A single packet takes longer to reach the destination, but that single packet can contain shittons of data. Ingenious! Of course... This assumes the packet actually arrives.
this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
561 points (92.2% liked)
Technology
72764 readers
2787 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes but not as safe and not as reliable, also not viable over long distances. Furthermore its a one directional transfer.
IPoAC isn't one-way, but it's definitely less reliable. Unfortunately, packets can be lost due to encapsulation from birds of prey, and bad weather also increases dropped packets
I wish that pigeon can send me approximately 3000 pictures of the Atomium
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Popular TechTuber Jeff Geerling has delivered an updated take on the old chestnut about the relative merits of pigeon-based vs internet data transfers.
Spoiler alert: the pigeon with its high-capacity microSD cards won Geerling’s data transfer race by a significant margin.
Famously, in 2009, a South African company compared the transfer speed of a pigeon carrying a 4 GB memory stick vs local ISP Telkom’s ADSL service.
So, he donned a pigeon mask and jumped on a plane to carry 3 TB of files from his home in the US to the Canadian data center, which the internet transfer also targeted.
To conclude, Geerling says he could have easily done better as PiJeff, stuffing his luggage with very high capacity drives, but wanted to stick to the common 3 TB across all alternatives.
Hopefully, another decade later, we will all have broadband measured in petabits, and pigeons won’t have to endure having flash NAND devices strapped to their legs for our amusement (research).
The original article contains 432 words, the summary contains 163 words. Saved 62%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Who doubted that sneakernet would be faster?
I'm not the original author:
Trebuchets are the most technologically advanced siege engines of all time, and are capable of hurling a 90kg stone over 300m using a counterweight.
With this in mind, we can perform the following calculations:
A 22TB WD Red Pro drive weighs 670g, with a maximum hurl weight of 90kg, trebuchet can hurl 134 drives at once, totalling 2,948 TB of data.
The average speed of a trebuchet projectile is 54m/s and the average size of an American 'block' is 100m. Lets presume 3 blocks to get our full trebuchets use (fuck you catapults).
It'll take 5.5 seconds for the projectile to go from launch to dramatic landing, meaning a throughput of 536TB a second.
Therefore, trebuchets are the best transfer method.
Flash storage has come a long way in 10 years!
I knew this was clickbait.
It's actually the latest Jeff Geerling video and it was partly tongue in cheek