Slashdot Mirror
Google Now Serves 25% of North American Internet Traffic
sturgeon writes "Wired Magazine claims today that Google is now 25% of the North American traffic with a mostly unreported (and rapidly expanding), massive deployment of edge caching servers in almost every Internet provider around the world. Whether users are directly using a Google service (i.e. search, YouTube) or the devices are automatically sending data (e.g. Google Analytics, updates), the majority of end devices around the world will now send traffic to Google server during the course of an average day. It looks like Wired based their story on a report from cloud analytics and network management company DeepField."
Can you imagine the explosion in Internet traffic if ISP customers were allowed to host servers?
That headline is confusing, considering there is a service called Google Now which is known not for its data consumption but its heavy battery draining capabilities.
The botnet cannot be contained anymore
Yes, I use for a good time. Analytics, Drive, Gmail, Calendar
Thanks,
Fabio Costa
http://equipepolishop.com.br
All of the world's traffic is sent through an NSA server during the course of an average day.
The NSA Now Spies on 25% of North American Internet Traffic
Lol, jk, it's more.
Google is now 25% of the North American traffic...
I have never been a CEO, an probably will never be, but what I wanted to know is what exactly goes on in a CEO's mind (say Steve Ballmer), once a statistic/detail like this is outed.
What really goes on in a mind like his?
Not necessarily so.
And worse, the test methodology linked from the post is based on a three-year-old sketchy (and perhaps wheezing vacuum cleaner) and doesn't point to validation as a cumulative measurement. In other words, a bit suspect.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
CDN (Content Distribution Networks) are even more "God-like". They serve most traffic for the biggest players, like Microsoft.
The stats, metadata, and content must be quite interesting.
Since they are including Youtube as part of this traffic, I can see why it would be such a high percentage. Nearly every other Google service is pretty low bandwidth, but many people, including myself, now use Youtube as a replacement for TV. So I'm not suprised by this statistic at all.
A relatively small local ISP has 2-3 google devices in their DCs, so that doesn't surprise me Went to do some traceroutes and noticed they were serving all my google traffic to me. Turns out it's at google's request
Just to be clear: the title of this story should be interpreted "The combined traffic of Google's internet properties now account for 25% of all Internet traffic in North America."
Not, as I thought upon my first reading, "Google's mobile device software package, "Google Now", accounts for 25% of all Internet traffic in North America." That made me do a spit-take.
if i got a dollar for every percent...I wouldn't call it nothing.
Trying to block out google analytics using various add-ons has been an enlightening experience to say the least. The majority of websites out there have links to third party tracking sites, google analytics figuring highly among them. Trying to exist on the internet without revealing some aspect of one's identity, even for the most mundane thing -- a search for information, is becoming very difficult.
Even here on Slashdot, they've blocked Tor. Amusing -- they let anyone post "anonymously", and unless of course you actually try to post anonymously you might believe it. If a website that caters to those most likely to understand privacy on the internet can't get it right...
#fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
I don't get it...
Youtube is pretty light on full-length movies and TV episodes, and it's still not extremely common that their videos are available in high definition.
Netflix and Hulu both have much more multi-hour content, higher-quality content that more people are likely to want to watch, and they have most of it in highdef, eating up the pipes. I've ever considered Hulu as a free, viable replacement for live TV, now that their offerings are so extensive, and even includes nightly news programs (only glaring exception is up-to-date PBS programming like NOVA, Frontline, American Experience, Secrets of the Dead, Nature, This Old House, etc.), but both myself and my ISP are quite happy that I find an OTA antenna a superior option for the foreseeable future.
I find it very hard to believe that Youtube is so massively beating out all the higher quality video providers, and can only conclude that the data is massively flawed, as TFA starts suggesting about half-way through.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
But the problem is that residential ISPs don't want to have to actually provide "internet service". What they really want to provide is the much simpler and more profitable "client only internet service". I.e. GoogleFiber's 'evil' terms of service-
ComIntercept (FCC->GoogleFiber)" // 1.41. Also attached is Mr. McClendon's October 24, 2012 complaint forwarded to the FCC by the Kansas Office of the Attorney General. Mr. McClendon asserts that Google's policy prohibiting use of its fixed broadband internet service (Google Fiber connection) to host any type of server violates the Open Internet Order, FCC 10-201, and the Commission's rules at 47 C.F.R. // 8.1-11.
"The enclosed informal complaint, dated September 1, 2012, has been filed with the Commission by Douglas McClendon against Google pursuant to section 1.41 of Comissions's Rules, 47 C.F.R.
"
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3929983&cid=44170993
No, if you had a dollar for every percent, you'd have 25$. But that's really not a lot of money.
Do you care about the security of your wireless mouse?
Google has too much control. I encourage all individuals and companies to establish your own non-google routed connections. Work with your ISP/Communications provider to make sure traffic does not get routed through Google.
Please Google, don't screw us. We have put our faith and internet traffic into you. We have rested our emails, the contents of our cell phones, our family photos, and favorite restaurants with you. Please don't be a d&^k and do anything stupid like turn into a giant conglomerate who controls all of Earth's resources and keeps them for only the super wealthy, while the poor are confined to a desolate existence - or something like that I have seen in the Science Fiction movies.
Click a link. It goes through G's servers first then to the target. This is not the cache link but the "direct" site link. Can you say SLOW !! And some won't work at all !! E-V-I-L !!
I hand edit the links: remove all before the target's http://.../ and everything from &sa after.
Parsing please.......
Is this "Google Now" serving 25%......or "Google" now serving 25%.
Yeah, I thought the same thing. Google Now is horrible!
Amazing. pig@acmexd.com
I think you mean WWW ...
Google, NSA, what's the difference?
"You must try to forget all you have learned. You must begin to dream." -- Sherwood Anderson
As someone who works on carrier SONET and GMPLS systems with DWDM, I can tell you that this is not even close to being engineering-feasible, despite the recent revelations about the NSA's capability to do so.
What they can do on a technical level is push arbitrary early-match and clone labels into the edge networks MPLS table of an existing or potential target to capture that targets IP address or a particular protocol (IP port number) to a clone interface which can then log that targets traffic.
Additionally by capturing the flow (think s/flow or similar) statistics from the routers at the edge of the MPLS routing domain, they can search that "metadata" for additional targets associated with an existing target (IP match).
Consider that the largest logical edge routers (usually a cluster of loadbalanced routers) might route 80x 10Gbps channels into an optical mesh network. For a spy to have the technical capacity to capture all that traffic they either have to capture 20-160 lambdas for every teleport in their taget domain, either capturing every ingress DWDM optical path or every egress DWDM optical path. The problem is not optically capturing those signals, that can be accomplished relatively inexpensively using an optical coupler and an EDFA, but how to get all these bundles unbundled. They could send the bundles back to their central office without unbundling them, but this would require a clear fiber line back to their CO for EVERY bundle (and there are probably 1k or more bundles in the US alone).
To unpack a single DWDM bundle requires a wavelength splitter with the same channels and channel spacing as the source, and as many client converters as there are channels, AND a client network termination device compatible with the system used on that lambda, and some computer systems to process that flow.
In essence what you are suggesting is a complete duplicate of the nations fiber core network. For every lightpath in the network you must have a duplicate lightpath to your theoretical surveillance point.
And it wouldn't capture anything about shorthop connections that aren't passing through a lightpath provider's network.
It's much more feasible to instead capture flow statistics from the ISP, which will have already aggregated those statistics for their own network management purposes, and pass those over a logical channel which can be cheaply multiplexed over a virtual circuit. You still have the capability to do arbitrary intercepts by injecting clone labels into edge routers on demand, and at a much more reasonable cost.
In '96 I had a job in Australia and the net was new. The university did a survey and found that they were using heaps of bandwidth between Aus and the Silicon Valley. I suggested that they might get their users to make their browser start page the uni's home page, rather than [I'm really old] the Netscape home site. Traffic dropped massively once they twigged. Hmmmm. I wonder....
Earlier poster said posting anonymously is hard