Slashdot Mirror


Pigeon Turns Out To Be Faster Than S. African Net

inject_hotmail.com writes "The results are in: it's faster to send your data via an airborne carrier than it is through the pipes. As discussed Tuesday, a company in South Africa called Unlimited IT, frustrated by terribly slow Internet speeds, decided to prove their point by sending an actual homing pigeon with a "data card" strapped to its leg from one of their offices to another while at the same time uploading the same amount of data to the same destination via their ISPs data lines. The media outlet reporting this triumph said that it took the pigeon just over 1 hour to make the 80km/50mile flight, whereas it took over 2 hours to transfer just 4% of that data."

406 comments

  1. Pigeons RULE! by stoolpigeon · · Score: 4, Funny

    Suck it, non-pigeons.

    --
    It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
    1. Re:Pigeons RULE! by joaommp · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Dear Sir

      I'm contacting you in the name of the office of the Ministery of Transport, Pidgeons and Communications of South Africa. Recently, the former minister has been abducted by aliens and therefore considered Missing In Action. He has left a huge fortune that is to be placed in a bet in a pidgeon running against a telecom. For that, we come asking for your help, as we need a second bank account to transfer the money, since we are unable to do it directly because the minister used strange passwords. I kindly request your account number so we can the amount needed. In the process, you will receive 10% of the amount, making you a turkish millionaire.

      In WEB we believe. Best regards.

      (PS: yes, I know "turkish" and "South Africa" have nothing to do with each other.)

    2. Re:Pigeons RULE! by MrNaz · · Score: 4, Funny

      If you're asking for me to pay the up front fee, I will do so. Via avian carrier. A recent experiment shows that it's more effective than internet based communications.

      --
      I hate printers.
    3. Re:Pigeons RULE! by dintech · · Score: 5, Funny

      For the love of God, just don't try to send any data throgh it's secure socket...

    4. Re:Pigeons RULE! by joaommp · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      These guys have no sense of humor. Since when making a joke about the context of the story is offtopic? Besides, pidgeons can carry 419 spam too.

    5. Re:Pigeons RULE! by moon3 · · Score: 1

      Pigeon broadband (only in Africa).
      Just do not try to play Quake over it.

    6. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      For the love of God, just don't try to send any data throgh it's secure socket...

            This has been tried, but the pigeon's "secure" socket is not as "secure" as you would think. First of all it only holds a tiny amount of data, and secondly, there's a vulnerability which can cause your data to be dropped on random objects including statues, cars and people.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    7. Re:Pigeons RULE! by MistrX · · Score: 1

      I'm wondering what the latency and ping times are. I must say the routing and switching is something of the past!

    8. Re:Pigeons RULE! by asylumx · · Score: 0, Redundant

      "its", not "it's"

      With love,
      Grammar Nazi #881307

      (mods give me a break, this is just an "idle" thread!)

    9. Re:Pigeons RULE! by dov_0 · · Score: 1

      Don't know about ping times, but the peck times are super fast!

      --
      sudo mount --milk --sugar /cup/tea /mouth /etc/init.d/relax start
    10. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Dan541 · · Score: 1

      I'm wondering what a DoS attack is like. I expect a shotgun is probably involved.

      --
      An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
    11. Re:Pigeons RULE! by JavaBear · · Score: 3, Funny

      I must applaud the IT company for trying out a 'green' alternative to large volume data transfer, but I wonder how long it will take for Telkom to get new legislation passed that will outlaw this form of data transfer.

    12. Re:Pigeons RULE! by eleuthero · · Score: 1

      Usually the scams come out of Nigeria - or claim to at least. South Africa is a bit far away from Nigeria. The main languages other than English are totally different too and thus English has developed along different lines. If this had been an article about Nigerian pigeons being faster, it would have made more sense. As it is, it is like responding to an article about Colombia by talking about Mexicans.

      On top of this, maybe I've missed it or something, but while a lot of the following comments tie in to wikipedia pages on pigeons, no one seems to have linked to IP over Avian Carriers - but perhaps they simply like the direct links made from that page.

    13. Re:Pigeons RULE! by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      "its", not "it's"

      It's [it's "its", it's not "it's"], it's not ["its", not "it's"].

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    14. Re:Pigeons RULE! by camperdave · · Score: 1

      Bert? Is that you?

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    15. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Haxamanish · · Score: 1

      Well, 'tis changing.

      (I found this form ('tis) in Hume's Treatise of Human Nature, 1739 - yes, I know he's a Scott.).

      Could we get a single clear form for the possessive in English please? No, of course not.

      Is it "Haxamanish's post", "Haxamanish' post" or "Haxamanishes post"? Depending on who you ask, the answer is different. "It's" and "its" is consistent with none of those. But then again, consistency is not a property of natural language.

    16. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate to see the UDP implementation with dropped packets ... poor pigeons

    17. Re:Pigeons RULE! by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      It's {It's [it's "its", it's not "it's"], not ["its", not "it's"]}, not {It's [it's "its", it's not "it's"], it's not ["its", not "it's"]}.

      Your sentence was a run-on.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    18. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Am I the only person who looks at that and the only thing I see is "tits"?

    19. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just wait until someone demos pigeon DDOS or MITM attacks.

    20. Re:Pigeons RULE! by dintech · · Score: 3, Funny

      Pigeons are a series of tubes.

    21. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Bigby · · Score: 1

      The Pigeon delivery is UDP, unless the sender gets some kind of confirmation. Maybe you can use the windowing idea and send 10 pigeons at a time, each with a different part of the same message. If a pigeon doesn't come back, send it again with the same message.

      You'll at least have nice fertilized ground between the sender and receiver.

    22. Re:Pigeons RULE! by NotBornYesterday · · Score: 1

      Would that be a European pigeon or an African pigeon?

      --
      I prefer rogues to imbeciles because they sometimes take a rest.
    23. Re:Pigeons RULE! by oatworm · · Score: 2, Funny

      Nah - that's a man-in-the-middle attack. A DoS attack would involve large flocks of pigeons visiting the data destination at the same time.

    24. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is Slashdot. Tits are everywhere. Some of them are even on women.

    25. Re:Pigeons RULE! by yo_tuco · · Score: 1

      "Just do not try to play Quake over it."

      You can if you upgrade to the high-speed Red Tail Hawk network. Much, much faster. It eats Pigeon networks for lunch! .

    26. Re:Pigeons RULE! by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      Technically a DoS would be anything which denies service, including a shotgun.
      You could even do a DDoS by putting out a bouny on pidgeons and getting a lot of people with shotguns to join in :)

    27. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly certain that the shotgun would be plenty capable of denying service.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    28. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      Actually you're BORTH wrong.

      A DDDoS (distributed DoS) attack involves large flocks of pigeons arriving at the same time.

      A DoS attack involves putting a screen door (plate glass window, cat) in front of the pigeon coop.

      And a man (falcon?) in the middle attack is, well, self explanatory.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    29. Re:Pigeons RULE! by The+Archon+V2.0 · · Score: 1

      Am I the only person who looks at that and the only thing I see is "tits"?

      I thought the people in the article used pigeons, not tits!

    30. Re:Pigeons RULE! by operagost · · Score: 1

      Is it "Haxamanish's post", "Haxamanish' post" or "Haxamanishes post"? Depending on who you ask, the answer is different

      and only one is correct: "Haxamanish's post." Possessive pronouns don't use apostrophes, while nouns do.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    31. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Neanderthal+Ninny · · Score: 1

      Watch out below!

    32. Re:Pigeons RULE! by cerberusss · · Score: 1

      I stand corrected!

      Also, your suberb nesting of braces, quotes and square brackets makes me quite horny.

      --
      8 of 13 people found this answer helpful. Did you?
    33. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pigeon breasts are tasty.

    34. Re:Pigeons RULE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You fail on basic understanding of all of these attacks. BORTH!

  2. But it still does not answer the question by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Funny

    What's the speed of an unloaden African swallow?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    1. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Sinn3d · · Score: 1

      30-40 mph .. oh wait thats the european swallow.

    2. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      UnlAden

    3. Re:But it still does not answer the question by M8e · · Score: 1

      The european swallows what?

    4. Re:But it still does not answer the question by plover · · Score: 3, Funny

      The european swallows what?

      Loads.

      --
      John
    5. Re:But it still does not answer the question by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      The european swallows what?

      Loads.

      Your mom is European?

      --
      To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
    6. Re:But it still does not answer the question by mokus000 · · Score: 2, Informative

      What's the speed of an unloaden African swallow?

      Replacing "speed" with "data rate" and making a few other substitutions, we have a question I find interesting. "What was the data rate of that particular laden African swallow?"

      The story is missing an absolutely critical piece of info though - how much data there was. Without that knowledge, the story is pretty meaningless. If I transport 30 GB of data by thumb drive physically (whether by pigeon or car or whatever) in an hour, I can get it there far faster than my home cable modem. If it was 1 MB of data, it's a very different story.

      Judging by the fact that the time "including download" to the destination system was about an hour longer than the time it took for the pigeon to fly, I'd say it very well could have been at least a few GB.

      For sake of a wild-ass guess, giving, say, 20 min overhead for fumbling around with the data card, putting it on and off the pigeons leg, etc., and dividing the remaining time by two (1 transfer onto and 1 transfer off of the device), that puts each transfer at around 15-18 min. At 20 MB/sec, it could have been around 18 to 21 GB of data being transferred. That translates (under the aforementioned massive and barely justifiable set of assumptions) to about 2.3 to 2.8 megabytes per second moved by pigeon (20-ish GB moved in 7617 seconds).

      I'm not going to waste (more) time analyzing sensitivity to changes in my assumptions, but at a guess I'd say the result is moderately sensitive to changes in both pigeon-to-computer transfer time and pigeon-to-computer data rates. In other words, take the numbers above with a pretty big grain of salt.

      --
      Additive identity, multiplicative cancellation, distributive multiplication over addition: pick any two (unless 1 = 0)
    7. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The story is missing an absolutely critical piece of info though - how much data there was. Without that knowledge, the story is pretty meaningless

      " to see which can deliver 4GB of call centre data logs quickest over a distance of around 80km (50 miles)."

      There. I did four seconds of research for you. To what address should I send the invoice?

    8. Re:But it still does not answer the question by mokus000 · · Score: 1

      Update: I see from elsewhere in the comments that the previous /. article had that info. It was a 4 GB stick, so assuming it had about 3900 MB of data, the data rate was about 512 kilobytes per second.

      --
      Additive identity, multiplicative cancellation, distributive multiplication over addition: pick any two (unless 1 = 0)
    9. Re:But it still does not answer the question by mokus000 · · Score: 1

      Maybe you missed the "Idle" tag. I'm *not* gonna research an "Idle" story. If they can't put it in the article, I'll make it up like everyone else will.

      --
      Additive identity, multiplicative cancellation, distributive multiplication over addition: pick any two (unless 1 = 0)
    10. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      According to some of the films I've seen, she swallows ANYTHING...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    11. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      never underestimate the bandwidth of a station-wagon loaded with tapes running down the highways.

      love, Tannenbaum

    12. Re:But it still does not answer the question by robbak · · Score: 1

      Which would require a 5 megabit upload rate. There aren't many people on this planet that can get a domestic service that does that - even businesses would find it expensive. Best I could get here is a 4 Megabit, if a progressive company would put equipment in the local exchange.

      --
      Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
    13. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What? A swallow carrying a coconut?

    14. Re:But it still does not answer the question by KCWaldo · · Score: 1

      I believe the net transfer was only 4% complete after 2 hours.

    15. Re:But it still does not answer the question by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      Why the linked to the yahoo page is beyond me, the full details are at BBC

      The card that 4GB on it (pidgeon) and took 1 Hour. The DSL line transfered 4% of that (163.84MB) in 2 hours (double the time) before I'm assuming they gave up and cancelled the upload.

    16. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that one mouse click really kicked my ass. Fortunately, I'm in training for a triathlon so I think I'll recover in time to get to work. You just save your energy for the really important non-idle stuff that requires, y'know, two or three clicks.

    17. Re:But it still does not answer the question by mdwh2 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Indeed - the problem here is conflating bandwidth with latency.

      The fact that offline methods can have higher bandwidth is nothing new or surprising - just shove a hard drive in the post or whatever, as you suggest, or for even more dramatic examples, the classic is a van or jumbo jet full of DVDs/hard drives.

      There's nothing here that suggests the S African network is slow. Indeed, even on my home wifi, I can trivially move a hard drive, thumb drive or flash card between my two computers, much faster than the time it takes to transmit it through the network. A pigeon could too.

      When we talk about networks being "fast" compared with offline methods, it's the latency we're talking about - how long does it take for a given piece of information to be transmitted?

    18. Re:But it still does not answer the question by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      According to speedtest.net, Africa is dead last in worldwide speeds (1.2 Mbit/s) versus Europe which is 6.8

      South Africa is slightly faster at 1.6 Mbit/s but still pathetically slow.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    19. Re:But it still does not answer the question by tagno25 · · Score: 1

      and if it was 32GB card then transferring the files via network at the same speed would require a minimum a 72Mb/s transfer rate.

    20. Re:But it still does not answer the question by kimvette · · Score: 1

      I have 5mbps upstream at the office, and 6mpbs upstream at home. It's not uncommon as you think, although from what I've heard southeastern asian countries make the broadband we have in the Boston area look like a joke. Here in the USA our infrastructure is woefully outdated, causing our internet connections to be much slower than those found in developing third-world countries. What we consider fast (22/5, 16/2, etc) would be considered substandard in many Southeast-Asian nations. They need the bandwidth, too, what with all of the "piracy"[sic] of Microsoft and Adobe software, and movies leaked from DVD replication factories. ;)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    21. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing here that suggests the S African network is slow. Indeed, even on my home wifi, I can trivially move a hard drive, thumb drive or flash card between my two computers, much faster than the time it takes to transmit it through the network. A pigeon could too.

      When we talk about networks being "fast" compared with offline methods, it's the latency we're talking about - how long does it take for a given piece of information to be transmitted?

      wireless (wifi)(at best 56Mb/s half duplex [802.11n can get around 130Mb/s split duplex]) is actually pretty slow when compared to a fast ethernet connection (100Mb/s full duplex)

    22. Re:But it still does not answer the question by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      That is the second problem with SA Telkom, their lines ARE slow (low bit rates) as well as high latency (high 'ping' times), at high cost.

    23. Re:But it still does not answer the question by v1 · · Score: 1

      well the summary was missing that, and I had to (gasp!) read the story to find out. But still it belonged in the summary.

      A long time ago I recall hearing "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of 9-tracks tooling down the highway". Reminds me of this. For a number of years now, the ratio of data storage per pound vs network speed has remained largely unbalanced, and isn't likely to ever change. I can fedex overnight a crate full of 1tb HDDs for a heck of a lot less cost than the bandwidth required to push the same amount of data across the country in the same amount of time. Really this pidgeon thing is a strawman, And they could have easily put a 16-32gb flash on it instead to up the ante.

      --
      I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
    24. Re:But it still does not answer the question by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      That's a completely stupid comparison. You could have strapped a 16 GB Micro SD card to it's leg, and made the comparison seem even worse. My home connection only gets 256 Kbits/s upload, so it would take me 35 hours to upload 4 GB of data. Even downloading (at 3Mbit/s) I would take 3 hours to transfer 4 GB. So, I would have to say, that this pidgeon is even faster than my Canadian High Speed connection. Put a large enough amount of memory on the pidgeon, and you could probably outrun a 10 Mbit connection.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    25. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      slashdot modding...

      another case in point this post here has a score of 2, where the poster is referring to absolutely nothing related to the original topic while responding to a post that was already offtopic. yet topics specifically talking about pigeons are getting offtopic mod.

    26. Re:But it still does not answer the question by MaerD · · Score: 1

      The classic example is a station wagon :)
      "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes", variously credited to Dennis Ritchie, Andrew Tanenbaum and other sources. I can't tell who was first with it.

      --
      I put on my robe and wizard hat..
    27. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Congratulations, you discovered the secret of packet based delivery.

      What we have here, in the case of a pidgeon, is that it delivers not single bits of data but packets of a given maximum size. And no matter how much you fill that packet the delivery time will be equal. Only if you need multiples of a packet, the delivery time will vary. It does not scale equally over the spectrum. Instead you have equal delivery time for data sizes of 0-X (with X being the pidgeons maximum carrying capacity), then a "bump" to three times that time for two packets, 5 time for three and so on (yes, not twice and three times, don't forget the return trip... let's assume the pidgeon would find back, I know... spare me the tidbits).

      The opposite would be to say a truck can deliver goods slower than a Ferrari, so why are we keeping this totally inefficient delivery system alive, why doesn't UPS exchange their ugly vans for sleek, brown Ferraris.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    28. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      Obviously not!

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    29. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Nesman64 · · Score: 1

      The correct answer will be given in bits/second.

      --
      coffee | nose > keyboard
    30. Re:But it still does not answer the question by nschubach · · Score: 1

      It doesn't matter how long it takes to get the first bit if you can't use it until the last one arrives... (zip files, etc.) When transmitting a progressive JPG or a streaming movie the argument would be prudent though. :p

      --
      Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
    31. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait a minute! Supposing two swallows carried it together...

    32. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      You're right about that, I have 30meg up and down here at the office which I can expand or contract with a single phone call. Of course I have optical Internet. Here in the Southwest it's not such a bad joke as other parts of the country but you're right in that the majority of providers took our tax money to build infrastructure and ran off with it to some island on their yachts.

      I understand high bandwidth can be expensive, hell I'm having trouble deploying 10gigE let alone 40gig like most ISPs need at their core. There's no shortage of fiber here though so it's purely the cost of equipment that hurts higher speed adoption. I can rent dark fiber in town for quite a reasonable price but lighting it will cost me quite a bit. Single mode GBICs rated for 72 miles usually cost in the $800 range plus the cost of the switching gear and that's just Ethernet. When you go ATM you achieve much higher throughput but the gear is quite costly.

    33. Re:But it still does not answer the question by The+Ultimate+Fartkno · · Score: 1

      Last swallow what bit me got 'is li'l neck broke. I'm not about to sit around and see 'ow many times 'e can do it in a second!

    34. Re:But it still does not answer the question by omnichad · · Score: 1

      And in South Africa (using 4% as an estimate) they are getting roughly 180kbps upload (or nearly 3/4 of your speed).

    35. Re:But it still does not answer the question by Vancorps · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the point that 256k is pathetically slow and 10Mbit isn't fast either. Hell, residential cable here in the Southwest is 28Mbit and even that is considered pathetically slow to the 100Mbit I have at work which is about par with residential Internet in South Korea or Japan.

      There's no technological reason we have today for a carrier pigeon to transfer data faster than we can over the Internet. It's a growing problem due to lack of competition whether in the U.S or South Africa.

    36. Re:But it still does not answer the question by promythyus · · Score: 1

      ha. You reckon USA is behind? Come down under, mate!

    37. Re:But it still does not answer the question by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Well, to be fair, I have 50 Mbit available to me, I just choose not to pay for it. Also, I don't really find my connection slow. It's not as fast as it could be, but it fits my needs. And the whole carrier pidgeon thing is still a bogus argument. You could strap 100 GB to that bird (how much would 7, 16 GB MicroSD cards weigh?) , and he'd still make the trip in 1 hour, giving you an effective bit rate of 227 Mbit/s. So that bird could be faster than just about any connection you to get to any home, anywhere in the world.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    38. Re:But it still does not answer the question by icebraining · · Score: 1

      There's an ISP here in Portugal that offers 50Mbps up&down for 22 dollars/month.

    39. Re:But it still does not answer the question by icebraining · · Score: 1

      Only 50Mbit? 'round here we have a 200Mbit available. It's not cheap, but I ear it gives what it promises.

    40. Re:But it still does not answer the question by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      Hell, residential cable here in the Southwest is 28Mbit and even that is considered pathetically slow to the 100Mbit I have at work which is about par with residential Internet in South Korea or Japan.

      I HATE YOU!

  3. Old News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful
    1. Re:Old News by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      RFC2549 - IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service

      That's the specification. This was the implementation test case. There's a world of difference between saying it will working and showing it to work.

    2. Re:Old News by Barny · · Score: 1

      This was most certainly not an implementation of either of the avian carrier RFCs. For one they are not implementing IP with the pigeon, they are using a custom data packet with a ridiculous MTU.

      A good implementation of the original idea would be to use that new DTN setup planned for space ( http://kingofgng.com/eng/2008/11/27/hello-world-for-the-interplanetary-internet/ ).

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
  4. In defense of the cable... by damn_registrars · · Score: 1, Interesting

    A couple of important things were omitted that are important to the pigeon - in particular the time and money that went into training the bird to make that flight. They didn't exactly just reach out of their office window and grab any pigeon that happened to be nearby.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:In defense of the cable... by kick6 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A couple of important things were omitted that are important to the pigeon - in particular the time and money that went into training the bird to make that flight. They didn't exactly just reach out of their office window and grab any pigeon that happened to be nearby.

      I don't think thats important at all. Its not like they reached out the window, and grabbed any phone line either. This was simply comparing quality of service between two provider's networks. Telekom lost.

    2. Re:In defense of the cable... by Ma8thew · · Score: 4, Informative

      Homing pigeons are not trained. Their ability is innate.

    3. Re:In defense of the cable... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      What a pigeon does is that it finds back its home. So what you usually do is breed some pigeons in your dovecote and give some to the people who need to send you messages. Not a lot of training is required but you need a way to deliver a pigeon to the sender of the message.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    4. Re:In defense of the cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Somehow, I don't think that flying from one specific Unlimited IT office to a specific other Unlimited IT office is an innate ability.

    5. Re:In defense of the cable... by Fleeced · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Homing pigeons are not trained. Their ability is innate.

      Kind of true, but training helps, that's why pigeon racing is a sport - different training methods produce different results (though breeding helps too, of course). In war, they were often trained to find a "moving home"... an ability that is certainly needs training

    6. Re:In defense of the cable... by amn108 · · Score: 1

      You are saying it as if if you had to snap a random group of IP packets you actually knew what to do with them? Infrastructure always has to be in place.

    7. Re:In defense of the cable... by dsginter · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that pigeon bittorrent implementation is a bit cumbersome.

      --
      More
    8. Re:In defense of the cable... by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      Actually, it is. If they nest in one office, then returning to that office (from any starting location) is innate. Training helps with speed of transit, but they do it of their own accord. Of course, to make the trip again, they need to be boxed up and shipped back to the starting office.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    9. Re:In defense of the cable... by damn_registrars · · Score: 1, Insightful

      A couple of important things were omitted that are important to the pigeon - in particular the time and money that went into training the bird to make that flight. They didn't exactly just reach out of their office window and grab any pigeon that happened to be nearby.

      I don't think thats important at all. Its not like they reached out the window, and grabbed any phone line either. This was simply comparing quality of service between two provider's networks. Telekom lost.

      My point is that the time and money invested in the bird is not trivial. If the pigeon is to carry something to point B from point A, someone needs to deliver the pigeon from point B to point A in order for that to happen. And that person will then themselves return to point B (if they live or work at point B) or else they originated at point A (if they live or work there). Hence there is a round trip by car (or other vehicle) for someone between A and B that should be considered. That round trip took time and money for someone. And the bird likely wasn't free either.

      Though nonetheless, the data transfer rates over cable were atrocious, as shown in the summary.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    10. Re:In defense of the cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The innate ability mentioned is just the pigeons ability to return to it's home ('nest'). But these pigeons need to be domesticated so that they allow people to actually catch them and stuff the data card/ letters into the sheath/container that they carry. Training these is not a easy task or an overnight task!! (Training pigeons (ehow)

    11. Re:In defense of the cable... by supernova_hq · · Score: 1

      It's called central park. Or more specifically, the tree above your car.

    12. Re:In defense of the cable... by notgm · · Score: 2, Funny

      so you just have one pigeon from the other office boxed up with your memory stick. the first pigeon arrives, you take the other office's pigeon out of the box, take the memory stick, put in a new memory stick, put your pigeon in the box, attach the box to the previously boxed pigeon, and send him back from whence it came.

    13. Re:In defense of the cable... by NonSequor · · Score: 1

      Furthermore, when you look at throughput for physical transportation, you have to factor in the impact of deadheads (moving an empty truck, plane, or messageless pigeon somewhere so it can pick up a load). In the case of carrier pigeons, they just fly toward home, so if you want to send another message you're going to have to carry them back to the source by some other means of transportation which likely takes much longer than the pigeons flight. Averaging in the return trip, the crummy network is going to win.

      As an aside, the problem of minimizing the deadheads for a set of shipping orders between a variety of points is NP complete.

      --
      My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
    14. Re:In defense of the cable... by theverylastperson · · Score: 3, Funny

      What if you just strapped one pigeon onto another pigeon? Each pigeon goes one direction. Thus if we strap two pigeons together we have a bidirectional avian connection. The future is now.

      --
      ed duval the very last person
    15. Re:In defense of the cable... by ubersoldat2k7 · · Score: 1

      Not if you count cleaning all the crap that pidgeons generate. Go to Rome some weekend and watch (and smell) the show.

    16. Re:In defense of the cable... by damn_registrars · · Score: 0

      God you dense.

      Your typing leaves something to be desired.

      Do you think the time and money invested in digging-up the ground, hiring men, laying cable, and then connecting it with the required headends/servers is trivial either?

      I never suggested such a thing, you made it up based on how you (mis)read what I wrote.

      Futhermore, the investment in networking infrastructure is dramatically different than the investment in training a bird. In particular, cabling to a site is in most cases multi-use - it connects to the internet and not just a single site. Unless you have some reason to claim that dedicated cabling was running between the two sites, your argument doesn't hold much weight. After all, the bird is capable of going only to one site - and very few pigeons ever learn to do a round trip on their own.

      I suspect training the pigeon would actually be LESS time consuming.

      That is based on a whole lot of assumptions that you cannot support. How the time expense of wiring at each site compares to the round-trip drive between the sites is not defined.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    17. Re:In defense of the cable... by Barny · · Score: 1

      Not to mention having a "person" take them from point B to point A, then return is silly, thats what a large fedex box with some air holes is for.

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    18. Re:In defense of the cable... by ChemGeek4501 · · Score: 1

      Makes my dial up look pretty good....

    19. Re:In defense of the cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Add all the qualifiers you want - Telekom's electrons got beat by a fucking bird.

    20. Re:In defense of the cable... by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      Of course, to make the trip again, they need to be boxed up and shipped back to the starting office.

      Just tie it to the ankle of a bird that nests in the other office...

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
    21. Re:In defense of the cable... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I wonder how well pigeons scale though. You might find you get pretty high packet loss if everyone starts using them...

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    22. Re:In defense of the cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canceling accidental mismoderation.

    23. Re:In defense of the cable... by jschen · · Score: 1

      Canceling accidental mismoderation. (Evidently, posting anonymously doesn't get the job done.)

    24. Re:In defense of the cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't find my source, but there was an interview done where they admitted that their internet connections were costing R35000/ $4605 per month.
      The interviewee went on to say that using pidgeons would cost them R10000 / $1315.78 per month.

    25. Re:In defense of the cable... by Midnight+Thunder · · Score: 1

      I wonder how well pigeons scale though. You might find you get pretty high packet loss if everyone starts using them...

      Isn't this already documented in the specification for "Utilitarian Data Pigeons"?

      --
      Jumpstart the tartan drive.
    26. Re:In defense of the cable... by nahdude812 · · Score: 1

      Nah, it's not so complex as that. You have A->B pigeons, and you have B->A pigeons. B just straps A's pigeon to one of his pigeons and sends it back.

    27. Re:In defense of the cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine a Beowulf Cluster of this ... does that work nowadays?

    28. Re:In defense of the cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Carrier pigeons don't really need to be "trained" per se. All you do is raise them at a home base (the destination) then transport by ground to the source, attach the message, and let it go. The pigeons just go home from where ever they are by instinct. It also helps that pigeons, like many birds, have a natural sort of GPS built into their brains.

    29. Re:In defense of the cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your point is still lacking. Why do you continue to argue a point that is weak at best?

    30. Re:In defense of the cable... by Locke2005 · · Score: 1

      And the bird likely wasn't free either. But it's cost was pigeon feed compared to the cost of getting a Telekom line installed. Also, pigeon breeders don't have to bribe the government communications workers to ensure continued service. (I'm told you have to do this in India, I'm not sure about SA.) At any rate, one should not be surprised when a government licensed monopoly provides poor service.

      --
      I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
    31. Re:In defense of the cable... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      According to the Wikipedia article, it is possible to train them to go to a single food source regularly which is a long distance from their nest, so that you don't even have to bother transporting them to the source yourself.

    32. Re:In defense of the cable... by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >>>>>God you dense.

      >>Your typing leaves something to be desired.

      It's not a typo or grammatical error. It's Ebonics. ;-)

      .

      >>>I never suggested such a thing, you made it up based on how you (mis)read what I wrote.

      I understood perfectly. You basically said "in defense of cable" that it was cheaper than training pigeons, which is more costly in time and money.

      Now you're trying to backpeddle and pretend you never said that, but it seems quite clear - you forgot laying cable ALSO requires traiining and money and time.

      Right now I'm leaning towards the pigeon being cheaper. It's certainly faster (about 50 times faster).

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    33. Re:In defense of the cable... by damn_registrars · · Score: 0, Troll

      I understood perfectly. You basically said "in defense of cable" that it was cheaper than training pigeons, which is more costly in time and money.

      Wrong again, you assumed that to be my argument. I did not assert one to be cheaper than the other. I was arguing that the logic presented was incomplete.

      Much like your own analysis of what I have been saying:

      Now you're trying to backpeddle and pretend you never said that

      There is no backpedaling, no matter how much you may assert (or misspell) it. Kindly go back and re-read what I have written, without your own assumptions.

      , but it seems quite clear - you forgot laying cable ALSO requires traiining and money and time.

      I never claimed that was done magically or at no cost. However you will find that in other posts I have pointed out that cable is not laid for single purposes; pigeons are single purpose. Furthermore between a point A and a point B, very little of the cable used for communication is specifically laid for the occupants of point A or point B in most cases. The same cannot be said of the pigeons, their preparation, or their deployment.

      Right now I'm leaning towards the pigeon being cheaper

      Since you seem to have no concern for my opinion on the matter, I won't worry about yours either.

      It's certainly faster (about 50 times faster).

      At the very least you need to divide that number by two, as someone had to get the pigeon down to point B so it could return to point A. And that is only if you assume that the trip for the pigeon to point B was at the same speed (around 50mph) as it took to get back to point A when flying (and that is also only if you assume that the bird immediately leaves point B for point A with no time between).

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    34. Re:In defense of the cable... by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>My point is that the time and money invested in the bird is not trivial.

        Do you think the time and money invested in digging-up the ground, hiring men, laying cable, and then connecting it with the required headends/servers is trivial either? I suspect training the pigeon would actually be LESS time consuming.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    35. Re:In defense of the cable... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really failed to make that point, then.

  5. Not a fair comparison by localman57 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Fine. So your data rate is higher. But the fact is, a carrier pigeon is only half-duplex, whereas your network connection, though slower, is full-duplex. I bet your carrier-pigeon vendor didn't talk about that part, did he?

    1. Re:Not a fair comparison by CRCulver · · Score: 5, Funny

      I bet your carrier-pigeon vendor didn't talk about that part, did he?

      Not only that, but his assistant kept touching my wife's ass, and after he wrapped up his sales presentation and left, we noticed all the silverware was gone. I'd advise all to keep well away from these carrier pigeon vendors, even if they seem slick.

    2. Re:Not a fair comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps half duplex, but for the cost (~70-90$ a 32Gig reusable) per packet it's quite perfect for them. I just hope they'll continu this way :)

    3. Re:Not a fair comparison by ryanov · · Score: 1

      I wish I had mod points. It's not every day I can laugh before 9:00a.

    4. Re:Not a fair comparison by mokus000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Huh? You can't send pigeons both ways at the same time? As far as I know, you can pipeline pigeons too. I guess if you're talking about the one pigeon it's not gonna "home" both ways, but one data packet doesn't go both ways on an electronic network either.

      --
      Additive identity, multiplicative cancellation, distributive multiplication over addition: pick any two (unless 1 = 0)
    5. Re:Not a fair comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who cares.. the Pigeon is still faster than Telscum... for bulk. The pigeon proved what everybody knows...Telscum has been ripping off SA for years now. This was a brilliant idea to highlight SA's frustration with Telscum.

    6. Re:Not a fair comparison by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 1

      If full-duplex is all you care about, a dial-up line will suffice. But if you want high-bandwidth, pigeons is clearly the way to go in South Africa.

      I'm looking forward to a follow-up three-way race that includes bongo drums.

      --
      He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
    7. Re:Not a fair comparison by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      This has always been the case. Say for example I take a 10 terabyte harddrive full of Data. Then I Take an airplane across country and give them the drive. Say 8 Hours later I transported 10 terrabytes of data. That is about 3 GigaBit/Second transfer rate.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:Not a fair comparison by Idbar · · Score: 1

      Also, the efficiency of pigeon carrier drops dramatically with packet losses:
      1. Reliability: Acknowledgment of packets would require another mechanism, which increases costs.
      2. Packet (or pigeon) losses, will get them into trouble with animal agencies, and will also be costly as the media also costs money.
      3. Most important, possibility of being sued by people being sh*tted all over when massive data transmission is required.

      If you ask me, I don't think this start-up will fly.

    9. Re:Not a fair comparison by MMC+Monster · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry.

      --
      Help! I'm a slashdot refugee.
    10. Re:Not a fair comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, they could always sent another pigeon in the other direction at the same time

      Or, since only 4% was transferred in the time it took the pigeon, that would mean the pigeon may be able to make 24 more trips in the same amount of time (assuming handling the pigeon is easy and doesn't take a lot of time)

    11. Re:Not a fair comparison by chrysrobyn · · Score: 1

      Fine. So your data rate is higher. But the fact is, a carrier pigeon is only half-duplex, whereas your network connection, though slower, is full-duplex. I bet your carrier-pigeon vendor didn't talk about that part, did he?

      A single carrier pigeon is half duplex, but if you add another at the other end, you have full duplex. Increasing bandwidth is easy, too, just add another pigeon.

    12. Re:Not a fair comparison by inject_hotmail.com · · Score: 1

      Actually, more than one homing pigeon exists in the world...so they could create a full-duplex "connection" in the same sense that the Internet is full-duplex.

    13. Re:Not a fair comparison by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 1

      My carrier pigeon rep just informed me that he is the Nephew of one Ngobe Ngayaka, a formerly high ranking member of the Nigerian Government, and he has access to $23.45 Million in secret funds. He needs help getting the funds out of the country. I get to keep 10% if I help. It is a can't lose proposition!

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
    14. Re:Not a fair comparison by TeethWhitener · · Score: 1

      That's why Telkom now offers a new service: two pigeons. For a modest fee.

    15. Re:Not a fair comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the pidgeons are more than full duplex. We have the capability to "channel bond" them and like to call this "super poop-plexing" since they do tend to generate a bit of "dropped" waste.

      So you could actually have multiple packets headed each direction, over the same medium. But we do have to concede that latency is a bit of a problem, which could adversely affect real-time applications.

    16. Re:Not a fair comparison by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I don't even understand the purpose of this test. It takes me forever to transfer 4 gig (a couple days, and sometimes resorting to leaving the computer on overnight). What home user with a reasonable budget can send 4G in an hour? If the pigeon had lost, all they would have had to do was double to size of the data card and try the test again. Eventually you'll get an amount of data that takes longer to send over the net than via pigeon, even with top of the line broadband.

    17. Re:Not a fair comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's also 'faster' than any network anywhere in the world. I'm sure a pigeon can carry several PB in flash cards nowadays.

  6. Cloud computing by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 5, Funny

    This give a new meaning to "cloud computing". Just look at the clouds to see the results coming in!

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    1. Re:Cloud computing by ruiner13 · · Score: 1

      You only HOPE those are "results" coming in while looking up, with pigeons, you never know.

      --

      today is spelling optional day.

    2. Re:Cloud computing by MarkRose · · Score: 1

      Better wear goggles in case that incoming result is not the output you were looking for!

      --
      Be relentless!
    3. Re:Cloud computing by kencurry · · Score: 1

      This give a new meaning to "cloud computing". Just look at the clouds to see the results coming in!

      Not sure that I would look up if there are pigeons flying to/from the Cloud...

      --
      sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
    4. Re:Cloud computing by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      This give a new meaning to "cloud computing"

      And "tweetering".
         

  7. Take that! by palemantle · · Score: 5, Funny

    They forgot to mention that they also got the pigeon to stop and poop all over the Telkom bosses enroute.

    1. Re:Take that! by muffen · · Score: 4, Funny

      They forgot to mention that they also got the pigeon to stop and poop all over the Telkom bosses enroute.

      It's the logfiles!

    2. Re:Take that! by rwa2 · · Score: 1

      Brilliant!

      If those are the logfiles, I'd hate to see what a coredump looks like.

      Oh wait, inappropriate analogy :/

  8. One would hope by Shivetya · · Score: 4, Insightful

    that training and money went into creating this network that cannot keep up with a pigeon.

    --
    * Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
  9. My professor used to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Never underestimate the datarate of a truck loaded with CDs. The latency is a bitch, though.

    Seems the same applies to pigeons with flash cards.

    1. Re:My professor used to say by ShadowRangerRIT · · Score: 1

      Pfffttt... Snail based networking is the way to go... But yeah, the latency characteristics are even worse.

      --
      $_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
    2. Re:My professor used to say by zmnatz · · Score: 1

      Funny my prof said the same thing

    3. Re:My professor used to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never underestimate the datarate of a truck loaded with CDs.

      Your professor was Andrew S. Tanenbaum?

    4. Re:My professor used to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Harrumph! Station wagon loaded with tapes. What's with these newfangled "CDs" ?

    5. Re:My professor used to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    6. Re:My professor used to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've heard that point made using a snail pulling two DVD's on a spindle... a reasonably enthusiastic snail has better bandwidth than the average internet connection, but the ping is hell.

    7. Re:My professor used to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The actual quote is "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway." - Andrew S. Tanenbaum

    8. Re:My professor used to say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, in general terms, "Never underestimate a <insert cargo vessel> loaded with <insert highest-density storage media>."
      The latency would suck, but what kind of bandwidth are we talking about with a super-carrier full of hard drives from Shanghai to, say, Seoul?

  10. This is useless reporting by azav · · Score: 0, Troll

    The size of the data file is not mentioned nor is the upload speed. Was the pigeon carrying a terabyte of information or 4K? Who knows? Incomplete and useless reporting.

    --
    - Zav - Imagine a Beowulf cluster of insensitive clods...
    1. Re:This is useless reporting by Yvanhoe · · Score: 1

      I was 4 gigabyte on an USB key.

      --
      The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
    2. Re:This is useless reporting by Calydor · · Score: 4, Informative

      From the /. article also linked in the summary:

      "Just a few days after this Slashdot article, South Africa's largest telecoms provider, Telkom (which has been taking flak for years for its shoddy and overpriced service), is being pitted against a homing pigeon to see which can deliver 4GB of call centre data logs quickest over a distance of around 80km (50 miles). According to the official website, the race is set to take place September 10."

      --
      -=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
    3. Re:This is useless reporting by tom17 · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, *I* was 4 gigabyte on an USB key! And so was my wife.

  11. Underwater Fiber by oldspewey · · Score: 4, Insightful
    From TFA:

    Internet speed is expected to improve once a new 17,000 km underwater fiber optic cable linking southern and East Africa to other networks becomes operational

    I thought this "contest" measured the speed of an internal data transfer within SA.

    --
    If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    1. Re:Underwater Fiber by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      More to the point: I'd like to see that pigeon deliver a single byte of information 17,000km away!

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
    2. Re:Underwater Fiber by Jamamala · · Score: 1

      Perhaps the network is congested with traffic going to other continents travelling across the same networks as used for this experiment. Once the fiber is installed then this international traffic will be routed more efficiently to the outside world, lowering network congestion and allowing higher speeds to transfers between peers in SA.

    3. Re:Underwater Fiber by LordAndrewSama · · Score: 1

      They said everything would improve the last time they got a swanky undersea cable. nothing improved. I wouldn't hold my breath for that new cable. there is a new cable provider there, that is doing tests in certain areas, no idea how they're coming along as I left za a while ago. can't even remember their name..

    4. Re:Underwater Fiber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The hope is probably the optical cable is probably taking load off of internal lines that are overburdened. It's a typical excuse.

      OTOH, maybe the routing is so bad internal to SA that it'll be faster to send your data out of the country by the fastest or fewest hops and then back in, bypassing as much internal SA lines as possible.

    5. Re:Underwater Fiber by Builder · · Score: 1

      Nope - that's not it. The cable is for international transfers and is completely unrelated to this story.

      Internal transfer speeds in .za just suck. Always have, always will, until Telkom get some competition.

    6. Re:Underwater Fiber by Phloebas · · Score: 1

      The Seacom cable has been operational for over a month, and so far we have only heard rumours of some ISP's "Slashing" their prices down to higher than the prices currently offered by the cheapest ISPs - and still no increase in monthly caps on the horizon. All this cable means is that Telkom can sell the same bandwidth to ISPs at the same prices, and make larger profits. The only good news is that Telkom just listed on the JSE, so buy some stock before someone figures out they're making ridiculous profits.

    7. Re:Underwater Fiber by coogan · · Score: 1

      Sadly this is what none of the articles mention.... The only provider of ADSL in South Africa is Telkom. No inter carrier or internet networks even play a role in this exercise. Makes me wonder about their backbone, let alone international bandwidth capacity.

    8. Re:Underwater Fiber by adnonsense · · Score: 1

      In other news, Unlimited IT has just announced plans to test whether a shark with a frickin' laser attached to its head can transmit data faster than a 17,000 km underwater fiber optic cable.

    9. Re:Underwater Fiber by geoffball · · Score: 1

      From TFA:

      Internet speed is expected to improve once a new 17,000 km underwater fiber optic cable linking southern and East Africa to other networks becomes operational

      I thought this "contest" measured the speed of an internal data transfer within SA.

      I guess it's where you are on the network. Ten years ago, I had no problem reading my webmail on a server hosted in the US from an internet cafe in Cape Town without much noticeable latency. Not much different than dialup in the US at the time. I bet the physical routing from Pietermaritzburg to Durban goes through Jo'burg and the bandwidth on the first link is low. It's probably physically longer than it needs to be. I'd love to troubleshoot the problem. I wonder what the ping times between hosts, packet loss, and the TCP buffer settings on the hosts in question are. I'm sure there is some optimization the company could do to make this better. Although the pigeon may still win. We were able to improve file transport times across the US (~80 ms latency coast to coast) by 4 times by tuning TCP properly. Are they using Win 3.1 and Windsock?

    10. Re:Underwater Fiber by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Correct. Telkom - or Telskum or Hellkom, as we call them - limits the UPLOAD speed on standard ADSL lines to 128kb. I'm sitting on a 4mb line, and they are shaping it to 50kb per socket and limited to a 512kb upload speed. They do not want people providing their own servers without paying them $$$ for a leased connection.

      They also charge me the equivalent of $ 130 per month for a 20gb, shaped connection. So businesses (uncapped) are paying even more.

      In this environment, the poor cannot afford something like ADSL, unlike in India. The joy of a state monopoly in collusion with leadership :(

    11. Re:Underwater Fiber by VGPowerlord · · Score: 1

      You're assuming that they have a sane network routing system that wouldn't uselessly route packets halfway across the continent.

      Incidentally, that's what my US ISP used to do. Granted, traffic never left the country...

      --
      GLaDOS for President 2016! "Well here we are again. It's always such a pleasure." -- GLaDOS, 2011
  12. Station wagon full of tapes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  13. That was no ISP by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 2, Informative

    That was Telekom, the government owned telephone and internet semi-monopoly.

    They don't have to compete.

    40 years ago it was put your name on a list and wait up to five years to get a (wired) phone.

    Now it's put your data on the wires and wait for it to get delivered.

    But I wonder why I can get to SA web sites and search engines like brabys.co.za and ananzi.co.za fairly quickly.

    1. Re:That was no ISP by Builder · · Score: 1

      Because they're not running on DSL.

      Standard leased lines in South Africa present relatively good performance internally, and the international pipes aren't too bad these days either. Of course, you pay through your ass for these.

    2. Re:That was no ISP by IANAAC · · Score: 1

      They don't have to compete.

      40 years ago it was put your name on a list and wait up to five years to get a (wired) phone.

      You might not remember, but the US (and every other developed country in the world) has gone through this same thing. And many countries still operate this way.

      I remember when I was a kid, we switched from a party line (my grandmother's source of neighborhood goings-on) to a private line. It took months for that to be completed.

      In fact, try and order DSL from ATT - it can still take up to a couple of weeks for them to flip a switch.

    3. Re:That was no ISP by mat128 · · Score: 1

      traceroute to telkom.co.za (196.43.22.222), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
        1 192.168.20.2 (192.168.20.2) 0.224 ms 0.152 ms 0.154 ms
        2 ip-209-172-xx-xx.static.privatedns.com (209.172.xx.xx) 0.466 ms 0.399 ms 0.449 ms
        3 te8-1.v0709.cl-core04.mtl.iweb.com (67.205.127.130) 0.811 ms 0.625 ms 0.760 ms
        4 te8-1.v0699.cl-core06.mtl.iweb.com (67.205.127.86) 0.841 ms 0.793 ms 0.650 ms
        5 te2-2.mpd01.ymq02.atlas.cogentco.com (38.104.154.201) 1.084 ms 0.936 ms 0.906 ms
        6 te3-6.mpd03.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.5.117) 144.064 ms te4-3.ccr01.jfk02.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.7.57) 15.331 ms 15.334 ms
        7 te4-3.ccr01.jfk07.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.2.62) 15.503 ms te2-7.ccr01.jfk07.atlas.cogentco.com (154.54.1.134) 15.607 ms 15.605 ms
        8 telkomsouthafrica.demarc.cogentco.com (38.112.18.42) 273.902 ms 273.908 ms 273.903 ms
        9 rrba-ip-esr-1-ge-6-0-0.telkom-ipnet.co.za (196.43.11.166) 338.869 ms 338.857 ms 338.853 ms
      10 rrba-ip-bssr-1-ge-2-48.telkom-ipnet.co.za (196.43.23.6) 339.263 ms 338.846 ms 338.880 ms
      11 nbsc-ip-bssr-1-atm-5-0-0-1.telkom-ipnet.co.za (196.43.23.30) 351.209 ms 351.220 ms 351.166 ms
      12 nbsc-ip-rcache-1-vif2.telkom-ipnet.co.za (196.43.22.222) 343.911 ms 344.389 ms 344.385 ms

      It aint that fast mind you!
      Same goes for brabys.co.za and ananzi.co.za.

    4. Re:That was no ISP by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 1


      They don't have to compete.


      40 years ago it was put your name on a list and wait up to five years to get a (wired) phone.

      You might not remember, but the US (and every other developed country in the world) has gone through this same thing. And many countries still operate this way.

      I remember when I was a kid, we switched from a party line (my grandmother's source of neighborhood goings-on) to a private line. It took months for that to be completed.

      Maybe in the boonies. In Chicago and Los Angeles -- there were no such delays. And that up-to-five-year-wait was in 1971-1972 in Johannesburg/Sandton -- not exactly the boonies of South Africa.

    5. Re:That was no ISP by IANAAC · · Score: 1

      Maybe in the boonies. In Chicago and Los Angeles -- there were no such delays.

      I live in Chicago. I can say from first hand experience less than a year ago, it still takes 2 weeks, depending upon neighborhood. The neighborhood, BTW, was Wrigleyville, right across the sreet from the CO. Bureaucracy at its finest.

    6. Re:That was no ISP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But I wonder why I can get to SA web sites and search engines like brabys.co.za and ananzi.co.za fairly quickly.

      Answer's obvious: Carrier pigeons are used to carry site updates to their real hosting servers in Switzerland.

  14. Cleaning time? by realsilly · · Score: 1

    But they didn't mention how long it took to clean off the pigeon droppings. Eeeewwwwww!!!!

    --
    Life takes interesting turns, but the most interest is when you're off the beaten path.
  15. Seacom by nicc777 · · Score: 1

    For those who don't know about Seacom yet, look here for a quick intro video.

    This is however still no silver bullet, as the local Telkom exchanges (where our 4MB lines plug in) can not yet handle higher speeds. Apparently they tested 8MB ADSL earlier and found some issues (I'm too lazy to goole it now...)

    --
    Need an ISP in South Africa?
  16. Its official... by dreemernj · · Score: 4, Funny

    They've been Pigeowned.

    --
    1 (short ton / firkin) = 89.1432354 slugs / keg
    1. Re:Its official... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Okay, this comment is Funny. Someone please mod up

    2. Re:Its official... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it isn't.

  17. Not really all that surprising these days by Bicx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    with the size of USB drives you can buy for under $20, I would dare to say that the same experiment would probably have the same results over here in the states (at least with cable and DSL). If I strapped just an 8GB USB drive to a pigeon's leg and had it fly the same distance in around an hour, there's no way my internet connection could beat ~8GB/hr, or approximately 18Mbps (if I calculated correctly).

    1. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by delt0r · · Score: 1

      Well its not bad here. I just downloaded the slackware 13.0 iso (3.5GB) in 8 min from Switzerland to Austria. Faster than a pigeon.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    2. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by John+Hasler · · Score: 1

      According to the story the ISP delivered only 4% of the data in the one hour the pigeon took to deliver all of it. That would be 720Kbps by your figures.

      --
      Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
    3. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by bluesatin · · Score: 1

      Download != Upload data rate.

    4. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by AaxelB · · Score: 1

      Well its not bad here. I just downloaded the slackware 13.0 iso (3.5GB) in 8 min from Switzerland to Austria. Faster than a pigeon.

      Unless that pigeon is carrying a 128GB USB drive instead of the GP's paltry 8GB. Or five of them!

      Of course, this just shows how ridiculous the whole comparison is, though they do legitimately have some slow-ass internets in South Africa.

    5. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by delt0r · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well I get the same upload too. But yes generally thats true. I have to pay an extra 10EU per month to have the same upload as download speed.

      --
      If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
    6. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      USB drives might impede the pigeons flight ; I expect they used a micro-SD card.

    7. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My cable is 16/2 and it'll peak at 18 most days! 2 MB/s is pretty nice.

    8. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by piltdownman84 · · Score: 1

      I work for a small company, and our two offices don't have the fastest internet connections (Up to 100 Mbps down* / 5 Mbps up*). We have found for anything over two gigabytes its faster to just send via Fed-Ex overnight.

      * Up to, but you will never actually get a fraction of this

    9. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by sjames · · Score: 1

      The race was 4GB SD card on a pigeon vs business DSL. Since after ~2 hours, the business DSL was only 4% done it would take 50 hours to be complete, that puts the transfer rate at (4*1E9*8)/(50*3600) = 177 Kbps. That's pretty pathetic for business DSL. I'd say they have a fine reason to want to shame their provider. Even in a 3rd world country like the U.S. you can get a better connection than that for business.

      So while pigeons can beat DSL anywhere under the right conditions, that's not news. The fact that an IT company could actually save money and trouble as well as improving their communications by using pigeons is news.

    10. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by SRabbelier · · Score: 1

      Where do you live and where do I sign up? We pay some 30 euro's here for 20Mbit downstream, but we're lucky to get 1.5 up :(. Fiber run at 70 euro for around 60Mbit downstream, but still only 6Mbit up. Symmetric ADSL is erm, well, very expensive here :P.

    11. Re:Not really all that surprising these days by Swizec · · Score: 1

      with the size of USB drives you can buy for under $20, I would dare to say that the same experiment would probably have the same results over here in the states (at least with cable and DSL). If I strapped just an 8GB USB drive to a pigeon's leg and had it fly the same distance in around an hour, there's no way my internet connection could beat ~8GB/hr, or approximately 18Mbps (if I calculated correctly).

      Yes, but over here in the real world (Europe), we can get FTTH cheaply and so many of us are perfectly capable of uploading at 20Mbps if only the other end is capable of doing it. Hell, the only reason it takes so long to download stuff via p2p (somewhat legal stuff like TV episodes in HD) is that there aren't enough uploaders to saturate my connection and so such a download can take up to 30 minutes. A real drag.

  18. Never thought the day would come... by muffen · · Score: 1

    ... when I had to move this RFC to the "useful RFC's" bookmark folder

    1. Re:Never thought the day would come... by Hymer · · Score: 1

      You can't. That RFC is for packet data. The pigeon carrying a flashdrive is a replacement for FTP.

  19. Next up in news... by castironpigeon · · Score: 1

    ISPs hire snipers to defend themselves from homing pigeon carrier competition.

    --
    mmmm...forbidden donut
  20. Well of course it's faster by jabjoe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A trained pigeon with a large enough capacity USB stick stuck to it will be faster than the internet in almost any country. It scales great too, just add more pigeons. It's a pipe. The problem is the latency sucks. The post office (or in this case pigeon army) has unlimited bandwidth, but terrible latency. If you want to send some one a few blue rays' worth of data, do you email it? Then your fired. Just put them in the damn post, it will get there much faster.

    1. Re:Well of course it's faster by Pulse_Instance · · Score: 3, Insightful
      If you want to send some one a few blue rays' worth of data, do you email it? Then your fired. Just put them in the damn post, it will get there much faster.

      If you email it most likely your email server rejects it, at that point you try FTP which sucks because the remote office around the world has a terrible link speed and your outgoing FTP is throttled so you suggest to your IT department that you set up bittorrent at the offices with fast connections because this data must be transferred weekly. Finally after 3 weeks of back and forth you settle for the post office because while everyone including your boss has come up with 5 better solutions than mail the IT guys refuse to implement any of them.

    2. Re:Well of course it's faster by colmore · · Score: 1

      How exactly to in-house IT guys implement a fatter pipe? You can't create more bandwidth locally.

      "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway." - Tanenbaum, Andrew S.

      --
      In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
    3. Re:Well of course it's faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, it was an SD memory card, I'm guessing Micro SD. A USB stick would be too big and heavy for a pigeon.

      FWIW, Telekomm transfer rate was 80MB/HOUR. I can transfer that in under 60 seconds using my 100Mbps FTTH (yes, home fiber, not commercial) here in Tokyo. Which I got 5 years ago. That's 6GB per hour. More than pigeon with 4GB data card.

      Either way, 80MB/HOUR translates to 0.177Mbps, or 177Kbps, which, incidentally, even sucks compared to a V.44 analog modem... In the year 2009, I think that pretty much defines "sucks".

    4. Re:Well of course it's faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What is it with the USB stick?? Get with the program...Micro SD card! 16GB, under $40 and a pigeon could carry a dozen of the things. Heck, I could put 10,000 in a backpack and walk 50 miles at a leisurely pace of 2mph. Then you would have 160,000 GB / 25 hours = 15Gb/s !

    5. Re:Well of course it's faster by csartanis · · Score: 1

      your fired

      No, not really. I can download 170GB in 24h over cable alone.

    6. Re:Well of course it's faster by jabjoe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Good for the IT guys. You know you have good people if they don't impliment a bad solution that won't work, regardless of pressure from above. It's a bandwidth/latency issue. It gets to a point where you are better of sending lots of data slowly then small amounts fast. No amount of screaming, shouting and jumping up and down at IT is going to help.

    7. Re:Well of course it's faster by jabjoe · · Score: 1

      Lucky you. So what about 340GB then? Min of 48h, probably quicker to post it. Also, how far you sending this 170GB? You sure it's quicker to do it over the network? For instance, if it's down the street, you would be mad not to stick it on a external drive and walk.

    8. Re:Well of course it's faster by bughunter · · Score: 1

      How exactly to in-house IT guys implement a fatter pipe?

      IDWTK, but one would imagine it involves locking themselves in the server room and access to unfiltered content.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    9. Re:Well of course it's faster by Kvasio · · Score: 1

      as in old saying: never underestimate the bandwidth of Boing 747-400 filled up with DVDs

    10. Re:Well of course it's faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No amount of screaming, shouting and jumping up and down at IT is going to help.

      Maybe not, but it's always fun to watch them twitch and squirm.

    11. Re:Well of course it's faster by isorox · · Score: 1

      For instance, if it's down the street, you would be mad not to stick it on a external drive and walk.

      Depends on how quickly the data should get there, and how valuable my time is. I could spend half an hour copying to an external hard drive, walking down the road, and copying it to the target server, or I could spend 30 seconds doing "cp bigfile.zip /mnt/server2", and getting on with something useful. The copy may take 12 hours, but if the data doesn't need to be there until next month, does it matter?

    12. Re:Well of course it's faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, this is also after the boss' response to the question, "Would IT people still be personally liable and accountable if porn/illegal software/viruses were transferred by this unsecured new system?" was "yes."

    13. Re:Well of course it's faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "How exactly to in-house IT guys implement a fatter pipe? You can't create more bandwidth locally."

      Extenze dipshit, don't you watch prime time cable commercials? You'll last longer too, the busty bimbo said so.

    14. Re:Well of course it's faster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes that is the case in the States and EU, and the rest of the world.... but this is Africa and the postal service is not reliable, or anything that looks valuable that is sent via SA mail *will* get stolen.... The only drawback to the pigeon network I can see is that your 4GB packet could become Kentucky Fried...
      They worked out the cost saving running the network for log files this way is $1000 for pigeon network vs $5625 per month for slow unreliable ADSL...
      Regards
      Pommie

  21. Tighten the darn string between the tin cans that' by GarryFre · · Score: 1

    Tighten the darn string between the tin cans that's all they have to do!

    --
    www.Migrainesoft.com - Computer giving you a headache? We can fix that!
  22. But was it African or European? Oops, wrong skit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But was it African or European? Oops, wrong skit.

  23. Loss by Bibz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's a nice demo of pigeon power, but did they think about pigeon packet loss ? I'm sure it'll be a little more important than cable packet loss

    --
    I didn't found something funny to put here.
    1. Re:Loss by LaminatorX · · Score: 2, Funny

      You mean hawks?

    2. Re:Loss by muffen · · Score: 4, Funny

      >> but did they think about pigeon packet loss ?

      The carriers have an intrinsic collision avoidance system, which increases availability.
      Because IP only guarantees best effort delivery, loss of a carrier can be tolerated. With time, the carriers are self-regenerating. Audit trails are automatically generated, and can often be found on logs and cable trays.

    3. Re:Loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Wait a minute! Suppose *two* pigeons carried it together?

    4. Re:Loss by ruiner13 · · Score: 1

      Yes, that is one way of describing what pigeons do. Drop packets! I hear in some countries it is good luck if a pigeon "drops a packet" on you.

      --

      today is spelling optional day.

    5. Re:Loss by gad_zuki! · · Score: 1

      >It's a nice demo of pigeon power, but did they think about pigeon packet loss ?

      There was an initial loss caused by a hungry malicious hacker with a 12 gauge shotgun.

      Later, an RST packet was sent by a local hawk.

    6. Re:Loss by eth1 · · Score: 1

      WIth pigeons, i'm more worried about the *dropped* packets...

    7. Re:Loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In SA we have terrible 'cable loss', a phenomenon where the cables disappear altogether... Go pigeon...

    8. Re:Loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, he meant hungry South Africans.

    9. Re:Loss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case, I wish you good luck.

  24. Pigeons Vs. The Clacks by CapnYarrrrrr · · Score: 3, Funny

    Excellent proof of concept by Lord Vetinari. I do hope Moist Von Lipwig gets this contract as well. Increased pigeon poo fertilizer along the main trunk lines should help agriculture in the region as well. Remind me to participate in the subsequent land-snatching.

    1. Re:Pigeons Vs. The Clacks by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

      Pigeon poo will strip the paint from your car.

      God knows what effect it would have on soil in large enough quantity.

      --
      Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
    2. Re:Pigeons Vs. The Clacks by hal2814 · · Score: 1

      I hear they're working on a pigeon/imp hybrid system (pigeon for long range and imp for short) that will make clacks obsolete. They have the finest Igors in Ankh-Morpork working on it. The Unseen Univerity has denounced the system since they claim it will be faster than flight, which is theoretically impossible.

  25. Newegg by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Newegg lists a 4GB flash drive for $10 (I'm sure you can do better on specials and such). I very much doubt that many people could download 4GB in under an hour, or even two.

  26. In defense of the pigeon by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 1

    How about the time and money spent deplying this piece of crap network??

    Besides, I'm sure you can just buy a carrier pigeon nowadays... this is not the 15th century anymore you know...

    1. Re:In defense of the pigeon by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 1

      Besides, I'm sure you can just buy a carrier pigeon nowadays... this is not the 15th century anymore you know...

      You're right, you can't, because they're extinct, and they're also not the same thing as Homing Pigeons.

    2. Re:In defense of the pigeon by theverylastperson · · Score: 1

      The carrier pigeon was a homing pigeon, but not all homing pigeons were carrier pigeons.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_pigeon

      --
      ed duval the very last person
    3. Re:In defense of the pigeon by Tim+the+Gecko · · Score: 1

      Besides, I'm sure you can just buy a carrier pigeon nowadays... this is not the 15th century anymore you know...

      You're right, you can't, because they're extinct, and they're also not the same thing as Homing Pigeons.

      You're probably thinking of the yummy, delicious Passenger Pigeon, which became extinct in 1914.

  27. Re:Pigeons may be fast but... by esocid · · Score: 1

    Am I missing something? Who modded this bigotry informative? And who in that state of mind gets mod points?

    --
    Absolute power corrupts absolutely. indymedia
  28. too bad animaniacs is off the air by jollyreaper · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Would have made a good premise for a Goodfeathers episode.

    --
    Kwisatz Haderach
    Sell the spice to CHOAM
    This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
  29. Ironic /. Quote by Faizdog · · Score: 1

    Interestingly, the /. quote at the bottom of the page when I was reading this story was:

    It's not against any religion to want to dispose of a pigeon. -- Tom Lehrer, "Poisoning Pigeons in the Park"

    --
    -"Those who fought today will die tommorow."-
    1. Re:Ironic /. Quote by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      I disposed of a pigeon once. It was tasty.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  30. PTAM by Rick.C · · Score: 2, Informative

    Back in the day (mid 1970s) when IBM appended "AM" (for Access Method) to all of their protocols, we had BTAM (Basic Telecommunications), TCAM (TeleCommunications), and VTAM (Virtual Telecommunications, which is still around today) to move data. It was widely acknowledged that when it came to raw bandwidth, even over long distances, PTAM (Pickup Truck Access Method) beat them all. You load up a pickup truck with hundreds or thousands of 200MB tapes and drive it across the country.

    With 16GB micro SD cards, the statement holds true even today.

    --
    You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
    "Math in a song is good."-Linford
  31. Ostriches by GNUThomson · · Score: 1

    That's nice, but ostriches are far better for that purpose. They are robust, immune to falcon-in-the-middle attacks, does not generate ocassional unexpected drops and can carry much heavier traffic. The only downside is that they require bridges between separated domains.

  32. fortune cookie by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anybody else find it funny that the current quote at the end of the page reads:

    It's not against any religion to want to dispose of a pigeon. -- Tom Lehrer, "Poisoning Pigeons in the Park"

  33. So... by ThoughtMonster · · Score: 1

    ...according to the numbers, the pigeon transferred about 4194304 kilobytes (for the sake of argument, the BBC article says it transferred a 4GB Memory Stick, which I'll assume was filled up and that it can actually hold that much of data) in 7617 seconds, which is about 550 kilobytes per second in normal transfer speed. Not an unreasonable speed, a decent 6Mbps connection should be able to do that much.

    The most expensive ADSL program advertised by Telcom is a 4096/512kbps program, which I think (at least in Greece) would get you speeds up to ~400 kilobytes per second. In NORMAL conditions.

    But that is download speed. And the test measured upload speed. So the real figure they should be testing against is about 50 kilobytes per second in upload speed (at least in Greece it does, if uploading with a 512kbps upstream connection).

    Still, 4% completed in 2 hours, 16 minutes and 57 seconds is about 22 kilobytes per second upstream, which is about 50% lower than what it should be. Still a very large margin.

    That is all.

  34. Yes, if latency is not a factor by amn108 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What about latency? Surely it is orders of magnitude larger with pigeons than with even worst possible fiber connections? We are talking minutes versus tens to hundreds of a second. Something anybody with knowledge on networks knows already. Then again, since for most IT companies bandwidth is more important than latency, I guess pigeons make more sense to them. In fact, that is what I would have used. Every time I had to send a gigabyte of media data back when I was in advertisement media business, I wish I had remembered about pigeons. So, for any case where latency is not a factor, pigeons rule. In all other cases however we need any kind of fiber.

    1. Re:Yes, if latency is not a factor by natehoy · · Score: 4, Funny

      Well, yeah, you're not likely do do VoPTP (Voice over Pigeon Transfer Protocol) or play an online game using pigeons as packet carriers. The latency is bad. But this was a POC (Pigeon of Concept) that will lead to an RFC (Request Flying Carrier) and eventually it will go Beta (Birds Enabling Telecommunications Applications).

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    2. Re:Yes, if latency is not a factor by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      play an online game using pigeons as packet carriers.

            You can if you're a falconer...

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    3. Re:Yes, if latency is not a factor by jonbryce · · Score: 1

      They generally use motorbike couriers for that sort of thing. They can carry about 10TB or so of data. Time taken depends on traffic and distance.

    4. Re:Yes, if latency is not a factor by amn108 · · Score: 1

      Humans want money for everything. Pigeons don't. They are cheap in getting and owning :p They're also cute and assuming they don't become disease carriers, are good pets.

    5. Re:Yes, if latency is not a factor by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      Pigeons don't use fossil fuels either...

    6. Re:Yes, if latency is not a factor by TheThiefMaster · · Score: 1

      Technically, latency is for a packet size, it's not an absolute, because it's to the end of the packet, not the start. It's normally measured with 32 bytes of payload, and in that case the cable line massively beats the pidgeon. But with a 4GB payload, the pidgeon wins easily.
      The pidgeon takes 1 hour, and then you get the entire packet.
      The cable network breaks your 4GB into 1kB packets (possibly) and transmits those with a 200ms latency (possibly) at 256kbps (possibly). You get some data in 200ms, but it's useless to you until you finish receiving the entire packet 50 hours later.
      In other words, for 4GB packets, the pidgeon is much better latency.

      But that's picking holes.

  35. Haha by kieran · · Score: 2, Funny

    50 Win points (TM) to whoever tagged this "half-duplex"

    1. Re:Haha by clone53421 · · Score: 1

      It's not... you could have two pigeons going both ways at once. The problem isn't that it's half-duplex, the problem is the latency sucks.

      --
      Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  36. Re:Pigeons may be fast but... by Stuckey · · Score: 1

    Negros could carry a lot more weight. With twenty or thirty 1GB hard drives in a backpack, I'm sure one of them could better the pigeon quite easily.

    Maybe, but the pigeon might be a little more reliable. At least it wouldn't think of stealing your data medium (i.e., hard drives, USB sticks, etc.) and selling them on the black market.

  37. Bollocks by smoker2 · · Score: 1
    Apparently it took about 57 minutes to get the data off the card onto the recipient computer. So it was hardly a trivial amount of data. Maybe they confused mega bits with mega bytes like so many other ignorant lusers.

    In a (very) rough calculation I worked out that if they sent an 8GB card, then their net connection was a little over 43Kbps. I don't think even SA has stuck to modem implemented internet, so I would say they were probably sending more than 8GB.

    1. Re:Bollocks by Jafafa+Hots · · Score: 1

      Until I dumped them last month for cable, Verizon DSL "broadband" was often slower than dialup - probably more than half the time... and when working, the fastest I ever got was 180kbps. That's bright, shiny "Made in USA" bandwidth which despite countless calls to Verizon complaining, they claimed was just fine and not a problem with their network.

      (Now I have cable at around 6-10 times the speed for about half the price. Suck it, Verizon.)

      --
      This space available.
    2. Re:Bollocks by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 1

      Actually, from the older article, and from their website, they only transferred 4GB. From their website, the pigeon isn't trained to fly directly to their other location: They got one that would go someplace close, and then drove the data the last few miles.

      I suspect the card also my have needed some cleaning before it could be used.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
  38. Re:Pigeons may be fast but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Am I missing something?

    A sense of humor, maybe?

  39. Never underestimate... by L4t3r4lu5 · · Score: 1

    ... the bandwidth of a truck full of magtapes.

    --
    Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
  40. Re:Pigeons may be fast but... by ryanov · · Score: 1

    I would except the gentleman with mod points was being ironic. Whoosh.

  41. Brute force wins again by zmnatz · · Score: 1

    Sounds like a competition one of my professors told us about when I was at school. He said they had a competition at school about sending data from point A on campus to point B. I supposed the idea was to test compression algorithms or something on the data and who could send the most data. My professor said they just started copying files on to a bunch of hard drives. Went to the bar and had drinks while they copied. Then came back, put the hard drives in the car and drove to point B. They won but were disqualified because it wasn't in the spirit of the competition.

  42. Just an improved version... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    Already been tried and tested....

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

  43. Latency by tecnico.hitos · · Score: 1

    So I guess I can't play Quake Live in it, am I right?

    --
    The good, the evil and the vacuum tubes.
  44. Hawks by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Funny

    A major source of packet loss...

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    1. Re:Hawks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We need to extend anti-hacking laws to include falconry!

    2. Re:Hawks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A major source of packet loss...

      Windows...
                the hard transparent kind.

    3. Re:Hawks by meyekul · · Score: 1

      Better yet, imagine the fun of DDOS attacks featuring your buddies and a few shotguns.

    4. Re:Hawks by Jeff+Carr · · Score: 1

      And somehow I think you'd have a hard time marketing a Redundant Array of Inexpensive Pigeons...

      --
      The television will not be revolutionized.
    5. Re:Hawks by shermo · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many times this exact jokes will get modded +5 in pigeon related stories.

      --
      Insanity: voting in the same two parties over and over again and expecting different results
  45. The pigeon is faster? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You lie!

  46. You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Moraelin · · Score: 5, Informative

    Actually, we know it was 4 GB and that in 2 hours the Telekom transferred only 4% of that data. Let's say approximately 4000 MB for ease of calculation. A whole 4% of that is 160 MB transferred in two hours.

    Now bytes are not bits, and network speeds are usually specified in megabits per second. Allowing for handshake, headers, etc, and again going just for a rough ballpark figure, I'll take x10 for the bytes to bits conversion.

    So it's 1600 megabits in 7200 seconds. 1600 / 7200 = 0.22 megabit / sec.

    Honestly, even ADSL upload speeds in the western world tend to be better than that.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 1

      That's... pathetic. I have 50 megabit fiber (in Japan) and I've downloaded 5-gigabyte files in minutes before.

      --
      He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
    2. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea yea, we can all see your big e-cock.

      Keep bragging Jimmy, nobody cares.

    3. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Statecraftsman · · Score: 1

      On the other side of the equation, that 4 GB tells me they weren't really trying. You can get 16gb sd cards and I bet a pidgeon could carry 5 of them at least. So that'd be 80GB*10/7200 = 111 Mbps...half duplex as others have stated. Horses for courses, this entire idea is kind of ridiculous. .22 Mbps is quite usable though, and I didn't read TFA, but perhaps cost is the issue.

    4. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by joaobranco · · Score: 1

      That's... pathetic. I have 50 megabit fiber (in Japan) and I've downloaded 5-gigabyte files in minutes before.

      I don't have fiber - I have hybrid cable, but I can achieve the download speeds you mention. However, we are talking about uploads, and most ISPs prefer to sell grossly assymetric connections (don't know about Japan but where I live, although I can get 100Mbps download using fiber, it only achieves 10MBps upload on the more expensive option - and 2 MBps on the cheapest).

    5. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Well, it's in the rough ballpark of 256 kb/s upload speeds on really crappy ADSL contracts.

      It's usable for most home uses, but this was a company. I would kinda expect them to have a bigger pipe.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    6. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Wolfrider · · Score: 1

      --Shazbot - it sounds like you would get better speed using smoke signals or Signal flags, rather than using this crappy ISP!

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    7. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Kjella · · Score: 1

      So it's 1600 megabits in 7200 seconds. 1600 / 7200 = 0.22 megabit / sec.

      Honestly, even ADSL upload speeds in the western world tend to be better than that.

      Yes, but looking at it from a different angle that's much more than a household had ten years ago, then then were normally on 64 kbps ISDN or 512/128kbit ADSL that was brand new.

      Sure, it sounds very slow to us but they're less than a decade behind. If they're still only a decade behind in 2020, I'd say they're doing quite fine.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    8. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by benengel · · Score: 1

      Is it just me or does 80km per hour seem very fast for pigeon? i mean i know birds can fly pretty fast and for a very long time but 80km/hr is reasonably fast for a car let alone a pigeon?

    9. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by BeanThere · · Score: 1

      So it's 1600 megabits in 7200 seconds. 1600 / 7200 = 0.22 megabit / sec.

      I'm stuck with Telkom's slow overpriced ADSL and I can confirm that this figure sounds very possible ... the most common "broadband" option that Telkom advertises in this day and age is 384kbits/second ... for a 384kbit line (shaped and contended) and a maximum capped usage of 3GB/month you'll pay over $80/month. Yes, Telkom's idea of "broadband" is 384kbits with a 3GB usage cap, at a monthly price that is at least double the average in pretty much the rest of the Western world (never mind Japan or S. Korea). Yay. That's what happens when the government completely blocks the free market and grants one company a protected monopoly.

    10. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, we know it was 4 GB and that in 2 hours the Telekom transferred only 4% of that data. Let's say approximately 4000 MB for ease of calculation. A whole 4% of that is 160 MB transferred in two hours.

      Now bytes are not bits, and network speeds are usually specified in megabits per second. Allowing for handshake, headers, etc, and again going just for a rough ballpark figure, I'll take x10 for the bytes to bits conversion.

      So it's 1600 megabits in 7200 seconds. 1600 / 7200 = 0.22 megabit / sec.

      Honestly, even ADSL upload speeds in the western world tend to be better than that.

      note this test is for upload speed as the ppl are sending the file on 512kb/s line meaning upload of 128 kb/s

    11. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Kashgarinn · · Score: 1

      that's just under 256kbps which was my first ADSL home connection speed back in 1999.

      at 12mbit down, 1mbit up today.. so if I was sending I'd be doing 4 times that.. not sure if this is as ghastly as it appears, unless they're paying alot for this meager connection.

    12. Re:You can calculate the speed and it's damning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah a decent or even good DSL in the wester world has like .7 mbps still is only like 10% :x

  47. African or European? by rAiNsT0rm · · Score: 1

    You've got two empty halves of coconuts and you're bangin' 'em together!

    --
    http://teasphere.wordpress.com - A little spot of tea
  48. Telkom could not immediately be reached... by Simon+Brooke · · Score: 3, Funny

    From the article:

    Telkom could not immediately be reached for comment.

    Well, that's because you used email. If you'd sent it pigeon post, it would have got through!

    --
    I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
  49. stupid point to make by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I could transfer 4gb faster by tossing an SD card across the room than I could by sending it over our LAN, that doesn't mean the LAN is bad, or slow, it just means that "a Truck full of harddrives has more bandwidth than the whole of the internet"[admitting that "whole of the internet" is a meaningless term in terms of bandwidth]- point being that bandwidth isn't everything

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    1. Re:stupid point to make by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      The pigeon had a 4 GB card, but they would have only a couple hundred MB per day to transfer.

      Their ADSL carried 4% of that amount of data in just over two hours time, that comes down to 23,861 bytes per second (I am being liberal here by taking 4GB = 4x1024x1024x1024). At 8 bits per byte that is 190.887 bits per second. Or 186 kbit/s. That is less than three ISDN lines bundled (64 kbit each). Even in the US that speed may not even qualify as "broadband" (I don't know the exact norm over there, just that some ISPs want to lower the minimum speed that can be called "broadband" there, and US internet connections are not known for their great speeds). 186 kb that is what I get on my 3G mobile connection when the connection is poor.

      According to the article linked from the previous /. posting, they pay about R45000 a month for their ADSL lines. That is almost USD 6,000. A lot of money for Internet service I would say, and that would be "business ADSL", not even dedicated lines. I currently pay just under USD 60 per month for a 2M/2M ADSL business line in Hong Kong. And South Africa may not be rich, it is also certainly not a developing country.

      And to make it really interesting: at this speed they would be able to transfer 1.92 GB per day only. So the transfer of 4 GB of data would take more than two days.

      Now they have only a couple hundred MB of data to transfer, say 300 MB for sake of the argument. That amount of data would take about 3h40m to transfer over their current line... I can imagine they are not happy with that. They should really considering sending a pigeon (or someone in a car, may be more reliable but likely slower than the pigeon) once a week carrying a 4GB or 8GB memory card. And ditch the ADSL or at least go for a cheaper option.

    2. Re:stupid point to make by bentcd · · Score: 1

      ...admitting that "whole of the internet" is a meaningless term in terms of bandwidth...

      But what a beautiful unit it would make! "Their internal network has a bandwidth of 2.3 gazillibits/second, or about three and a half wholes of the internet" ... and before long we'd have a standard whole of the internet unit based upon the internet of 1/1/2010 or something and a few years down the road you'd be talking kilo-wholes of the internet and mega-wholes of the internet! The possibilities!

      Darknets, of course, would be measured in black wholes of the internet, a related unit.

      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    3. Re:stupid point to make by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Going here:

      That would be

      524.83 South African rands = 69.2733614 U.S. dollars

      For the highest package offered

    4. Re:stupid point to make by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but how long does it take to transfer onto the SD card and then off the SD card on the other side? The tossing is the easy part. Using Telkom is like tying an anvil to the SD card prior to tossing it across the room.

    5. Re:stupid point to make by BeanThere · · Score: 1

      Not if you bothered to spend 20 seconds researching the issue in order to actually understand the point before posting an ignorant comment: In South Africa the telcos constitute a government-protected cartel, so bandwidth is extremely overpriced, service is terrible, quality is bad, and price-gouging is the order of the day ... this publicity stunt draws public attention to this critical issue. Which part of that is hard for you to understand? It's *obviously* not intended to be "hard science" - duh.

    6. Re:stupid point to make by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      That are asymmetric connections, so extra horrible when you want to upload large stuff. This is not a business option either. It seems they have dedicated connections, otherwise I can't understand the high price the article mentions.

    7. Re:stupid point to make by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

      it's more that it's meaningless because it's impossible to measure what counts as "bandwidth". If I stick a repeating router in the middle of a line, have I just doubled the "total bandwidth" of the network, just because where there was 1hBps of bandwidth between point A and B, there is not 1hBps of bandwidth between point A and C, and another 1hBps of bandwidth between point C and B. Meaningless.

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    8. Re:stupid point to make by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

      Because if they really just need to send one huge packet a day, maybe they don't need the Internet anyway. But that's not the case - otherwise they wouldn't have signed up (they would have just used a car).

      Copyright laws suck, and prop up a huge government-protected cartel, but I'm not going to try to make the point about how long copyright terms currently last by officially registering 4,294,967,296 separate works. Saying "I'm doing this to prove a point!" beforehand doesn't magically make the act relevant.

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
  50. Oh, the irony... by thebryce · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... of the quote at the bottom of the page as of 8:55AM (EST): "It's not against any religion to want to dispose of a pigeon. -- Tom Lehrer, "Poisoning Pigeons in the Park"

  51. Make some money! by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    Now all I have to do , is capture and train all the pigeons here in my downtown area, move to Africa, and start my own carrier pigeon company for all those interested in saving money and also having quicker file transfers, and I will be filthy rich!

    Seriously though, it speaks volumes that a pigeon can carry a card with data faster then we can download...oh wait, this is in Africa,
    so I guess its because its still a 3rd world country???

    1. Re:Make some money! by Nadaka · · Score: 1

      Hard to call them a third world company when they have built their own nukes.

    2. Re:Make some money! by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

      Well...dirty bombs dont count and as we all know, whatever real nukes they had,
      Jack Bauer destroyed

  52. PR stunt by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Why is everybody discussing the technical validity of using pigeons to transfer data? (except of course to generate semi-interesting puns and whatnot)
    It is a PR stunt to get more non-technical people to take note of Telkom's practices putting a brake on parts of our economy. (nevermind the breaks our "government" is putting on...)

  53. This just in... by Chatsubo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Patent application granted to "Telkom Communications" for a "method for transmitting data via avian carrier", even though lots of prior art exists.

    --
    > no, yes, maybe (tagging beta)
    1. Re:This just in... by kimvette · · Score: 1

      This should invalidate all wireless communications patents, right? ;)

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    2. Re:This just in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon.

    3. Re:This just in... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy, you just have to implement the protocol specified in RFC1149 ( http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1149.html )

    4. Re:This just in... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      even though lots of prior art exists.

      "Art", Is that what you call that crufty stuff on my windshield?
       

  54. not standards compliant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    obviously, this setup does not conform to RFC1149

  55. An unfair comparison by Moraelin · · Score: 4, Funny

    I fear that this might have been an unfair comparison, though. The pigeon was, after all, dedicated to only that one transfer.

    For a more apples-to-apples comparison with most companies' networks, the pigeon should also be transporting:

    - a porn DVD or two

    - half the collection of lolcat movies on youtube

    - and half the collection of funny clips

    - a periodic refresh of Slashdot, in 1 second intervals.

    - an IRC session on sexnet for the network admin. Logging connections doesn't apply to him, after all. You can contact him under the nickname Linda1991 faster than through the internal channels.

    - a couple of managers' correspondence with the distressed widdow of a nigerian prince. Hey, they're only trying to help her.

    - a trojan download or two, from those guys in marketing who got admin rights on their computer because they can't work without it. And now can't work without the latest animated gizmo off www.i-pwn-your-machine.ru.

    - the keylogger traffic in the other direction from the couple more who already downloaded it.

    --
    A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    1. Re:An unfair comparison by Barny · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes but this was just ONE packet, I am sure you can fit more than one pigeon into the air ;)

      --
      ...
      /me sighs
    2. Re:An unfair comparison by JavaBear · · Score: 2, Informative

      South Africans just do not do that, at least not in great numbers. It is too expensive. And as for downloading DVD's, it's almost cheaper just to buy the original [copy off a street vendor..]

    3. Re:An unfair comparison by Moraelin · · Score: 3, Funny

      If your network uses 4 GB packets, I fear that you might not get much advanced out of the whole packet switching concept :p

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    4. Re:An unfair comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rubbish, you need a pigeon per item to make it even playing field. It's like having one connection per item.

      I bet the pigeons would still kick ass.

      And they make better soup too...

    5. Re:An unfair comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is beside the point.

      The point is that Telkom only supports lines of up to 4mbps, whish is grossly inadequate for any use.

      Furthermore, ridiculously low caps (starting from 1GB/month) and ridiculously high rates (R64.76 / $8.52 for a single GB of data, blended, shaped, EXCLUDING line rental, VAT and other charges)

    6. Re:An unfair comparison by Digital+Vomit · · Score: 4, Funny

      Absolutely. The air is just one big tube.

      However, I wonder if it would be faster to just dump a bunch of carrier pigeons on a truck instead and transfer the data that way?

      --
      Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
    7. Re:An unfair comparison by mcrbids · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Of course it's unfair. You can get a *LOT* of data on a flash card nowadays. They're selling 8 GB cards at the store I'm standing in for $25. And a pidgeon could easily carry 4 of these. Go 16 GB cards, same size, double the capacity.

      It's the common confusion of speed vs latency. Speed is how much you can cram through the pipe in a given period, and at this, pigeons excel.

      Latency is end-to-end, unloaded communication lag, and this is where pigeons do very poorly.

      Stunts like this one purposely confuse the two issues.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    8. Re:An unfair comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hahaha

    9. Re:An unfair comparison by ugen · · Score: 1

      That's pretty much how VoIP works.

    10. Re:An unfair comparison by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...or "Thursday" as we call it round here.

    11. Re:An unfair comparison by bogd · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. The air is just one big tube.

      However, I wonder if it would be faster to just dump a bunch of carrier pigeons on a truck instead and transfer the data that way?

      As opposed to just dumping the memory cards in the truck? (which somehow seems... simpler :) )

      "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway." - Tanenbaum, Andrew S. (1996)

    12. Re:An unfair comparison by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Sure you can send more packets but you're still getting a 7200000ms ping.

      Good luck finding a Quake server which won't kick you.

    13. Re:An unfair comparison by tftp · · Score: 1

      They're selling 8 GB cards at the store I'm standing in for $25. And a pidgeon could easily carry 4 of these.

      Most of the size and mass of those cards are plastic enclosure and connectors. A properly designed "card" for a pigeon would be an implantable chip with a very fast wireless link to write and read, with inductively supplied power for those operations. Not only there would be no card to lose, the pigeon would be indistinguishable from all other.

      Besides, that would be a very ecologically friendly telecommunications channel. Birds are good.

    14. Re:An unfair comparison by evel+aka+matt · · Score: 1

      Did you RTFA? They didn't confuse anything, purposefully or otherwise. Their complaints are with the speed, not the latency of the network. And IIRC, they only packed 4gb on the pigeon.

    15. Re:An unfair comparison by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Eh, it was mostly supposed to be funny, rather than be any kind of judgment on South Africans. (Whom I have no experience with, anyway.)

      Though that would make them different from the rest of the western world, I guess. I've yet to see anyone who's deterred by costs or bandwidth limits, when it's the company's not his personally. Let's just say I've seen all those even on an old dual ISDN connection, nevermind that it was stuffing the network for everyone else. Down the network admin being on sexnet all day, although the nickname has been changed to protect the idio... erm... innocent.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
    16. Re:An unfair comparison by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Nah, you just pad the other 3.999GB with zeros.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    17. Re:An unfair comparison by st0nes · · Score: 2, Informative

      If anyone asks, I definitely did not shoot this delicious, plump-breasted pigeon.

      --
      Tempora mutantur, nos et mutamur in illis
  56. oh, spam. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ah, crap! I'm getting bombarded with pidgin-sent spam! asdfasfonga;f/klr;gs

  57. Avian carriers have other benefits by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Avian carriers can provide high delay, low throughput, and low altitude service. The connection topology is limited to a single point-to-point path for each carrier, used with standard carriers, but many carriers can be used without significant interference with each other, outside of early spring. This is because of the 3D ether space available to the carriers, in contrast to the 1D ether used by IEEE802.3. The carriers have an intrinsic collision avoidance system, which increases availability.

    and

    Multiple types of service can be provided with a prioritized pecking order. An additional property is built-in worm detection and eradication. Because IP only guarantees best effort delivery, loss of a carrier can be tolerated. With time, the carriers are self-regenerating. While broadcasting is not specified, storms can cause data loss. There is persistent delivery retry, until the carrier drops. Audit trails are automatically generated, and can often be found on logs and cable trays.

    I think it is safe to say that RFC 1149 is the way all our data will be transferred in the future.

  58. As a good friend once said by npcole · · Score: 1

    It reminds me of what a friend who works doing IT for big banks is fond of saying:

    "Nothing beats the bandwidth of a lorry full of tape travelling up the M1"

  59. latency by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yeah but latency is a bitch

  60. transatlantic swallow-carriers? by tommten · · Score: 1

    I for one hope that the new swallow transatlantic encrypted usb network, HirundoNet, but it's been delayed because of the experts can't decide on the most important point - African or European?

    --
    - I choked on the red pill and now I'm stuck in limbo
  61. This is nothing new... by mario_grgic · · Score: 1

    Sneaker net has always had the highest bandwidth recorded. Want to send 10 TB of data across the world? Would you try uploading it to their server, or sending 5 2TB hard drives by Fed Ex? Which one do you think will get there faster?

    People have been doing this for quite some time.

    --
    As the island of our knowledge grows, so does the shore of our ignorance.
  62. Computer Networks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. â"Tanenbaum, Andrew S

  63. google wasnt kidding about the pagerank thingie! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wow, now i get it. google is miles ahead than any of us! ... the folks at google weren't kidding, and probably using the page-rank pigeons in the african continent!

  64. RFC1149 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Looks like a similar method has been suggested before: RFC1149 :)

  65. Ted Stevens' Revised Speech by tekrat · · Score: 1

    The internet isn't some pidgeon you can just dump stuff in, it's a series of tubes....

    I sent an email to my staff via pidgeon and it arrived faster than the actual email sent via the network. That's because the bird only had to fly across the room. Of course, I could have just yelled my message, but this is the future... Where's my flying car? Now get off my lawn.

    --
    If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
  66. An hour to transfer the data? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Assuming a 4 GB MicroSD card at 10 MiB/s, you're talking about roughly 7 minutes to load and unload the card at each end.

    Now the fun part: my Comcast "high-speed" Internet is 6.6 mbps down, 1.1 mbps up, so a transfer from my house to a neighbor also using Comcast would max out at 1.1. Assuming a constant 1.1 mbps, that same 4 GB would take 10 hours to transfer. So it ain't just South Africa. :-)

    Now, when we get to 32 GB, we're now talking about 80 hours. If I had to send someone 32 GB or more of data, it would make more sense to stuff the memory cards in a Priority Mail or Express Mail envelope and send it off.

    Me to my wife: "Why should I upload it at 1.1 mbps so you can download it at 6.6 mbps while our home LAN is 1 gbps? :-)

  67. It's a feature. Bugs are delicious. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't you mean "dumped"?

  68. Pigeon Speed? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the pigeon flew 50 miles in an hour? A pigeon can sustain 50 mph+?

  69. I think you trailed off there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Then your fired.

    My fired what?

    1. Re:I think you trailed off there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My fired what?

      Ass.

    2. Re:I think you trailed off there... by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      The post office's carrier pigeons failed to deliver the blu ray with that part of the message.

  70. Tell me about it by Phloebas · · Score: 1

    As a South African, there is a little more to the story. Yes, Telkom is appropriately nicknamed 'Hellkom', and yes, their data speeds are ridiculously slow, and notoriously unreliable (The standard line that most households can afford is 384kb, with 512kb lines being prohibitively expensive. All lines enjoy downtime at least once a month. Most large businesses make do with one or two 4MB lines). However, the company in question only leased their line from Telkom (who have a monopoly on all lines around here, more or less), and did not use Telkom as their ISP. This has allowed Telkom to completely escape any "blame" for the slow speeds. Also, 4gb was a remarkably optimistic chunk of data to try transfer. Most people in SA would never dream of trying to send that much data via the internet. Once could argue that the "race" was deliberately made impossible for Telkom to win. This doesn't excuse the fact that if the data packet had been 200MB the pidgeon probably still would have won. The main problem is education: people in this country do not know that they are entitled to faster lines at cheaper rates, and consider paying around $35p/m about right for a 384kb line capped at 1GB. If you shop around you can find the same line capped at 3GB for around $15, but most people do not know they have access to these prices. The irony is that Telkom has access to 20MB+ lines, and have never been able to legitimately explain why they cap lines, making it difficult for competing ISPs (Telkom is also an ISP) to offer reasonable prices. So glad this made it onto Slashdot!

  71. Cost of Telkom's "recommendations" by JavaBear · · Score: 1

    I found this tide-bit rather interesting in the BBC article :

    --

    "Several recommendations have, in the past, been made to the customer but none of these have, to date, been accepted," Telkom's Troy Hector told South Africa's Sapa news agency in an e-mail.

    --

    I'm sure they (Telkom) have made recommendations, but at what cost?

  72. In Southern US Rednecks with Shotguns by Dareth · · Score: 1

    In the Southern US, major packet loss to pigeons are caused by rednecks with shotguns.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
    1. Re:In Southern US Rednecks with Shotguns by TheHawke · · Score: 1

      *munch*munch*munch* OW!
      Maw, what's this funny piece of plastic I keep hitting?

      --
      First rule of holes; When in one, stop digging.
  73. not so surprising by buddyglass · · Score: 1

    Per the article the pigeon flies 50 mph. Suppose I want to transfer a 32 GB file, stored on a compact flash card, from one side of my town to the other, which is about 15 miles. The pigeon gives me a transfer rate of 24 Mbps. That's faster than any residential broadband in my area, and probably most peoples' areas, considering you're looking at upstream transfer rate. In my area the "high end" DSL option offers an upstream rate of 768 Kbps. Cable isn't much better.

  74. Bandwidth by El_Muerte_TDS · · Score: 1

    Imagine the bandwidth of a truck full of pigeons.

  75. new virus alert by 0110011001110101 · · Score: 1

    watch out for bird flu i love you virus.

    --
    Don't anthropomorphize computers: they hate that.
  76. Re:Pigeons may be fast but... by clone53421 · · Score: 1

    stealing your data medium (i.e., hard drives, USB sticks, etc.) and selling them

    Just the media? Don't forget the data. That might be valuable too.

    --
    Alexander Peter Kristopeit bought his basement from his mommy for one dollar.
  77. RFC1149 Implementation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wonderful! I've been waiting 20 years to see a real-world implementation of RFC1149 IP Datagrams over Avian Carrier. Looks like we're well on our way!

    http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc1149.txt

    1. Re:RFC1149 Implementation by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

      Yes, but it looks like they used a different encapsulation protocol which would make it non-RFC compliant.

  78. Netflix bandwidth by Halotron1 · · Score: 1

    Snail Mail Still Winning The Bandwidth War - Estimates (back in 02) that Netflix bandwidth of shipping DVDs was about 1500 TB.

  79. 747 full of CDs by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Twenty years ago, it was said that nothing had more throughput than a 747 full of CDs, except two 747s full of CDs.

    Today you would replace 747s with a bigger aircraft and CDs with higher-capacity media.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:747 full of CDs by JavaBear · · Score: 1

      This one just keeps changing it's media and means of transport.

      The original:
      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.
        - Tanenbaum, Andrew S. (1996). Computer Networks. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. pp. 83. ISBN 0-13-349945-6.

  80. 4GB packets - don't laugh by davidwr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The post office is a packet-switched network, where the packets are known as letters or parcels. A DNA sample sent through the mail may contain well more than 4GB in a single "packet."

    For electronic packet-switched networks, there may be some applications where a 4GB packet is appropriate. If the cost of resending lost packets is very low even fi the packet size is huge and the overhead cost per packet is high but fixed per packet, a larger packet size might be in order. Maybe not 4GB, but very likely more than the typical ~1.5Kb for most LAN networks.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:4GB packets - don't laugh by Moraelin · · Score: 1

      Point taken, but in these guys' case their network only managed to transmit 4% of that 4GB "packet" in 2 hours. So a rough estimate of the time for the whole packet is 50 hours.

      I'm sure you'll agree that for their particular network, 4 GB per packet is not the optimal block size. A kilobyte and a half should be ok, but 4 GB is not quite the optimal block size there IMHO.

      --
      A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
  81. What... by viridari · · Score: 3, Funny

    .. is the Airspeed Velocity of an Unladen Pigeon?

    1. Re:What... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      African or European ?

  82. Latency? by universalconstant · · Score: 1

    Good bandwidth, but I think SA pigeon latency will be a bit of an issue thought. Playing L4D might be a bit on the choppy side...

  83. In Related News..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The National Security Agency (NSA) has just released an RFP for "A global falconer intercept network"

  84. 50 MPH by yosquire · · Score: 1

    They doped the pigeon. Am I the only one who is impressed by a pigeon that can fly 50 MPH sustained for 1 hour?

  85. Another missing bit by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

    We don't know where the cabled network is lagging. For that matter we don't know if the people who wrote this article even know where the network is lagging. By the time some amount of data traverses from point A to point B it has passed through several routers, switches, etc. Just because the bandwidth was underachieving doesn't mean that the problem can't be solved with a sensible investment of time and resources.

    Or of course they can just use birds.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  86. Obligatory RFCs by hsa · · Score: 2, Informative

    RFC1149 - Standard for the Transmission of IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers
    http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc1149.html

    RFC2549 - IP over Avian Carriers with Quality of Service
    http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2549.html

    1. Re:Obligatory RFCs by NotNormal · · Score: 1

      Avian Carriers do not use the IP protocol

      --
      ~ Normality is merely the achievement of the mediocre...
  87. Software Pirates by netrimos · · Score: 1

    We have gone full circle, pirates will require guns again.

  88. not if you have FIOS by robot256 · · Score: 1

    I have FIOS and am paying for the "20/5" service but frequently it behaves as 25/20--easily 3 MB/s download, 2.3 MB/s upload. megaBYTES per second

  89. What if the birds... by mrkite_38 · · Score: 1

    Had to run? then we might have an epic quail.

  90. DDOS Anybody? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I guess this makes DDOS attacks a lot more entertaining, what with beer, shotguns and landrovers. Pigeons I suspect have a better carbon footprint than routers.

    Also of note, pigeon latency still better than Hughes net.

  91. Is it a fair comparison?? by codeButcher · · Score: 1

    I mean, having an able-bodied, athletic bird compete against such a lame and fat organisation is just so unfair....

    (Disclaimer: Not only do I live in ZA, I have done some contracting for said company.)

    --
    Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
  92. THE GAME by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    you're an idiot.

    -anon

  93. bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. -- Tanenbaum, Andrew S.

  94. If something goes wrong? by jitterman · · Score: 1

    I'd much rather check the server logs than the pigeon logs to find out what the problem is!

    --
    For conscience is the wound, and there's naught to staunch it
  95. Not the first time this has been done. by RivenAleem · · Score: 2, Funny

    We recently ran a similar experiment at work where we took 2 copies of a 50 page document and asked one student to scan and email it to the neighboring desk, and we got another student to hand deliver the second copy over the same distance.

    The results were startling.

    We have now opted to remove all computer equipment from our offices as we consider them inferior to manual transfer of information.

  96. actual bandwidth is 168kbps by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that's 4^ of 4gb in 2h6m47s, or
    4*1000^3*0.04 * 8 / (3600*2 + 6*60 + 47) = 168266

  97. Now... by shentino · · Score: 1

    I'd love to see Comcast tested in a similiar way.

    The "truckload of hard drives" isn't fair from a throughput standpoint, but Comcast needs some bad press to make it upgrade its network.

  98. The Data Rate of a South African Pigeon... by NotNormal · · Score: 1

    So in this example we had a 4GB payload that took 2:07:57 to deliver which gives us a data rate of about 4.3 mb/sec. However, currently you can purchase 128MB USB sticks... This gives the homing pigeon a data rate of 136.6 mb/sec! Of course a 128GB USB stick is expensive, but not more so than a decent rack-mount gigabit switch.

    --
    ~ Normality is merely the achievement of the mediocre...
  99. Interestingly by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 1

    4% of 4GB for 2 hours is about 24kb/s (bytes, not bits). I have a non-business internet connection (meaning, there's a chance you don't get the full capacity you're paying for as with business accounts where the ISP is likely to be sued if they do that) in the US (as in that place that is lagging behind the rest of the world in broadband speeds) and my upload is 32kb/s (bytes again). Yeah, I think their internet is pretty slow.

  100. It wouldn't affect my skillz by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    Even on slow-assed, jungle bandwidth I'll still PWN you and your clan in Battlefield. If I had to wait for the pigeon to crap out packets, your heads will still be exploding! Here come the pain, bitches!

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  101. High bandwidth? by daveywest · · Score: 1

    For off-site backup, never under estimate the bandwidth of a station wagon filled with data tapes.

  102. Station Wagon Backup Tape Bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For years, many of us in the Disaster Recovery business have said. "Never under estimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of backup tapes."

  103. We are plagued by morons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sometimes it's the managers, sometimes some BOFH, sometimes cheap third-party "specialized" personnel.

    Problems and lies we have to bear from IT guys:

    a) One hour waiting for a phone answer is ok.
    b) If you register an incident, and a solution never comes -- it's ok, you have support.
    c) Windows is easy to use and there's no way out.
    d) Computers are problematic or too hard for the user.
    e) If software is a problem, just pay more to M$ and don't think.
    f) Broadband is whatever they deliver to you -- even if it's slower than dial-up.
    g) Outages are a regular thing (other businesses call it "overbooking").
    h) It's from M$: it can't be fixed... live with that.
    i) Pay more because of this feature you never asked.
    j) Pay even more to get that feature removed.
    k) Pay more for software, but do spend on hardware, too.
    l) If you're alone with a problem, don't annoy us -- how come others don't complain?
    m) If others have the same problem -- well, don't complain as if you were the only victim.
    n) Interoperability is promised, but non-existent -- not even between different versions of the same app!
    o) Your data is no longer yours the minute you used _our_ file formats.
    p) The network is down. What? Networks weren't supposed to get down? How so?

    At the root of the problem is lack of competition.

    It's imperative we enforce better and stronger competition to avoid practical monopolies like M$ and telecom.

    There was a time when government was respected and companies lacking respect were split.

    Yeah, I know, get off my lawn etc. etc. etc. ...bunch of idiots burning resources!

  104. African or European ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Huh? I... I don't know that. Auuuuuuuugh.....

  105. Wait a minute, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The pigeon "took 1 hour to make the 80km/50mile flight"

    Can pigeons fly 50 MPH? I guess so, see various animal airspeeds at http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/nonpwdpubs/young_naturalist/animals/animal_speeds/index.phtml

  106. is that an unladen pigeon? by pbrooks100 · · Score: 1

    300+ posts, and not one comparison of of the speed of a pigeon to an African Swallow... sigh...

  107. Tannenbaum and sneakernets by ducky10 · · Score: 1

    Don't forget Tannenbaum: "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway.Computer Networks, 4th Ed. p. 91"
    And sneakernets in general: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sneakernet

  108. CPIP, Carrier pigeon IP. RFC1149 by plopez · · Score: 1

    http://www.blug.linux.no/rfc1149/

    In case you were curious.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  109. RFC compliant by EvilStein · · Score: 1

    I worked with a small ISP for a while, and we joked that we had an RFC compliant backup data network. Yep, you guessed it. Pigeons. They would have been faster most of the time too, aside from the occasional bird bath and run in with angry falcons.

  110. DIY networks... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First of all, never underestimate the bandwidth of a vehicle with a number of hard disks in the boot. The bird was a good stunt which illustrates this fact and shows how abysmal the carrier's service is.

    Now what?

    If it were here, I'd call Ubiquity (ubnt.com) and / or other vendors and start creating the backbone that is so sorely needed. A little competition will improve things and a parallel carrier will lighten the load. It the quality and price point are superior, you would replace both the carrier and pigeon.

  111. Or.. by Inominate · · Score: 1

    Or a shotgun.

  112. What seasoning is this Maw? by Dareth · · Score: 1

    Maw, what you season this pigeon with? It tastes like burnt plastic, like when you cook over the trash barrel.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  113. Never Underestimate the Bandwidth by Francis · · Score: 1
    Popular saying from computer networking:
    "Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway." - Andrew S. Tanenbaum (1996)

    It's an old saying, and I was curious how true it still is, so I started calculating relative bandwidth using modern media: http://www.francischang.com/tape/

    Some of the figures:
    WiMAX 9.375 MB/s
    802.11n 31 MB/s
    Gigabit Ethernet 125 MB/s
    SDRAM 12.8 GB/s
    E-150 Van full of magnetic tapes, New York to LA: 392 GB/s

    --

    --
    #include <malloc.h>
    free(your.mind);
  114. Never underestimate by Trogre · · Score: 1

    ...the bandwidth of a truck full of backup tapes.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  115. Re:Pigeons may be fast but... by guabah · · Score: 1

    I Africa, it's probably cheaper and faster to hire a marathon racer as courier than using the Telco anyway

  116. In Backwards South Africa by piotr+alfredovich · · Score: 1

    Avians beat technology in speed test.
    Variant:
    In Backwards South Africa
    Data-usage is accounted for in bushels of wheat

  117. A small boy with a punch card is faster by burisch_research · · Score: 1

    iBurst is the enemy #1. iBurst is a wireless 'broadband' provider in South Africa, and apparently several other countries. It is not HSDPA, or any other recognizable acronym -- it is a Kyocera-backed wireless protocol that one might reasonably expect would give a good internet experience. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iburst) Not in my case, however. I have been a subscriber to South Africa's iBurst service for more than two years. My signal strength is not magnificent, I get somewhere between 70% and 80% reported signal strength at all times. Late evenings and weekends, I can expect pretty good transfer rates. Very rarely do I experience any issues at all outside of office hours. However, I work from home. During daylight hours, during the week, I see about 90% of my http page requests fail. Almost all TCP requests close unexpectedly. I raised a call log with iBurst South Africa about this issue, requesting that somebody get back to me on this issue. I have had a couple of callbacks, requesting that I perform a speed test on my connection, however it's not even fast enough that I can even load the speed test flash file! I am now at the point of despair. I have called 15 times and spoken to 6 different representatives, over a period of about 3 weeks. Nobody useful ever gets back to me. iBurst advertises that they offer technical support 24/7, however when anyone attempts to call outside those times, a recorded message advises callers to retry in office hours. It's no surprise that a South African service provider can get away with poor service, and in fact no surprise either that they screw their users over. But it's not right. I work from home, and I rely on my internet connection to earn my living. It costs me R600 per month, which is around $80, for 3.5 gigabytes of data per month. Those of you in the first world, you can consider yourselves extremely lucky. Here I'm just lucky if I can actually download 3.5 gigs in the whole month in which I have paid for it. (I'm a software engineer working for a USA company, FYI) My own hypothesis is that the penny-pinching bastards have a tiny upstream connection that they pay peanuts for, and charge enormous amounts for their users to make use for -- which is, by definition, profiteering. In the absence of a class-action law here in South Africa, what are my options for getting just recompense for not only me but all those other poor sods who are being screwed over by iBurst? Do I start a petition? Open a case with the police? Approach the fair trading commission here? What?!?!?! I'm at a loss! c

    --
    char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
    1. Re:A small boy with a punch card is faster by burisch_research · · Score: 1

      Apologies, R600 is US$48, not $80

      --
      char*f="char*f=%c%s%c;main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}";main(){printf(f,34,f,34);}
  118. The North American net is slower than a truck. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "A group of american scientist got so fed up with the internet speed between Los Angeles and San Francisco that they loaded their 1000 TB of data onto 1000 x 1 TB harddrives. They then proceeded to fill a truck with all drives and let the truck drive from LA to SF. It took the truck 12 hours to drive the distance. They started a transfer using the internet and while all the data had been transfered with the truck, their 1Gbit internet connection had only transfered 5.4 TB or about 0.5% of the data in the same time."

    Why is this article news? There is nothing miraculous about it. It doesn't immediately say anything about South Africa. Most importantly, we've all been at the point where it was easier to get the data on disk, CD, DVDs, USB sticks, portable hard drives, than using the internet to transfer files from our friends or from work.

  119. Latency by Jessta · · Score: 1

    faster transfer, but the latency is a bitch.
    Did they include the time required to send a pigeon to make the request?
    and a pigeon to ACK to be sure it actually arrived?
    what if the pigeon got lost? what is the timeout on a pigeon?

    --
    ...and that is all I have to say about that.
    http://jessta.id.au
  120. Latency is important too by BhaKi · · Score: 1

    Look at latency people. Not just the throughput.

    --
    The largest prime factor of my UID is 263267.
  121. Pigeon Net by darthvader100 · · Score: 1

    The real solution would be a wireless pigeon network
    Everyone connects to their nearest pigeon, which then passes the packets to the next pigeon.

    Actually i think i just designed cellphone networks with movable towers

    The scary thing is even with vast packet loss it would still be faster than "Hellkom"

  122. Upload speed by BeanThere · · Score: 1

    Oh sorry, forgot to mention that the upload speed you get is usually half the download speed, so for that 384Kbit line you'd perhaps get 192Kbit/s upload speed, which is 0.19 megabit / sec.

  123. To be fair... by jandersen · · Score: 1

    Not to defend the South African internet quality, of which I know nothing, but I don't really think this is anything more than an advertising stunt. One can prove that just about any method is "faster" than, say, a 1 Tbit line, if one is allowed to load an unlimited amount of data on your alternative transport medium. So how about loading a barge with 500 tons of DVDs packed with data or something like that? Is transport by barge going to be faster than a 1Tbit line? It is easy to make it look that way.

  124. Protocols by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trained Carrier Pigeon / Idiot-Proof

    or considering it's connectionless

    Untrained Dopey Pigeon / Instant Poo

  125. 1996? by davidwr · · Score: 1

    "Station wagon full of tapes" sounds like a '60s or '70s reference.

    In any case, I heard the 747 version in the 80s or early 90s, well before 1996.

    I suppose the original version was something along the lines of "never underestimate the bandwidth of a chariot full of papyrus."

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  126. Jim Carnicelli by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A pigeon will be able to outdo any electronic network, given a sufficiently large amount of data to transmit. :-)

  127. So... by TheLinuxWarrior · · Score: 1

    They're using Comcast then?

  128. *** baud modem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had a 14.4 modem on my bbs in the early 90s and it was pretty speedy for back then. I had some poor user that had a 1200 baud modem. I had this ANSI file of Dream Theater's Images and Words album cover on a random logon script with Renegade. I would catch him sometimes, I knew it was him, he was my only 1200 baud caller, and the ANSI would show 3 lines and I'd see "no carrier". Then the modem would pick up, and I'd see 1200 baud again. I'm sure he was praying he didn't get that ANSI again.

    Poor guy, he did eventually get a faster modem but this story reminded me of that. I always thought it would have been faster to drive a floppy over with the ANSI on it than for him to sit there and watch it scroll S L O W L Y across his screen.

    Good times!

  129. Sitting on it!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    At my company the internet is still faster. Because the data would be shipped (flown) to the purchasing agent. She would sit on it for a few days to a week. Then it would be forwarded to my department where it would sit on my boss' boss' desk for at least a full day. If I'm fortunate I'll get it the day after. Sometimes I just have to know when to expect it (through premonition) and go looking for the package.

  130. Intelligent Epidemic Routing by GrantRobertson · · Score: 1

    With Intellegent Epidemic Routing this could actually work as a viable - if time delayed - networking system.

    P.S. What is up with the Slashdot comment form? The text box is only about 20 characters wide.

  131. Shocking Reply by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just a few days after this Slashdot article, South Africa's largest telecoms provider, Telkom (which has been taking flak for years for its shoddy and overpriced service), is being pitted against a homing pigeon to see which can deliver 4GB of call centre data logs quickest over a distance of around 80km (50 miles). According to the official website, the race is set to take place September 10."

    Here's a shocker...............Telkom buys it's internet from AT&T............eply