to ask why core infrastructure isn't better protected against ordinary accidents, much less sabotage.

It was not comforting to learn that the explosion of a single tanker could bring down one of the approaches to the Golden Gate Bridge.

Re:reliability?

[alienmole]

But after having said all that: it still seems fair to ask why core infrastructure isn't better protected against ordinary accidents, much less sabotage.

No, it isn't fair. The Internet2 is an experimental network, and I'd certainly vote against spending money on sabotage-proofing it at this point.

It was not comforting to learn that the explosion of a single tanker could bring down one of the approaches to the Golden Gate Bridge.

Life has infinite risks. It's impossible to guard against all of them. The cost of explosion-proofing all approaches to the Golden Gate Bridge to the necessary degree cannot be justified by the amortized cost of such an event. Not that hysterical voters might not approve such a thing anyway...

Re:reliability?

[WGFELyL5]

Bob Kahn, Inventor of TCP/IP, said as much in his 2006 interview.

Apparently, withstanding a nuclear attack was only a passing consideration.
The primary objective was creating a standard means of sharing data across diverse networks.

An MIT student's take

[Jazzer_Techie]

It apparently also knocked out normal service to MIT students living on the Boston side of the Charles. One of my friends called me around 9:20PM (an hour after the fire started) to see if my internet connection was down. Fortunately, I live on the Cambridge side (with the main campus) so I wasn't affected. Here's what MIT IS&T had to say.

--
Wed, May 2nd:
Internet2 Service has been restored.
We have re-routed our connectivity to the Verizon TLS service, so all ILG's should be back in service as of 01:47AM this morning.

Tue, May 1st, 2007:
There was a fire earlier this evening under the Longfellow Bridge, on the Boston side of the river. This fire appears to have destroyed electrical and communications conduits that run over the Longfellow, including fiber used by MIT and other Boston area institutions to connect to Internet2.

MIT and other New England Schools are currently disconnected from Internet2. Traffic to Internet2 institutions is being routed via the Commodity Internet, but performance may be less then normal experienced.
--
They got things back going again in less than 6 hours, even though it started in the evening. Not too shabby.

Re:An MIT student's take

[Garrett Fox]

See, there is a good reason why the Institute decided to keep all freshmen on campus. What would they have done without Net access that evening?

Two alarm?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe just one really loud one would have worked better?

Woa

[Anonymous Coward]

What a great DoS attack. Forget the terrorists, watch out for accidents. That's a level 4 from Symantec.

Firewall

[Dude163299]

Guess they forgot to install the firewall.

Homeless?

[bulliver]

It wasn't a homeless guy, it was a torch job paid for by Internet 1.

Re:Homeless?

[Hanners1979]

Or, more likely, the RIAA and/or MPAA. ;)

Re:Homeless?

[MadMidnightBomber]

Had they run out of backhoes?

Re:Homeless?

[Klowner]

Agreed, there's no way this was a simple BumDoS.

Level3?

[BigDuke6_swe]

Internet2, level3? What's level3?
"Level 3 Communications cables used by the network went up in flames"
"Level 3 engineers estimate it could take one to two days to restore the circuit"

Taken out by a level 1 homeless person?

Re:Level3?

[Anonymous Coward]

He obviously rolled a 20 on his attack roll.

Re:Level3?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know if you're trying to be funny but I'll presume not. Level 3 is a backbone ISP - www.level3.com

Re:Level3?

[Anonymous Coward]

NSP

but...did he run Linux?

[Anonymous Coward]

1)give a drunken wino a cigarette and a mattress
2)???
3)internet2 smackdown!

In other news

[Baricom]

In other news, witnesses reported a spontaneous cheer coming from the corporate headquarters of the Recording Industry Association of America.

Re:In other news

[Hoi Polloi]

I always said the RIAA was a bunch of bums. This just proves it.

This is why we need tougher safety standards...

[Mish]

Obviously the newly imposed mattress fire safety rules just aren't working!

Re:This is why we need tougher safety standards...

[aussie_a]

This isn't directed at you as you're simply being funny, but the mod who either abused the system and modded you informative or thought you were serious: Of course the newly imposed standards didn't work in this case. If a mattress is lying around for a homeless guy to burn, then its probably old, made BEFORE the standards were imposed. Duh!

Re:This is why we need tougher safety standards...

[Hognoxious]

But in that case you'd expect it to be less flammable because it's soaked in pee. No, not IP. Goddam geeks.

Re:This is why we need tougher safety standards...

[Stripsurge]

You are incorrect sir. The mod saw the humour in the comment but deemed the bit of information about the new ruling to be quite informative to those not up to date on mattress laws. Obviously if the law was just passed I wouldn't expect a mattress on the street to meet the safety standards. It is nice to see an example of how a new safer mattress *could* have actually saved a lot of people a lot of time and money. Firefighters, internets, and buildings aren't exactly cheap.

aside: is that a correct usage of the word internets??

Re:This is why we need tougher safety standards...

[Anonymous Coward]

"aside: is that a correct usage of the word internets??"
No. The correct term is "tubes."

Internets are sent through tubes, what the homeless guy burned was a tube, not an internet.

Re:This is why we need tougher safety standards...

[Anonymous Coward]

Must be the real life cancerman (X-files) that is working for the RIAA.
They didn't have a protected ring setup for this optical link, did they?

Re:This is why we need tougher safety standards...

[elrous0]

Well, the obvious solution is to get the homeless new mattresses!

Re:This is why we need tougher safety standards...

[zakezuke]

Obviously if the law was just passed I wouldn't expect a mattress on the street to meet the safety standards. It is nice to see an example of how a new safer mattress *could* have actually saved a lot of people a lot of time and money. Firefighters, internets, and buildings aren't exactly cheap. See the below paragraph from the grandparent's link.

Cigarette ignition is covered by a separate mandatory standard. That standard has been in place for more than 30 years during which deaths and injuries from mattress fires caused by smoking materials have fallen dramatically.

--Grandparent link

I'm sure more fire retardents "might" have made an impact in this case, though it's clear that there have been measures in place for at least 30 years. What I suspect is the issue are not the mandatory fire retardants but rather having a mattress outside in the elements, and I could be wrong about this, having the rain wash them away. I don't know if the typical fire retardants used are water soluble or not.

Either way, a mattress is one of those items which is ridiculously hard to dispose of.

We Must act Now!

[scenestar]

Clearly the homeless are not only unsightfull to look at, they also pose a direct threat to homeland security by sabotaging our infrastructure.

It seems clear that we must *eradicate* the homeless.

(don't mod this a troll straight away)

Re:We Must act Now!

[Anonymous Coward]

I know he's jokin about, but there's still some irony in a comment like this receiving good karma :P

Re:We Must act Now!

[Icarus1919]

So, I should wait five minutes or so before I mod you troll? ... Damn, you win this round.

Re:We Must act Now!

[iminplaya]

The round up is coming. This gives another reason for the bigots to do just that. Fill the prisons and put 'em to work. Turns out that slavery never was abolished after all.

Re:We Must act Now!

[Glowing Fish]

I heard they have hammers.

Re:We Must act Now!

[Anonymous Coward]

Clearly the homeless are not only unsightful to look at, they also pose a direct threat to homeland security Why wait any longer??

Let's declare a war on them!

Hm.. My captcha is "cocaine".
Obviously the work of a homeless person.

Re:We Must act Now!

[EmagGeek]

The prisons are already full

Re:We Must act Now!

[0rionx]

I was going to mod this comment -1 Unsightfull but for some reason I couldn't find that option...

Re:We Must act Now!

[Hoi Polloi]

Ah, the bums of Boston are cest magnifique! Nothing beats riding the T and having a guy who looks like he just took a ride inside a blender muttering threats at everyone on the train. They could be MIT grad students though, you can never be sure.

Re:We Must act Now!

[iminplaya]

That why we need more...And we're getting them. It's a booming business, better than Cancun timeshares. Soon it will be tent cities in all the sports stadiums. Got some practice with Katrina.

Re:We Must act Now!

[owlstead]

"It seems clear that we must *eradicate* the homeless."

No problem, just put them in houses. Ash trays would be a good idea too.

That is rather unforunate...

[Remi0o]

Good thing we still have Internet1.

Yikes

[jigjigga]

And we thought cancer was bad! Oh I know how to fix it, lets ban cigarettes outdoors!

Smokey says...

[Genocaust]

Only YOU can prevent Internet fires!

Re:Smokey says...

[redirect 'slash' nil]

In Soviet Russia, Internet fires prevent YOU!

Re:Smokey says...

[caol.kailash]

Wouldn't Tux be the internet fire prevention mascot? But add some sort of, "Or I'll fill your inbox with spam!" threat at the end since he's not exactly physically intimidating.

Re:Smokey says...

[RealGrouchy]

I stopped a flamewar once, and was disappointed not to get any recognition from Smokey Bear.

Not even a letter!

- RG>

Routing protocols? Redudnancy?

[arivanov]

Is the internet devolving or this is just my impression? Routing protocols? Redundancy? Multipath anyone?

Re:Routing protocols? Redudnancy?

[Kentaree]

One of the other comments from an MIT student mentions that while the connection is down, they were routing over the regular internet 1 infrastructure. I think the problem is that it's experimental, and there's no infrastructure there yet to use for redundancy.

Re:Routing protocols? Redudnancy?

[maxwell demon]

Redundancy?

I guess that question has been answered by the moderators ...

Re:Routing protocols? Redudnancy?

[Yetihehe]

Funny how parent was modded redundant. BTW, there IS redundancy, TFA says they switched to other lines.

Re:Routing protocols? Redudnancy?

[pppppppman]

This is internet2 we are talking about, not the orig Internet.

As far as I can tell, Internet 2 is for educational high-speed purposes, not "oh noes someone set us up the bomb lets keep talking" purposes, so it isn't built with (that much) redundancy in mind

O How the mighty have fallen.

[ShagratTheTitleless]

From the article: "The homeless man, whom authorities identified as one Kevin Rose, was apparently despondent after the recent shutdown of his tech news aggregation site. Witnesses reported seeing him staring into the flames and rocking slowly while mumbling a series of letters and numbers."

Re:O How the mighty have fallen.

[iminplaya]

...mumbling a series of letters and numbers

Obviously a disgruntled digg user.

Re:O How the mighty have fallen.

[fuse2k]

"He just just kept saying '09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0' over and over"

Re:O How the mighty have fallen.

[Skraeling2]

09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0?

Re:O How the mighty have fallen.

[ookabooka]

Witnesses reported seeing him staring into the flames and rocking slowly while mumbling a series of letters and numbers.

Maybe it was an IPv6 address...

Re:O How the mighty have fallen.

[Hoi Polloi]

He was obviously channeling network packets.

Re:O How the mighty have fallen.

[iminplaya]

Must be some time reversal thing or something. Guess I should have used a different account, or posted AC...Whatever

Re:O How the mighty have fallen.

[Workaphobia]

Damn. Either I can be a geek or a Lost fan, but not both. There's no way I'll ever be able to remember both that number and 4 8 15 16 23 42.

Redundancy

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess there is no redundancy on I2 between nodes. Worse would be a Line side failure w/no redundancy.

so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[c_jonescc]

Sorry, but isn't a little absurd, and likely judgmental, to mention TWICE in the abstract that the fire was started by a homeless person?

If the cig was tossed from a car window would we be hearing repeatedly about how a Toyota driver started this all?

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[aussie_a]

How would you have preferred "A smoker destroyed public property and risked people's lives because he couldn't control his filthy habit"? Given the alternatives, I'd say homeless guy was a pretty good description.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[Detritus]

We also eat lost tourists. Throw another Aussie on the barbie, Billy-Ray! The young'uns is hungry!

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[ch-chuck]

If the cig was tossed from a car window would we be hearing repeatedly

Yes, if it was an SUV. An SUV using a cell phone.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[mapkinase]

No, most likely you would not. "Homeless" is mentioned because it is relevant. The submitter just narrated the story the key element of which was mattress, then cigarette, then the explanation of how the cigarette got onto mattress.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[alzoron]

Something about this story is fishy. If they knew so many details about how the fire started, down to knowing it was a homeless smoker at precisely 8:20, why didn't anybody do anything to stop the fire. You don't just throw a cigarette and "boom" interweb 2.0 goes up in flames instantly. Sounds to me they don't really have a clue how the fire started past a mattress catching fire and just wanted to pin the blame on today's favorite evil... tobacco. Watch out folks, cigarettes kill the interweb! Secondhand smoke is somehow worse than firsthand smoke, and you'll get cancer and die tommorow if you get withing 30 feet of a smoker!

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[dcam]

Aussies are tough. We don't make very good steak.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[kripkenstein]

Sorry, but isn't a little absurd, and likely judgmental, to mention TWICE in the abstract that the fire was started by a homeless person?

I agree that twice looks a little suspicious (and how do they even know how the fire started?), but my guess is that they are trying to make it perfectly clear that it wasn't one of their own that caused the failure. That is, it wasn't a fire started by someone using Internet2, so they aren't directly to blame (but might be to blame for inadequate preparations for such events, I really don't know).

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[uhlume]

And rightly so! If SUVs have learned to use cell phones, homeless smoking guys are the least of our worries.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[dhalgren]

Anyone who's been beaten by an Aussie after complaining about the steak can confirm both points.

Torben

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[dcam]

Don't complain about our steak. My uncle grows prime Angus and it is clearly the best steak available anywhere.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[Anonymous Coward]

The do have to explain how a mattress got under a bridge, you know. Especially if you've ever seen the Longfellow Bridge, which looks like something out of the middle 19th century (it's actually from the very early 20th century), and not your usual city bridge.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe you didn't realize it, but there's a story of personal loss here where it is very relevant that the guy was homeless. For instance, where will he sleep now that he's burnt his mattress?

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[Hoi Polloi]

These guys tend to live in the nooks and crannies of bridges and buildings where nothing could get in unless it crawled in or was carried in, so it wasn't a cig tossed from a car. The guy also probably told the authorities when they showed up what happened and that it was an accident.

The Boston Globe a few years back had an article about a guy who lived with his dog in a relatively cozy space in a space under a bridge near the new Fed Courthouse. It had even had power. I was walking under it once and actually saw the guy hop up to the where the supports meet the roadbed and slip into a space there.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[c_jonescc]

My question is: how is it relevant?

A fire, started by a cig, carelessly tossed onto a mattress or any other debris, started a fire, took down the interwebby. What's the relevance to the living conditions of careless smoker? And again, why's it SO relevant that it warrants two mentions in a paragraph?

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[Anonymous Coward]

I would have preferred it to be worded exactly that way. Let's place the blame accurately where it belongs.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[pppppppman]

What shits me is that this guy doesn't have enough money for accommodation, but gladly wastes it on cigarettes.

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a difference between having good meat and being able to cook it at all well (where "well" means "with skill", not the... other meaning).

Re:so the fire starter didn't have a home?

[Workaphobia]

Intuitively, a person who can afford a car has the financial means to deal more damage to society than a single homeless person. The irony of this situation (nothing spectacular, just implied) is that a man whose actions would otherwise be extremely localized and probably insignificant, actually managed to affect a large, dispersed population.

Give the guy a home

[Anonymous Coward]

... problem solved. Oh wait, we'd rather spend the cash on paying our ISP bill...

Re:Give the guy a home

[maxwell demon]

Well, have the ISP give the guy a home. That way you can pay for it through your ISP bill, and everyone is happy.

nobody running linux on internet2 it seems ...

[laejoh]

... otherwise they might have gotten the 'printer is on fire' linux kernel message!

Though it's sad what happened to Zem

ob Slashdot Networking joke...

[Anonymous Coward]

Score: +1, Redundancy

In other news...

[Monsterdog]

...US Government brought down by chili farts. Pictures at eleven.

The new public-service ad slogan...

[laughingcoyote]

"Alright, if you don't care about killing yourself, quit smoking or you'll kill the Internet!"

Might work.

smoke kills

[dunkelfalke]

smoke kills

Internet and Internet Killers have this in common:

[Glowing Fish]

What are cigarettes, after all?

They are tubes, a series of tubes...

Re:That is rather unfortunate...

[Anonymous Coward]

Good thing we still have Internet1.

Apparently Internet2 is a private network that is not designed to replace the public Internet. So most of us will never be connected to Internet2; it's really just a testbed for new technology. Personally I'm taking the sour grapes mentality, and my view is that it must be crap anyway. Besides, you probably can't even get pr0n on it!

What you can learn from this

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe those of you who smoke can start tossing cigarettes onto the properties of known spammers

Am I alone in finding it sad...

[Anonymous Coward]

...not that a research network was briefly taken down, but that somebody who has no home would still rather smoke cigarettes than use the same money (or barter the cigarette with another homeless guy) for some food or shelter?

Re:Am I alone in finding it sad...

[fractoid]

Maybe he already had shelter (a bridge, perchance?) but was too cold to enjoy it, and some food (which was cold and unappetizing due to being uncooked). At that point, he did the obvious thing and burned a spare mattress for warmth...? >.>

Re:Am I alone in finding it sad...

[westlake]

that somebody who has no home would still rather smoke cigarettes than use the same money (or barter the cigarette with another homeless guy) for some food or shelter?

You do know that tobacco is addictive - that it satisfies both physical and psychological needs?

Uh...

[Anonymous Coward]

Doesnt the term "internet" refer to the linking of multiple networks with redundancy?

An internetwork.

If this "internet2" had only 1 link, between 2 cities, doesnt that simply make it just another backhaul link?

The title should read "High speed network link between cities taken down by cigarette fire"

Calling it "internet2" is a fallacy.

"It's A Mistake"

[Lord_Breetai]

The submission title reminded me of a certain Men At Work music video. Not quite the same circumstances, but a cigarette is involved regardless.

Re:Obligatory as well

[Anonymous Coward]

Obligatory? I for one am getting tired of losers like you posting the same old tired "overlord" jokes. They aren't even funny anymore, they are annoying as hell. Knock that stupid shit off!

Internet 2 to 3

[vipintm]

End of one (internet2) it should burn and act as a bosting agent for next (internet3).

Cigarettes are bad for your ISP's health...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Uh, yeah, we've got some connectivity issues... it went up in smoke."

Obligatory buzzword equation

[RedElf]

Internet 2.0 + Cigarette 1.0 = Firewall 0.0

Re:Obligatory buzzword equation

[ookabooka]

Internet 2.0 + Cigarette 1.0 = Firewall 0.0

Ok so the firewall coefficient is irrelevant since it is multiplied by 0, and the 1.0 coefficient for Cigarette is redundant, moving Cigarette to the other side gets us:

Internet 2.0 = - Cigarette

Multiply both sides by -1 and we see that a single cigarette is worth (-2 Internets).QED

Two alarms?

[Anonymous Coward]

"The cigarette landed on a mattress, which ignited and led to a two-alarm fire."

The alarm was redundant, but Internet2 isn't? Ummm?

Old Slashdot poll

[dj245]

I am reminded of This

I remember voting backhoe.

Re:Fuckin' hobos.

[CoolVibe]

I guess they are becoming the modern equivalent of the backhoe, which is also a dreaded enemy of many an ISP. :P

Look Sharp

[kram175]

One if by land, Two if by sea, Three if by burning mattress under a bridge! Good thing the minute men (well, 6 hour men) were on the job. But seriously, what does this say about the vulnerability of our infrastructure? I mean, a homeless guy with a cigarette?

Re:Look Sharp

[wesley78]

Actually... that's a really good point there. I mean, it really wouldn't be hard for a real terrorist or someone just looking to screw things over for a while to go and buy some wire cutters, or maybe just some kindling and some matches. Quick- seal the borders and make sure everyone that wants to buy firewood, matches, hammers and wire cutters gets appropriate permits first.

Re:Look Sharp

[kram175]

What alert color would that be - teal? Beige? Watch out for anyone who buys matches, lighters, cigarettes, cigars, cigarillos, two wooden sticks, a flint, etc.

Makes you wonder what you are paying for.

[AHuxley]

Reminds me of the old Fiber-Optic Map got classified story.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/07/09/12 54254

If users could see the I/I2 network and demand more redundancy vs classified for profit protection?

An LSU student's take

[coderedave]

We had the same thing happen here at LSU last Spring semester. Someone had thrown a cigarette into a drain and caught some dry leaves on fire causing some serious fiber optics damage for most of the campus. But of course not on the scale as what happened in Boston. Luckily enough it was a small fire and happened on a Friday, so they got it fixed before Monday; so only us people in the dorms felt the effects of it :(. So I wonder if there is any kind of protection that could be used to help prevent things like this in the future.

Re:An LSU student's take

[MollyB]

Do I read this correctly? Are fiber optic lines routed through storm drains? I had no idea...

Re:An LSU student's take

[The_Wilschon]

A fire in a storm drain might very well heat up the surrounding earth sufficiently to damage fiber in nearby conduits.

Re:An LSU student's take

[peragrin]

No they run them through storm drains. your phone, cable, and electrical company's do it all the time. At least for the larger trunk lines of the drains.

Re:Obligatory as well

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed - I tend to use my mod points to mod these idiots down as soon as I see them. I don't even read all the comments on the page, I find something like this and I immediately -1 it and submit.

Physical security

[tomofumi]

Physical security is always the weakest link in any implementation...they should back to the drawing board again...

Re:Physical security

[user24]

"Physical security is always the weakest link in any implementation...they should back to the drawing board again.."

they would, but how can they be sure the drawing board is secure?
They need to design some kind of non-physical drawing board on which to design internet2 - that's how!

Now, how to design that drawing board?

Maybe some kind of non-physical... drawing...

ah.

Internet 1 vs Internet 2

[markh1967]

Internet 1 was designed to keep running after a nuclear exchange whereas Internet 2 can be taken down by a stray cigarette. That's progress for you...

Re:Internet 1 vs Internet 2

[Anonymous Coward]

GO AMERICA!

Flame Retardant:

[wild_berry]

At the cost of significant functionality: newsgroups, forums, mailing lists, IRC.

Who cares?

[Anonymous Coward]

Everyone keeps talking about that Internet2 stuff, but how can you get on the internet if you can't take the train home?

Rather...

[Anonymous Coward]

What are cigarettes, after all?

A bunch of fags.

Just like certain wannabe internet legislators.

Firehose

[Chiisu]

No wonder Slashdot developed Firehose....

boston or new york red line?

[brunascle]

i know boston has a red line, i take it every day. i believe new york also uses colors. which red line is it? (TFA doesnt specify)

Re:boston or new york red line?

[Dragonslicer]

Considering the fire was on/under the Longfellow Bridge in Boston, which the MBTA red line goes across, I would assume that's the subway that got disrupted. If a fire in Boston can interrupt subway service in New York, that'd be a pretty impressive fire.

Re:boston or new york red line?

[Rob T Firefly]

While NYC has a line which is represented by red numbers, it's not commonly refered to as "the Red Line." New Yorkers usually call it "the 1-2-3," "the West Side line," or "the Seventh Avenue line." The "Red Line" colloquialism is more likely to refer to Boston's one.

x files

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew the smoking man was out to get us all.

Imagine if...

[Khyber]

It was one of those off-brand Black Death cigarettes!

Re:Fuckin' hobos.

[Bastard of Subhumani]

Nightmare scenario ... they merge by some obscure genetic process (involving a spider bite or something like that) to form a backhoebo.

For those of you who don't know

[kingtonm]

How the rating system works
How big is a 10 alarm fire?

Geek priorities...

[AndersOSU]

INTERNET DOWN! THE experimental INTERNET that nobody uses WENT DOWN, in a fire that killed three people and did millions of damager to property.

Re:Geek priorities...

[vancbc]

Take it easy, nobody died, as well there is no structural damage.

Re:Geek priorities...

[Anonymous Coward]

~ <-- joke

* <-- your head

Re:Geek priorities...

[vancbc]

Parent should be mod funny, not insightful.

Re:Geek priorities...

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa, that was one very expensive mattress!

Re:Geek priorities...

[Anonymous Coward]

The internet no one uses? Don't forget those of us attending research universities. I love my internet2.

Re:Geek priorities...

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if it's because the guys at the media labs couldn't understand why it took a full 2 hours to download their pre-release dvd screener of spiderman 3 when it'd usually take 5 minutes...

Re:Geek priorities...

[njchick]

Sarcasm and ignorance don't mix.

Re:Geek priorities...

[noidentity]

~ <-- joke
* <-- your head

If the Internet2 had't been down, we wouldn't have had to settle for this low-bandwidth ASCII illustration.

Re:Geek priorities...

[AndersOSU]

You must be unfamiliar with stand-up comedy.

homeless man

[dwater]

...when a homeless man tossed a lit cigarette. What a tosser!

"-1 flamebait"

[theophilosophilus]

That is all.

Level 3 is...

[Quince alPillan]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level3

Level 3 is one of the largest providers of wholesale dial-up service to ISPs in North America and is the primary provider of Internet connectivity for millions of broadband subscribers through its cable and DSL partners

But the correct answer...

[ClayJar]

But the correct answer was, obviously, "users". Sure, nicotine in tobacco is a more-or-less permitted drug, depending on where you live, but the guy was still a user. :)

Fines

[dheera]

They should levy huge fines on people who improperly discard cigarettes and/or actually randomly decide to patrol parts of cities and cite people who drop cigarettes for littering. It's dangerous, filthy, bad for the environment, and makes cities just look bad.

Re:Fines

[killercoder]

What a colossal waste of public funds that would be!

Tell ya what - why don't we do the same thing for gum disposal? How about for automobiles that are too old? Welcome to Singapore!!!

Its this sort of kneejerk BS that results in things like the patriot act.

There terrorists have already won.

Killer

Re:Fines

[dheera]

It's not BS. Singapore is a nice, clean, free country for anyone who cares about the environment enough to not litter and cares enough about other people not to vandalize, etc. Trust me, if you behave ethically, you won't be nailed for anything in Singapore (the actual ban of gum is debatable, but besides that, I mean).

In any case, I'm sick and tired of seeing cigarette butts everywhere, especially places like the beach and parks where it's wrecking the environment. We have a responsibility as humans not to wreck the environment. And if some idiots are going to pollute it, the government is one place that can enforce things that will keep these idiots under control. Littering is terrorism to the other species of this world (specifically, because over time, it mass-kills in numbers beyond what is necessary for the food chain to exist).

And yes, I would support high penalties for improper gum disposal as well. I'd be more than happy about ANY law that will prevent me from having to touch someone else's gum under my desk, ever again. Even if they got fined $10000 for it, terrific, I'm in support -- that way, I will never have to touch someone else's gum. Do I care about the amount of the fine? No, because I myself am not going to litter.

Re:Fines

[Bent Mind]

Maybe we could convince the government to place video cameras in key locations, such as the beach. It would certainly make catching litter bugs more economical. You could even attach speakers to the cameras. That way you could reprimand the offender while in the act and make them pick up their litter.

Re:Fines

[Anonymous Coward]

Or, instead of video cameras, you could just establish a high fine and leave it at that. Often the fear of a high fine is enough to keep a place clean. Singapore doesn't have video cameras lining the streets and beach, for example.

The occasional possibility of getting caught is enough fear to litter that people won't do it, so just establishing fines is enough and will work. Video cameras everywhere goes against the principles of America, anyway, so that won't be done (and doesn't need to).

Re:Fines

[Unicorn Giggles]

except these are the same people who have no qualms about smoking right next to the sign that says "NO SMOKING 25 FT" and make the rest of us walk through their clouds of toxic crap. and are also the same people that started smoking in the first place to rebel against nonspecific authority and conformity, just like all the other smoking losers.

The chances of...

[Shohat]

The chances of Internet2 being taken out by a single cigarette are 09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0 to 1.

Where's William Gibson when you need him?

[smchris]

If that is cyberpunk noire, I don't know what is.

Re:Where's William Gibson when you need him?

[alienmole]

Yeah, except when it comes to disrupting cables, Neal Stephenson is the cable guy.

MIRH--Multiple Independent Roaming Hobos

[The Bastard]

The exact same thing happened in Minnesota 12 years ago on the primary Internet link at the time. IIRC, in the Minnesota incident, diversified paths were implemented on seperate fibers. Unfortunately, the seperate fibers were in the same bundle.

It was the mooninites!!!1!111

[zish]

Don't you people read the news!? They're everywhere, the damn pixellated terrorists!

Butts

[magarity]

I really don't care that smokers don't care that their polluting their own lungs and homes, and if the smoke in the air bothers at a public venue me then I know to move myself somewhere else. The only reason cigarette smokers REALLY irritate me is that in general they don't care one bit where they toss the ^%$# cigarette butts. Streets, sidewalks, flowerbeds, and now even old mattresses... the country is completely littered with the nasty things. I demand that all cigarettes sold be unfiltered so the remaineder little bit dissolves and washes away easily in the next rain.

Re:Butts

[Nimey]

It'll have the positive side effect of killing off the lusers a little faster, too.

Re:Butts

[Chaymus]

I've always smoked unfiltered luckies. Unfiltered cigarettes offer the benefit of "disappearing" after they burn up, grind down, or disolve. But realistically without a filter there is more cigarette to burn when you don't put it out. So for everyone flicking them out their car window there is this extra couple centimeters of burnable product, where filtered smokers can get it a lot closer to the fiberglass and stop the flame after flicking it quicker. Unless of course you smoke with a roach clip, then people will be asking different questions.
So it's your call, more asthetically pleasing and less long-term pollutants lieing around, or added chance of burning mattresses taking out your internet.
I would like to think my cigarettes are better for the environment than filtered ones, but when I'm driving down the road I try to keep an eye out for dry grass.

Re:Butts

[Anonymous Coward]

Most are equipped with these funny things called ashtrays.
You might want to research that.

Mattress?

[Anonymous Coward]

Since when is a mattress part of the internet?

G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[ukemike]

You know cigarette smokers somehow think that flicking their butts isn't littering. It pisses me off to no end. HEY SMOKERS, YEH YOU! Put them out and then throw those butts in the trash, pathetic litterbugs. It's bad enough we have to smell your stink, we shouldn't have to look at your trash strewn all over the place.

Hopefully not too many smokers have mod points today...

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Nimey]

Broken beer bottles don't start fires, like the big forest fires we've had out west for the last few years and some in Australia as well.

It's stupid of fsckwits to litter, but beer bottles will at most burst some tires. They generally don't have capability to kill people.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[zakezuke]

You know cigarette smokers somehow think that flicking their butts isn't littering. It pisses me off to no end. HEY SMOKERS, YEH YOU! Put them out and then throw those butts in the trash, pathetic litterbugs. It's bad enough we have to smell your stink, we shouldn't have to look at your trash strewn all over the place.

Well, the problem is in daylight it's hard to actually tell if all the ambers are 100% out, and just throwing them in the trash can result in a fire. Hell, not being careful with an ashtray can lead to a fire.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Anonymous Coward]

Call the cops, someone is smoking a cigarette. Someone else may or may not have to smell cigarette smoke, oh no! They may or may not throw their filter on the ground, oh no! You do know that Hitler was a rabid anti-smoker too, don't you?

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Nimey]

Explain to me why you goddamn smokers can't just put your butts in your car's ashtray[1] or carry around a little cup of water or *something* that shows you're capable of not being utterly selfish about your butts. Then we'll get on the subject of why smokers congregate around doors that non-smokers need to use.

[1] If you're worried about burning paper, you can get little trash bags for paper & such that hang from your control stalks -- the ones for windshield wipers and so on. You can spend a little more to get a permanent vinyl one.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[EMH_Mark3]

So you're saying that since some people leave bottles of beer everywhere, you should be able to leave cigarette butts everywhere too? Nice.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure, the cities should provide more public ashtrays for smokers to use. But as the smoker it is still your responisibility to dispose of the butt properly. Carry them home if you have to.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[ivan256]

In other news, two wrongs now make a right?

If a cop saw you toss a beer bottle out the window, not only would you be hit with a littering fine, but you'd probably be subjected to all sorts of other unpleasantries to find out if you had just consumed said beer while you were driving. Toss your butt out this window where somebody else has to clean it up (open your door and look at the curb at any intersection) and you should get off scott free?

Sorry, but there should be a $500 fine and 8 hours of community service if you're caught throwing a cigarette butt out the window, even if there is no fire risk. It should be a moving violation if you do it on the highway where your lit butt can hit another vehicle. Either that or we should build some stockades... I'm not saying other roadside litterers shouldn't be treated similarly, but smokers shouldn't get special treatment.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[elrous0]

Then we'll get on the subject of why smokers congregate around doors that non-smokers need to use.

Probably because self-righteous pricks like you have forced them outside and that's the only place they have left to go. If you had just let them smoke in their offices, or in a designated break room, odds are you would never even have to smell it.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Afrosheen]

Cigarettes rarely, if ever, start fires in the wild. Lightning strikes and dry conditions are way more responsible than a cigarette being tossed out a window. I'm not defending irresponsible forest smokers, as anyone should properly dispose of anything burning by putting it out first, but nothing is more annoying than anti-smoker whiners.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[An ominous Cow art]

I'm with you.

I'm also annoyed when I'm walking across a parking lot and have to dodge the many sticky spots left by assholes who pour coffee on the ground.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Anonymous Coward]

Tour Guide: Get out of here, you filthy smoker!
Gerald: Yeah, dirty lungs!
Sharon: Go ahead and kill yourself, stupid tar-breath!
Chris: Dumbass!
Richard: Get out of here!

South Park, "The Death Camp of Tolerance"

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[jswigart]

Only if 'their offices' or the break room were located in a different building. Smokers stink to high hell. Walking through their clouds coming in the building is bad, but simply being in the vicinity of one when they come back in is not much different.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Eccles]

f you had just let them smoke in their offices

I'm old enough to have worked with smokers who could smoke in their offices. My girlfriend at the time could tell the days I'd gone into the smokers' offices, even for a brief visit, and would demand that I shower before I'd get any action.

Sorry, but having a smoking section in a building is like having a peeing section in a pool.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Grimbleton]

I hate getting them flicked deliberately out windows when I'm behind someone on my motorcycle. They look, wave, and flick. Wtf?

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[chuckT]

That's about £400, right?

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[StarvingSE]

Cigarettes rarely, if ever, start fires in the wild. Lightning strikes and dry conditions are way more responsible than a cigarette being tossed out a window.

ORLY?


As an aside, I don't dislike smokers, I just dislike discourteous smokers. And yes, I consider anyone who smokes inside a public place discourteous. I enjoy going to places like the bar, bowling alleys, and small diners. However, I am always subjected to breathing in the filth that comes our of cigarette smoke. Now, I have extra medical expenses because of a severe allergic reaction to cigarette smoke due to my constant exposure to it (I live in MI, one of the heavier smoking states). I think I have a right to be an "anti-smoker whiner" and will continue to be one until laws are passed that ban smoking in public places.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Emperor Cezar]

I don't like Gay people. They make me feel uncomfortable. That's why I can't go out to bars here. No matter how hard I try, I can't get the city council to ban homosexuality in public. God forbid I try to go to a non-gay bar. That would just be too much of a hassle. I mean, I have my morals and all, but I can't be bothered, it's an inconvenience.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Afrosheen]

Yeah, you can replace "smoker" with "gay" or any minority group you dislike. A whiner is a whiner is a whiner. If you are severely allergic to smoke, then you don't go where people smoke. I'm highly allergic to poison ivy therefore I avoid the forest. I'm not a city boy by choice. ;)

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Anonymous Coward]

Self-righteous? I don't spew toxic waste out of my mouth into your lungs... I'd appreciate if you'd afford me the same courtesy. Also, in some locales you're not allowed to smoke within 25 feet of entrances to buildings... plenty of smokers ignore that law. I'd like to see more of them getting tickets for it. It's not MY fault that you voluntarily addicted yourself to a dangerous substance, so please don't make it my problem.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[StarvingSE]

The dumb analogy strikes again! Homosexuals don't cause me health problems. They also don't pollute the air with chemicals (well, unless they're homosexual smokers).

And your comment about going to a "non-gay" bar would seem to suggest that you're telling me to go to a non-smoking bar. If you can give me the name of even one bar in the metro detroit area that is non-smoking, I'll buy you a pack of smokes.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[StarvingSE]

The problem with your comment is that "smoker" is not a minority group. How can I choose to go where people don't smoke when businesses don't ban it. I'm happy that smoking is banned at the workplace around here, but if I want to go get a beer, get some food, watch the game at a bar, or go bowling, it means subjecting myself to cigarette smoke.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Emperor Cezar]

"If you can give me the name of even one bar in the metro detroit area that is non-smoking, I'll buy you a pack of smokes."

Karra's Bro's. Tavern
225 Jos. Campau, Detroit, Michigan; Tel. 313.259.2767
A non-smoking sports bar, with a rooftop patio, in the heart of downtown with sports on TV, electronic trivia and games.

"Both Miller's Bar and Redcoat Tavern do have non-smoking sections, and you can be very express with them and tell them "*Very* non-smoking, please." which is usually understood and accomodated, but you may have to wait longer for your table."

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Afrosheen]

Maybe you should move to LA, Dallas, or any other large city with smoking-nazi laws on the books. I can't believe you can't go eat a meal in a non-smoking restaurant. Bars? That's a different story altogether.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[neglige]

Both Miller's Bar and Redcoat Tavern do have non-smoking sections

Smoke doesn't know how to stay in the smoking section...

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[leathered]

I recently had the novelty of working in a large office building with a smoking room on the ground floor near the reception, a rarity these days as virtually all builidngs are no smoking. The room was very well ventilated with extractor fans keeping it under negative pressure so no smoke whatsoever made it outside of the room.

The big advantage of this was that smokers would not congregate outside the building with the associated litter and clouds of smoke you would have to fight your way through to get to the entrance. It shows that smoking sections in buildings has its advantages so your 'peeing section in a pool' analogy doesn't wash with me.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[StarvingSE]

I can't believe you can't go eat a meal in a non-smoking restaurant.

You obviously haven't spent a great deal of time in Detroit. While I enjoy living here, Detroiters love their smokes.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[hurfy]

Well then dude, don't leave your mattress in the street where it can accidently get set on fire.

If there are mattresses where a stray butt can ignite them you may have more of a litter problem than a couple of rude smokers....

But yeah, don't see why it is too much to at least put them out 1st so at least they aren't burning. Even a homeless person should be able to manage that...even if some of our employees cant. Keep tossing them in the storm drain burning...it only has water during rain shesh.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[zakezuke]

Explain to me why you goddamn smokers can't just put your butts in your car's ashtray[1] You presume smoking is permited in the car, or smoking is done near the car. Not always the case. For example, taking a flight with lay-overs... you are not near your car.

or carry around a little cup of water or *something* that shows you're capable of not being utterly selfish about your butts. How practical is that? Where does this water come from, or this cup?

Then we'll get on the subject of why smokers congregate around doors that non-smokers need to use. Because the smoker is being thoughtful and smoking OUTSIDE the building, likely being social with the other thoughtful smoker smoking outside the building. In the past, that's where the ashtray was. But non-smokers complained about congregation around ashtrays, so they were removed.

[1] If you're worried about burning paper, you can get little trash bags for paper & such that hang from your control stalks -- the ones for windshield wipers and so on. You can spend a little more to get a permanent vinyl one. Well, the point about burning embers was using a traditional waste can, which could result in a fire.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[pestario]

"A smoking section in a restaurant is like a peeing section in a swimming pool."

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Nimey]

So grind the butt out on the ground so it's not smoldering, then put it in the trash or carry it with you until you find a trashcan. Don't be some asshole who litters.

You also don't need to stand right in front of the godsdamned door. Go stand somewhere else that people aren't required to pass by.

Smoke if you want, but for pity's sake don't be a selfish asshole about it.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Anonymous Coward]

Oddly enough, you're wrong. Beer bottles, being made of curved glass, only have to wait for the right sort of sunshine at the right sort of angle and a nearby supply of tinder in the right sort of position, before they turn into pointless little arsonists.

It does depend on a lot of factors, particularly the supply of tinder. Forests, as it happens, contain plenty of dry and resinous material carelessly discarded by trees, and are the most likely places for beer-bottle fires to start.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[buswolley]

How do you know it is cigarette smoke that gives you a reaction?? Do you go indoors with people who smoke cigarettes? Is it not just as likely that you're having a reaction due to smog from the freeway? Pesticides? Mold? If you live with a smoker who smokes inside, I will grant you that its unhealthy, but outdoor second-hand smoke is a joke. Low concentrations, and too many other pollutants. I have quite smoking for 3 months now, but I still don't like irrational arguments of why smokers are horrible. I do not like irrational arguments of how 2nd hand smoke outdoors is ruining their health, and yet still drive f**kin SUV's, and use disposable everything.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[jacksonj04]

Smoking places second-hand smoke into the environment. I go for a drink somewhere with smokers (Only one or two), I come home smelling of cigarette smoke. I go for a drink somewhere with homosexuals (Only one or two), I do not come home gay.

I dislike people who pollute my local environment. This includes people who thing playing dance music on their phone at full volume is the height of cool and those who otherwise do things which irritate me if I'm not really paying attention. Smoking falls into this category, and I fail to see how things like 'noise pollution' can be covered by laws yet 'smoking pollution' can't.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[zakezuke]

So grind the butt out on the ground so it's not smoldering, then put it in the trash or carry it with you until you find a trashcan. Hey... don't get me wrong, i'm all for what you are saying. The outer cellophane of a ciggerette pack can serve as a temp storage container until such time as proper disposal can be found.

However, the drawback is... you end up smelling like an ashtray, and non-smokers complain, and when over used it can result in a fire.

Don't be some asshole who litters. And you shouldn't be an asshole who starts fires either. Proper disposal, not blind disposal is indicated.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[StarvingSE]

How do you know it is cigarette smoke that gives you a reaction??

Umm... because an allergist ran through a full day of testing to find out. I also have a cat, am active outdoors, live in a major smog-filled metropolitan area, and never have any reactions unless I am breathing in second hand smoke.

I never said anything about outdoor smokers. I am specifically talking about indoor smokers.

I also don't drive an SUV, I drive a car that gets 30+ mpg, I reuse everything (reuse plastic department store bags and you'll never have to buy trash bags), and I recycle... just thought I'd add that ;)

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Stamen]

Most people are selfish pricks. Smokers, prove this fact more than most. I could care less if they smoke, but the general attitude that when they throw trash on the ground, it's perfectly fine just gets me. Do what you want, but don't think I'm not going to do what I want to you.

I'm generally libertarian leaning, and don't like interfering with anyone else's business, and I like to stand up for those whose business is interfered with. However, most smokers complete lack of respect for anyone makes me just ignore the injustices inflicted on them. I've only so much time on my soapbox to stand up for peoples rights, I'll use that time for some other group, thank you.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Anonymous Coward]

Self-righteous? I don't spew toxic waste out of my mouth into your lungs...

You don't drive a car?

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Nimey]

Dude? You smell like an ashtray anyway from smoking. Your sense of smell may be dead from your habit, but you do.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[reedk]

http://www.dragonmead.com/ Non-smoking and fantastic beer!

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[kalaf]

They banned it where I live a while ago. Even though I quit when I was 17, I still smoked occasionally at bars and at friends places who smoked. The ban helped me quit completely, and the last of my smoking friends quit this year. It also means I don't have to worry about second hand smoke when brining my daughter to a resturant or other public place. It may seem oppressive if you really love smoking while you eat, but when it's an us vs. them argument, the people doing the smart thing SHOULD win.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[cafucu]

What a great way to spend tens of thousands of dollars! Maybe they should invest in something that would be a positive benefit for everybody, like a gym. Or maybe a daycare facility, or a food court. I've heard of some stupid business decisions, but this one is on my top ten, unless you work for Marlboro or something. I wonder what the business case rationale looked like.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Anonymous Coward]

Self-righteous? I don't spew toxic waste out of my mouth into your lungs...

You don't drive a car?

American cars have the exhaust installed in the driver's mouth? You guys are so creative!

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[zakezuke]

Dude? You smell like an ashtray anyway from smoking. Your sense of smell may be dead from your habit, but you do.

There is a difference between smelling like you had a smoke, and smelling like you carry around cigarette butts.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[zakezuke]

As an aside, I don't dislike smokers, I just dislike discourteous smokers. And yes, I consider anyone who smokes inside a public place discourteous. I enjoy going to places like the bar, bowling alleys, and small diners. However, I am always subjected to breathing in the filth that comes our of cigarette smoke. Now, I have extra medical expenses because of a severe allergic reaction to cigarette smoke due to my constant exposure to it (I live in MI, one of the heavier smoking states). I think I have a right to be an "anti-smoker whiner" and will continue to be one until laws are passed that ban smoking in public places.

The problem is discourteous non-smokers didn't think about the logistics when they complained about the smokers congragating next to the provided ashtrays and asked for said ashtrays to be removed. This created a problem of disposal where blindly tossing them in the trash, where trash may contain newspaper, fast food wrappings, stryofoam, and thin plastic.

If you trully care about your health, you should contact your city and propose a viable solution. A ban of smoking in resturants, but permiting it in outdoor gazebos. Propose removal of ashtrays from entrances to buildings, but propose an alternative location such as 25feet from the entrance, or one designated exit. Permit indoor negative pressure rooms designated for smokers. Ignore bars when trying to propose any anti-smoking legislation at first as this is the most tough sell for smokers.

If you provide a place for smokers to congregate, it would be ever so much easier for you to avoid them. Think about co-existing rather than trying to mold the world to your needs.

If your health is still an issue, there is always california. The last time I checked resturants and bars were non-smoking.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Old Wolf]

I do not like irrational arguments of how 2nd hand smoke outdoors is ruining their health, and yet still drive f**kin SUV's,

SUVs don't ruin anyone's health (apart from kids they run over)

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[JackieBrown]

Not directly related to you only, but the non-smokers seem to have mod points today.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[glittalogik]

For a moment I couldn't tell if that was leet for 'goddamn' or 'Godwin.' Seems appropriate, having read your comment. =)

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[JackieBrown]

Give it up. There is no one more preachy of others faults than many non-smokers.

When we smoke were they tell us to (usually in some uncovered shithole) the non-smokers complain that they still smell the smoke. Then they get in their tricked out cars designed to cause more pollution and to be otherwise loud and act like they are considerate of others.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Emperor Cezar]

It is possible to argue that a man dressed in a feminine manner can "irritate" me. I do not argue for the allowance of smoking in truly public places (like the subway). But I really do believe that it is up to the business to decide what is allowed there and what is not. A bar near me has a bondage night. The more prudent parts of our society would wish to have that banned because it bothers them. If it was bondage on the train, I would agree with them, but it is not. It is in a private bar. I consider smoking the same. I would agree with you more about workplaces, as people must go to those. We have to be serious with ourselves though. Bars and restaurants are luxuries, they are places we choose to go into and to patronize.

I want a world where smokers can go into smoking bars, and non-smokers can go into non-smoking bars. To exclude everyone from the choice to go to a smoking bar is well.. fascist.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[StikyPad]

Maybe they should invest in something that would be a positive benefit for everybody, like a gym. Or maybe a daycare facility, or a food court.

I don't exercise, have kids, or eat, you insensitive clod!

You can't please all the people...

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[StikyPad]

I guess you'd better tell that to our fireplace.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[zakezuke]

Broken beer bottles don't start fires, like the big forest fires we've had out west for the last few years and some in Australia as well.

It's stupid of fsckwits to litter, but beer bottles will at most burst some tires. They generally don't have capability to kill people. If cigarette gets disposed of improperly, fire can result. This would include thoughtless smoker who tosses his butt in dry brush, trashcan, a mattress of a homeless man stored outside, or accidently gets blown into said areas. This can result in death. Conditions have to be right for this to be an issue. But that's no excuse not to be safe about the subject. While not a leading cause for house fires, it is a leading cause for household fires which result in death, probally because for it to start a fire, someone had to have been in the house smoking for it to be an issue.

Broken beer botts can destroy a set of tires. For this to happen, the vehicel has to be moving over the said bottles. This can result in a loss of control, which also has the capability to kill people. Broken beer bottles are a hazzard for a longer period of time.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Anonymous Coward]

but nothing is more annoying than anti-smoker whiners.

...except tobacco smoke.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[zakezuke]

In other news, two wrongs now make a right?

If a cop saw you toss a beer bottle out the window, not only would you be hit with a littering fine, but you'd probably be subjected to all sorts of other unpleasantries to find out if you had just consumed said beer while you were driving. Toss your butt out this window where somebody else has to clean it up (open your door and look at the curb at any intersection) and you should get off scott free?

Sorry, but there should be a $500 fine and 8 hours of community service if you're caught throwing a cigarette butt out the window, even if there is no fire risk. It should be a moving violation if you do it on the highway where your lit butt can hit another vehicle. Either that or we should build some stockades... I'm not saying other roadside litterers shouldn't be treated similarly, but smokers shouldn't get special treatment.

Both lit cigarettes and glass bottles should get simlar treatment. Both present a danger. Glass is heavy and could harm someone on the way out, and presents a hazzard to vehicles. Lit cigarettes could start a fire. I have to say conditions have to be just right to start a fire, but it is "possible".

A happy meal wrapper on the other hand, should be treated like normal littering.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[zakezuke]

I dislike people who pollute my local environment. This includes people who thing playing dance music on their phone at full volume is the height of cool and those who otherwise do things which irritate me if I'm not really paying attention. Smoking falls into this category, and I fail to see how things like 'noise pollution' can be covered by laws yet 'smoking pollution' can't. Because smoking is legal, and has been legal for well... i'd say since it was introduced to Europe in the early 1500s. Cigarettes have been around for about 146 years. I'm willing to guess that pollution from cars presents a bigger pollution harm than smoking.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[stinerman]

We figured out how to do it in Ohio. It feels odd and also refreshing to not be asked "smoking or non-smoking" when I go into a restaurant.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[stinerman]

Then we'll get on the subject of why smokers congregate around doors that non-smokers need to use.

I think that my home state (Ohio) has probably the most comprehensive laws (PDF) in the country regarding smoking regulation. I especially enjoy the "door regulation" that specifies how far away from any entrance a smoker has to be when smoking.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[Eccles]

Sounds pretty expensive. Presumably the CEO was a smoker?

I don't hate the smoker, just the smoking. I take it nicotine gum just doesn't always do the trick, because that would be a heck of a lot less invasive/expensive/messy.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[ivan256]

I don't think any littering should get special treatment. They should all be cause for a fine, and community service cleaning up litter.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[klx]

I could see how onsite daycare benefits everyone -- after all, who gets all the work after the breeders take off at 4:30 to retrieve their kids? Onsite daycare removes an excu.. ahem, a reason for skiv... er, leaving early.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[klx]

How practical is that? Where does this water come from, or this cup?

This notional water is for extinguishing butts, so it can be reused. All you'd need is a capped 10ml vial, which would easily fit in a coat pocket. Actually, one of those tiny aluminum keychain pillboxes from REI would probably do just as well; if they can keep water out, they can probably also keep it in.

Re:G0d@|\/|N smokers!

[zakezuke]

This notional water is for extinguishing butts, so it can be reused. All you'd need is a capped 10ml vial, which would easily fit in a coat pocket. Actually, one of those tiny aluminum keychain pillboxes from REI would probably do just as well; if they can keep water out, they can probably also keep it in.

This is at least a reasonable responce. I can not agree that 10mm of water can easily be re-used. Cigarettes are amazing absorbent, and not only that but wet cigarette water is among one of the highest stench known to man. Even from a smoker's standpoint whose nose is desensitized to much of the stink, this is exactly the sort of stink a smoker would notice, and not to speak of non-smokers who not only have to smell smoke on a person's clothes, but the fact that they carry around an ashtray. What would probally be better would be drops of water to extinguish the tip. This way during hot summer months where burn bans are on, a 10ml supply should cover at least 1/2 a pack of smokes. I would reccomend you talk with smokers about the subject and propose this as a viable solution.

Keep in mind the non-smoker complaint is smell and litter. Even an outside smoker would get an extra heavy dose of stench by keeping their butts and pocketing them. Proper disposal is in the best intrest of both the smoker and non-smoker. Using your foot to mash a cigarette followed by trash disposal isn't a bad solution, but adding water to the mix is even better. Still, the removal of ashtrays, esp the ones that employ sand to smother a flame without risk of fire are most ideal, but were removed thanks in part to non-smokers who found their presence to be offencive.

Fire is a legit conern esp during summer months. Cigarette temperature from what I read is 400 C to 500 C, drawing 750 C or so. Filtered cigarettes based on what I read don't seem to be as big an issue as unfiltered cigarettes with an accelerant to promote burning. Home rolled tightly packed ones seem to be less of an issue with fire, as it seems to be the accelerant used in domestic smokes and the loose tobacco would increase the temprature.

But keep up the good work, i'm all for practical solutions which help people to co-exist happily.

System Redundancies

[Chaymus]

I was not aware that I2 needed routing redundancies yet because it's not widely used. Once it's adopted by all means it's pretty bad to run it over a single point, but in reality the internet is still a best-effort system. Unfortunate yes, but until it approaches the usage of today we're not going to see the iternet2 networks to prevent single points of failure. On a less serious note; somehow a burning mattress causing this doesn't leave much to my imagination on how this guy became homeless in the first place.

Here's Who's Responsible For This outrage

[SkyDude]

It's this guy who caused all the fuss

Re:Fuckin' hobos.

[Afrosheen]

Hahaha...man I'm lucky I just sat my coffee down before I read that. +1 if I had it dude, that was dumb and clever at the same time. :)

oh... your... God!

[Snarkhunter]

do the anti-smoking folks know about this?
Now, not only do cigarettes give you lung cancer, poison everyone around you, finance terrorism, and kill cowboys, but it TAKES AWAY OUR INTERNETS!!!!1

A modest proposal

[alienmole]

If a nuke took out the Longfellow Bridge, Internet2 users in Boston wouldn't be complaining about their network connection to NYC, or doing much of anything else. The internet is only designed to route around damage at larger-than-blast-radius scales, and the affected area was actually quite small by those standards.

You know what this means, then: homeless people, and other sources of minor disturbance, are actually a much greater threat to the stability of the Internet than previously realized.

Clearly, we need Homeland Security to round up all the homeless people (included that bearded guy who lives in an office at MIT) and ship them off to Guantanamo. Only then will the Internet be safe.

To spearhead this operation, we will need effective, competent, no-nonsense leadership, someone who has the necessary experience in cleaning up homeless people without provoking a political fuss. Luckily, the perfect candidate just happens to be available: vote Giuliani in '08!

Smokers, and why I despise them

[Epi-man]

So can anyone give me any reasonable explanation as to why smokers always seem to consider the world their ashtray? What is wrong with these people? I get so disgusted every day driving home from work as I see at least 3-4 smokers drop their lit cigarettes out of their cars. They don't seem to care that we routinely have "red flag" days (high risk of brush fires due to lack of rain), that we have had several brush fires started by fellow members of their club of morons, that their freakin' plastic (they are not cotton) filters are going to take years to biodegrade, or that they are loaded with all sorts of toxins. Needless to say, it really ticks me off. Inconsiderate bastards.

Re:Smokers, and why I despise them

[myz24]

Probably for the same reasons these people also take smoke breaks and that it's "ok."

Re:Smokers, and why I despise them

[Chaymus]

I really hate people who litter their fast food wrappers, don't maintain their cars leaking antifreeze/oil, talk on cellphones while half-driving endangering lives, drink too much and become a public nuisance, and a ton of other things. The bottom line is smoking in this country (US) is a publicly accepted scapegoat making comments like this politically correct. Posts like these are stereotyping all smokers, some of us are more considerate than others.
Smoking offers many benefits to those of us that do it. For example, smoking was the only reason I don't have my reoccuring migraines I've had since highschool, and a large part of me overcoming depression with its stress relieving and ease of accessibility for those old enough to make the concious choice to smoke. There's plenty of PR out there to state the risks of it, I should have the choice & right to smoke.
I don't tell people how to eat healthy, even though deaths in this country are higher for obecity related reasons than smoking. If you look at Japan more people smoke per capita yet have a much lower risk of cancer and heart disease than America.
I'm not a lobbyist, but I'm glad they exist because if you just spew back everything you're told on one side of the story things like the 2nd hand smoke risks continue to be aired even after the tests are disqualified by the supreme court. Not all of us are idiots and I'm constantly weighing costs and benefits of my choice to determine when smoking no longer suites my needs and the risks overcome the benefits.
I appreciate your concern for the environment, that is a respectable goal and I fully understand the impedance smokers generate on this end. However, there are much larger concerns related to industry drive and common things everyone does. Singling smokers out in this regard is naive at best. I should start a civil rights movement for smokers ;).

Re:Smokers, and why I despise them

[Epi-man]

I really hate people who litter their fast food wrappers, don't maintain their cars leaking antifreeze/oil, talk on cellphones while half-driving endangering lives, drink too much and become a public nuisance, and a ton of other things. The bottom line is smoking in this country (US) is a publicly accepted scapegoat making comments like this politically correct. Posts like these are stereotyping all smokers, some of us are more considerate than others.

I concur, I also despise people who litter, don't maintain their cars (they smell worse than the smokers' cars!), talk on the phone while driving, drink too much, and tons of other things too, but this article was about a smoker doing what I think it is extremely safe to say a vast majority of smokers do (yes, I should have included that in my original post vs. saying all smokers).

Smoking offers many benefits to those of us that do it. For example, smoking was the only reason I don't have my reoccuring migraines I've had since highschool, and a large part of me overcoming depression with its stress relieving and ease of accessibility for those old enough to make the concious choice to smoke. There's plenty of PR out there to state the risks of it, I should have the choice & right to smoke.

Couldn't agree more that you should be allowed to smoke if you desire. Couldn't disagree more that limiting where you smoke isn't appropriate. Talking about your migraines, I get them when exposed to cigarette smoke, sometimes as little as following a smoker's car (oddly, cigars don't seem to do this to me?). I select where I go out based on the air quality (ie, I don't go bar hopping, I get sick from the smoke). I remember as a child throwing up on an airplane when I was stuck in the smoking section after going to the restroom and getting trapped by the food service. It slices both ways, and given that your actions will force my environment in many instances, sorry bud, but I have to say tough cookies for you (obviously if I were the smoker, I would probably have a different opinion here, so I can't get too high on my horse). I absolutely disagree with the idea that we have to pass laws forcing restaurants and bars to ban smoking though, let the businesses decide what they want to do, and I will take my business based on their decisions (as should you in my opinion).

Singling smokers out in this regard is naive at best. I should start a civil rights movement for smokers ;).

I agree, you should start such a movement, but perhaps you should start with what I am trying to start, and that is recognition that the behavior exhibited by most smokers is unacceptable. My motto is keep your butts to yourself, we don't want them any more than you do. The culture has to be changed so that people realize it is littering, and in my parts, it is probably close to half the problem (ie, routinely I see collections of butts as the only litter in an area, I can't remember ever seeing an area with litter sans butts).

Re:Smokers, and why I despise them

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably for the same reason these PEOPLE (as if!) take bathroom breaks and that it's "ok".

Seriously though, I'm sure if you wanted to take a few minute break every hour and NOT smoke it would be okay.

A Series of Tubes?

[johnsonjii]

How many tubes did the fire destroy?

Damn it man!

[ichigo 2.0]

I can jump 2 homeless people, maybe 3, but there is no way I can jump this many!

What does it matter that he was homeless?

[Afecks]

Seems like they are trying to make a point of that. I just can't figure out what it is.

Re:Obligatory as well

[alienmole]

Agreed - I tend to use my mod points to mod these idiots down as soon as I see them. I don't even read all the comments on the page

I, for one, welcome our petty, power-mad moderating overlords!

this is why Internet 3 will be ...

[constantnormal]

... wireless, based on a mesh of UWB wireless nodes. The more nodes in the grid, the higher the aggregate bandwidth and the harder it is to take it down.

Of course, due to the difficulty of monitoring and controlling such a system (and the reluctance of the various governments to allow such a thing to exist), it will occur only when it spontaneously emerges from connections between businesses and individuals at a time when UWB wireless is pretty much ubiquitous.

Commutes suck.

[charlesbakerharris]

That guy also cost me an extra hour getting home. Thanks, cigarette guy.

We should start with the cocky Fisher King!

[elrous0]

Thinks he's so big with his sword and fruit pies! I say: "To the gallows with that knave!"

And the ground is better?

[SuperKendall]

Well, the problem is in daylight it's hard to actually tell if all the ambers are 100% out, and just throwing them in the trash can result in a fire. Hell, not being careful with an ashtray can lead to a fire.

So the "better" solution is to throw it on the ground where a wind can take it into dry grass?

I'll take a trashcan fire any day.

P.S. - I also just love when people throw glowing embers at my car on the highway, that is also an awesome solution.

Re:And the ground is better?

[zakezuke]

So the "better" solution is to throw it on the ground where a wind can take it into dry grass?
I'll take a trashcan fire any day. Throwing it on the ground and stomping it with your foot a pretty reliable technique to crush those burning embers. Then a trashcan becomes a legit option after an approperate cool down period.

You may take a trashcan fire, but this can be considered a form of arsen.

P.S. - I also just love when people throw glowing embers at my car on the highway, that is also an awesome solution. I agree... it's one of the best fireworks displays you can see when it's not the 4th of july. But it's not really a safe method of disposal.

Smokers

[Emperor Cezar]

Let me post here instead of a direct response to all those who "hate" smokers because of this man.

First of all. Not all smokers are assholes. To consider them all assholes because of a subset of the population is called stereotyping. Stereotyping is generally considered wrong, except when it comes to smokers for some reason. I don't stereotype black people, gay people, homeless people, and I don't stereotype smokers either. Yes, a good bit of smokers throw their butts, but a good bit of McDonald's eaters toss their entire bag out the window on the interstate too.

Re:Smokers

[AlHunt]

>Stereotyping is generally considered wrong

Is a stereotype anything like a generalization?

Re:Smokers

[DanJ_UK]

>Stereotyping is generally considered wrong

Is a stereotype anything like a generalization? stereotype

"A generalization, usually exaggerated or oversimplified and often offensive, that is used to describe or distinguish a group."

Homeless My Butt

[Anonymous Coward]

His real name is Abdul Ahmed Mahmut Mohammed Smythe-Jones and he's a UK based Taliban terrorist. We've had him in our sights for years. Now he'll go down!

I for one welcome our fire-enabled tube overlords

[WillAffleckUW]

And was wondering what they would do with those underground transit lines ... hmmm, let's just stuff wood in them and call it Internet2!

nuclear?

[SharpFang]

Internet 1 was designed to withstand a nuclear war.
Internet 2 gets knocked off by a stray cigarette.

I don't like where the technology is going.

Internet 1 in the early 90's

[Knara]

I seem to recall something like this happening in the early 90's that caused a big regional outage. I was a young geek at the time and didn't really know how the thing I was MUDding on worked, but I seem to recall it had something to do with a homeless guy, a trashcan fire, and some fiberoptic cables running under a bridge in Minneapolis. Anyone remember this?

Burning what?

[Makito]

Sure it's all tragic that the fire took out some fiber - but what in the world was the fire burning? If you see the pictures, the fire extends nearly the entire way along the side of the bridge. That's either one rather large mattress or maybe fiber/conduits are more flammable than I imagined.

Re:Burning what?

[belg4mit]

Oh wow, so maybe there were two fires Tuesday (as per my earlier post) because there
was smoke in the same area (in the tunnels) at 3PM that day.

I also what there is to burn in that area, Longfellow is stone and they say
"roof of the bridge", but it's not exactly something you'd see in Madison County.
The Herald gives a slightly better idea of the scene.

plenum

[ncohafmuta]

hmm, they don't make plenum-coated mattresses?

-Tony

mattress?

[Bopper]

Sad thing is noone seems to find the fact that there is a matress in a subway suprising.

You have a bad internet connection....

[Anonymous Coward]

So MIT and the Boston area lost an internet connection but look at us here in the San Francisco Bay Area. Here are some URL from our TV news about this:
http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_122105617.h tml
http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/index?section=local&id= 5255731#

We lost two freeway connections this weekend in the San Francisco Bay Area because of a gasoline tanker truck overturned and caught fire. A homeless guy with a burnt mattress is nothing compared to the entire freeway overpass burning an collapsing. See the videos and slide show from the TV news station websites.

Re:You have a bad internet connection....

[belg4mit]

And your fucking point? This is a tech news site. Information about stupid drivers,
and the consequences for those who can't be bothered to take BART or live someplace
where they have a saner commute is covered by the usual news outlets. Yes, even all
the way over on the other coast we saw stories about the big bad broken bridge,
"worst thing since Loma Prieda" (which I was around for). So what? Yeah, okay. We
probably only saw the pieces because it happened before it was revealed some dumb
football player for "New England" (not MA) was wearing the hat for an NYC baseball
team and not Boston's. Nevertheless, it's not tech news, and it's not especially
notable. Get over yourself.

Hence, the latest interweb catch phrase...

[Damage Ctrl]

I'm under ur bridge burnin ur packets.

Experimental?

[mshiltonj]

Dude, how long is Internet 2 going to be "experimental"? Is this like development for Duke Nukem 3?

WTF!

[McGiraf]

sure ...

Timeline

[belg4mit]

I'd actually wager that it started much earlier. I switched from the Green Line to Red
at Park Street around 3:00 on Tuesday and there was quite a lot of smoke coming from
the outbound end of the tunnel. It wasn't clear what it was, but apparently nobody
reported it (including the conductors who have radios). My guess is because they didn't
want to bring the system to halt over false alrams "oh noes! smokes! It's anthrax!"

Mod parent up.

[SeaFox]

+1 Funny

Looking for the...

[Julz]

Smoking Bum

Re:God Bless Everyone...except assholes.

[Anonymous Coward]

Please, someone explain to me why these poorly presented arguments, complete with cussing and ad hominem are being modded up to +4 or +5 insightful. These are trolls, guys. It's just another person taking out their frustrations on the internet. If it's insightful, people would be impressed if these comments were said in real life. Rather if this guy would say this to the people he has a problem with... they would most likely dispose of the cigarette butt for him. It's not littering if you shove it down the throat of an obnoxious jerk, right?

Also, cigarette butts are compressed cellulose(plant fiber) and/or cotton wrapped in thin paper. They're completely biodegradable. So no matter how loudly you whine, it's not like it's a car tire or worse...electronics, that will not degrade for millenia. Those butts may be in your face, but they actually don't harm the environment at all. But like, Ohmigod! They are like, soooo not pretty!

Part of a conspiracy

[NMigo]

This is very likely a conspiracy from the government trying to cover up the installation of some spying equipment. Blaming a homeless guy? comme on :P