Slashdot Mirror
Google Planning New Undersea Cable Across Pacific?
tregetour writes "Google is planning a multi-terabit undersea communications cable across the Pacific Ocean for launch in 2009, Communications Day reports: 'Google would not strictly confirm or deny the existence of the Unity plan today, with spokesman Barry Schnitt telling our North American correspondent Patrick Neighly that "Additional infrastructure for the Internet is good for users and there are a number of proposals to add a Pacific submarine cable. We're not commenting on any of these plans." However, Communications Day understands that Unity would see Google join with other carriers to build a new multi-terabit cable. Google would get access to a fibre pair at build cost handing it a tremendous cost advantage over rivals such as MSN and Yahoo, and also potentially enabling it to peer with Asia ISPs behind their international gateways — considerably improving the affordability of Internet services across Asia Pacific.'"
So will the NSA tap it at the google datacenter with their permission ala AT&T or will the Navy have to tap it will one of those fancy subs we keep hearing about that lifts the cable off the seabed and can splice without interruption?
Because you know there's no way "homeland security" is letting that happen without monitoring.
You know with these kinds of resources, if Google ever did turn evil, we'd never figure it out until it was far too late...
Why are we trying to reduce the cost of Asian providers when the US' is still overpriced, unreliable, and underserved?
Last time I checked, Japan and SK had amazing speeds (10-100mbit) for very affordable prices. It's still a matter of government intervention, not corporate meddling.
As I understand it, Australia (and probably everyone else, for that matter) has been getting reamed by the USA as regards Internet peering arrangements. Bandwidth costs have always been higher here, and it's not all to do with a lack of local competition, although that used to be a credible story back when Telstra was charging twenty cents a megabyte for permanent dial-up connectivity. These days the economic pressure is mostly conspicuous for the fact that local hosting services are so expensive. If Google busts up that cosy little oligopoly, I'll love them to bits for it. To gigabits, even. (Sorry. Preemptive pun. Someone had to do it.)
Is this a part of Google's answer to the whole carrier sabre-rattling about non-neutrality and wanting a slice of Google's profits? There's no better way to ensure fair treatment than to provide your own infrastructure. Is this Google's way of saying to the carriers, "get over it, guys -- bandwidth is a fricken commodity now, and we're going to compete with you to make it so, so kiss your old monopoly profits goodbye." There's a high barrier to entry in this market, and you'd be mad to buy your way in only to compete all the profits out of it -- unless you happen to be a major consumer of bandwidth yourself, like Google.
Must... not... get... hopes... up...
proof, n. A demonstration that a conclusion is implied by certain premises and axioms.
I assure you the Chinese government doesn't suddenly have less authority because Google has fiber in the Pacific.
Don't get the vapors, everyone. Google is buying one fiber pair. This will lower their costs, but only that. There will be, what, 200+ fiber pairs in that cable. There will be some to go around if anyone else wants to pony up.
As for "considerably improving the affordability of Internet services across Asia Pacific,'" I don't follow that at all. Google doesn't sell transit. The new cable might do that, but not because of Google - because real ISPs will get other fiber pairs and use them to sell transit.
Next, we'll get articles about how Google's corporate jets will revolutionize air transport in North America ! (At least, for Google execs.)
Why not Africa?
Because businesses function on making money, not just fulfilling "needs."
Undersea cables are hideously expensive and the company putting one in _needs_ to have a reasonable chance of recouping those costs.
While Africa may "need" internet, the fact that companies aren't already in a race to provide Africa with internet is a de-facto signal that multiple companies don't think they have a business case to provide it.
I need a "Ferrari" but the business community isn't in a hurry to provide ME with one either.
I was prompted me to look at the wikipedia and found this interesting article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_communications_cable
I particularly found very interesting the map with all the undersea cables in the world. Pretty cool.