# Off-Topic Discussion > The Lounge > Tech Talk >  >  How Fast Do We Need

## Howie

This is from memory. so these are not facts. Please correct my errors.   :Oops:  

I was reading recently that the standard cable modem will be faster than a _speeding bullet_

Something in regards to being able to use silicone to admit laserbeam. Using light in am manner of speaking.
Silicone lase I think it ids called.

I don&#39;t know the details. What did stick in my head was..
A standard cable modem at it&#39;s highest rate is currently 1 meg per sec.
With this silicone lase it will be *TEN THOUSAND* time that speed&#33;

----------


## Ynot

I&#39;m sorry
I didn&#39;t understand any of that.......

----------


## ExoByte

Well with bigger and better programs entering the market, and bigger and better technology, that also means bigger downloads. As technology and software improve, and files become larger for downloading, I don&#39;t think people want to wait all that long for their download. 

Even when the files arent major size, people would rather have a file in 5 minutes rather then 15. Esspecially if its a last minute emergency.

Nonetheless, things are going to get bigger faster, so the road might as well be paved now. 

That said, if this new thing is going to be going 10megs per second, kick ass&#33;  :yumdumdoodledum:

----------


## Kaniaz

Software as a service. &#39;Nuff said.

----------


## Howie

> I&#39;m sorry
> I didn&#39;t understand any of that.......[/b]



I think they are using silicone as a conductor for electrons.





> Software as a service. &#39;Nuff said.[/b]





How do think this will or could effect AI?

----------


## Stalker

> I was reading recently that the standard cable modem will be faster than a _speeding bullet_
> [/b]



So...launching a modem out of a cannon then? That sounds useful   ::|:  

I have, and frequently use, 100 MBit full duplex. Wouldn&#39;t mind more, but it&#39;s enough for now I suppose.

(An optical connection should be able to do a lot more than 10 MB/s btw)

----------


## arby

I&#39;m sorry. I like keeping my modem right here moving at 0 kph. Easier to keep track of.

----------


## Ynot

you could try shooting it
if you hit it, then the modem&#39;s slower than the bullet

----------


## ExoByte

Can&#39;t argue with that logic.

----------


## Spectre

> This is from memory. so these are not facts. Please correct my errors.   
> 
> I was reading recently that the standard cable modem will be faster than a _speeding bullet_
> 
> Something in regards to being able to use silicone to admit laserbeam. Using light in am manner of speaking.
> Silicone lase I think it ids called.
> 
> I don&#39;t know the details. What did stick in my head was..
> A standard cable modem at it&#39;s highest rate is currently 1 meg per sec.
> ...



And that would be a *standard* cable modem?

Not for a while, I would think.

----------


## TweaK

Well, I don&#39;t think we need that yet. I mean, Kaniaz&#39;d be happy with even a tenth of that speed. AMIRITE?

----------


## Kaniaz

Yes.

----------


## Ynot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adsl#ADSL_standards

please note, speeds quoted in mega-bits per sec

----------


## Howie

> And that would be a *standard* cable modem?
> 
> Not for a while, I would think.[/b]




At some point. Since Standards will continue to rise.
Like most software, it seems outdateed as soon as you get it. But how soon. I have no idea.
It will likely be very expensive, then become outdated and then become standard. Then whole process starts over.   ::?:

----------


## Umbrasquall

Hmmm 10 meg/second? Actually that&#39;s not that impressive. Three years ago my neighborhood put in fiberoptics which _averages_ around 6-7  megs/second for the houses around me. Only a 3 meg average increase over 3 years? 

Technology will keep improving, although we are approaching limits in certain areas unless we drastically change the way we design our processors and memory.

----------


## Ynot

scraping away all the marketing blather ("meg / sec" is not megabytes....)
a lot of it has to do with the contention ratio (ie. how many people are sharing your connection)

you may have bought "2 meg broadband", but all that means is that the cable carries 2 mbps

you will probably be sharing that speed with 10 other households in your road

----------


## Stalker

> scraping away all the marketing blather ("meg / sec" is not megabytes....)
> a lot of it has to do with the contention ratio (ie. how many people are sharing your connection)
> 
> you may have bought "2 meg broadband", but all that means is that the cable carries 2 mbps
> 
> you will probably be sharing that speed with 10 other households in your road
> [/b]



Unless it says so in the fineprint (and for a low speed like that, doesn&#39;t sound likely) it actually means you can get 2 Mbps to (or rather from) the nearest station, and from there there&#39;s a x Mbps connection for y users.
2 Mbps sounds like it&#39;s a dsl-variant, if so then you definately have your own cable to the closest station, since it&#39;s the pots-cable.

----------


## Howie

> Hmmm 10 meg/second? Actually that&#39;s not that impressive. Three years ago my neighborhood put in fiberoptics which _averages_ around 6-7  megs/second for the houses around me. Only a 3 meg average increase over 3 years? 
> 
> Technology will keep improving, although we are approaching limits in certain areas unless we drastically change the way we design our processors and memory.
> [/b]



It is ten gigabytes per second. By persuading silicon to admit laser beams computers and other devices will handle light as well as electrons.
It is a 10,000 -fold improvement over the standard limit of one meg per second.
So huge digital files or high resolution videos would be transferred at a rate of 10 gigabits a second.

----------


## wasup

> It is ten gigabytes per second. By persuading silicon to admit laser beams computers and other devices will handle light as well as electrons.
> It is a 10,000 -fold improvement over the standard limit of one meg per second.
> So huge digital files or high resolution videos would be transferred at a rate of 10 gigabits a second.
> [/b]



That means I would be able to download huge amounts of music UBER-fast.

----------


## Howie

> That means I would be able to download huge amounts of music UBER-fast.[/b]




Even though I don&#39;t know what UBER-fast means, I am guessing yaaa.   ::wink::  

That is quite a leap isn&#39;t it?

----------


## Ynot

The problem with most high demand networks is not speed
but latency

The faster you go, the more collisions you&#39;ll have

----------


## Umbrasquall

> It is ten gigabytes per second. By persuading silicon to admit laser beams computers and other devices will handle light as well as electrons.
> It is a 10,000 -fold improvement over the standard limit of one meg per second.
> So huge digital files or high resolution videos would be transferred at a rate of 10 gigabits a second.
> [/b]



Oh. That&#39;s definitely fast then. Though I don&#39;t think anyone will need a connection that fast, it far surpasses even the speed required to stream HD videos.

----------


## Howie

> Oh. That&#39;s definitely fast then. Though I don&#39;t think anyone will need a connection that fast, it far surpasses even the speed required to stream HD videos.[/b]



You can be certain that the military is quite interested.  ::roll::

----------


## TweaK

> It is ten gigabytes per second. By persuading silicon to admit laser beams computers and other devices will handle light as well as electrons.
> It is a 10,000 -fold improvement over the standard limit of one meg per second.
> So huge digital files or high resolution videos would be transferred at a rate of 10 gigabits a second.
> [/b]



10*GB/s*? Holy fast speed Batman o_ô. If the speed keeps increasing exponentially like that, in a couple of tens of years we&#39;ll be able to _download teh interwebs_&#33;&#33; Ok maybe not.





> That means I would be able to download huge amounts of music UBER-fast.
> [/b]



..Yes. That would allow you to download about 1500-2000 songs in a second or two.  ::D:

----------


## Ynot

100 Gbps over ethernet was achieved a little while ago

----------


## Howie

> 100 Gbps over ethernet was achieved a little while ago[/b]



I doubt this.
One Gig is 1000 or 1024 Megabytes, depending on who is measuring. Are you sure you don&#39;t mean Megs? 

I am sure you know this and more than I.   ::wink:: 


Silicon Lase
Ethernet

----------


## Ne-yo

The Nippon Telegraph and Telephone Corporation ran test with a result of a 14 Tbps transmission over a single 100-mile fiber optic line.

----------


## Ynot

Doubt me ??
HA &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;  &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

http://gigaom.com/2006/11/14/100gbe/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_gigabit_Ethernet

Ph33R me,
for I will beat you

----------


## Merlock

> 100 Gbps over ethernet was achieved a little while ago[/b]







> I doubt this.
> One Gig is 1000 or 1024 Megabytes, depending on who is measuring. Are you sure you don&#39;t mean Megs? 
> [/b]



Bits and bytes are different people, bits and bytes are different. Gbps *&#33;=* GB/s.

----------


## Howie

> Doubt me ??
> HA &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;  &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;
> 
> http://gigaom.com/2006/11/14/100gbe/
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100_gigabit_Ethernet
> 
> Ph33R me,
> for I will beat you[/b]



If you noticed I linked to the same page that you have.
I just linked to the news release. So I am not saying they did not do so, but it seems that it was in a different manner. A more complex aptitude.
Using ten different gigabyte channels.

If you compare the two they seem rather different to me. 
Where the silicone lase may be adapted for use in many applications, cell phones and other wireless devices.

----------


## Ynot

> Bits and bytes are different people, bits and bytes are different. Gbps *&#33;=* GB/s.
> [/b]



yep,
and the difference gets wider the higher you go

100 Gbps (Giga-bits per second)
is the same as
12 GBps (Giga-bytes per second)

----------


## Howie

yep,
and the difference gets wider the higher you go

100 Gbps (Giga-bits per second)
is the same as
12 GBps (Giga-bytes per second)

Ok. So as hard as I tried to stay out of  (not knowing what the hell I am talking about stage) I have eventually been drug there. 
Sooo.  What is the differences?  ::bigteeth::  





> If you noticed I linked to the same page that you have.
> I just linked to the news release. So I am not saying they did not do so, but it seems that it was in a different manner. A more complex aptitude.
> Using ten different gigabyte channels.
> 
> If you compare the two they seem rather different to me. 
> Where the silicone lase may be adapted for use in many applications, cell phones and other wireless devices.[/b]

----------


## Ynot

difference between a bit & a byte ?

----------


## Howie

> difference between a bit & a byte ?[/b]




No no no.
Concerning my last sentence.

----------


## Ynot

> No no no.
> Concerning my last sentence.
> [/b]



Is this what you mean

http://www.networkworld.com/news/200...ntelsilic.html

http://www.lightreading.com/document.asp?doc_id=103960

cause it&#39;s nothing to do with networking
but the movement of information inside a chip
(optical light pulses are faster than electrical pulses across copper)

this is more to do with processor & motherboard designs than anything else

----------

