Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

nextplatform.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 107 posts

Re: How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

#31

Post by Swizec »

komali2 wrote: post #29
trafficlight wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hate the naming trend over the past 10-15 years of using common words for projects. I can't really search for Espresso, or Jupiter, or Andromeda without additional qualifiers that I may not know yet.

Heh, that for me culminated when windows released a ubuntu subsystem. The names in order of popularity when it was originally announced (now they push for WSL) 1. Bash for Ubuntu on Windows 2. Windows Bash Shell 3. Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) Trying googling WSL - it's world surf league. Windows Bash Shell is impossible, so is Bash for Ubuntu on Windows. It's getting better as more and more articles are being w…

It's a filter bubble issue. When I first started Ruby, it had been popular for 10+ years already. Many articles.

Despite that, it was still impossible to search for. Look for Ruby, get gemstones. Look for gem, get even more gemstones. Eventually Google figured it out and now it's almost impossible to search for gemstones. If I search for gem almost all search results are about Ruby things. Same when searching for Ruby.

Even "rails" now returns almost only Ruby on Rails stuff.

Re: How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

#32

Post by komali2 »

Swizec wrote: post #31
komali2 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Heh, that for me culminated when windows released a ubuntu subsystem. The names in order of popularity when it was originally announced (now they push for WSL) 1. Bash for Ubuntu on Windows 2. Windows Bash Shell 3. Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) Trying googling WSL - it's world surf league. Windows Bash Shell is impossible, so is Bash for Ubuntu on Windows. It's getting better as more and more articles are being w…

It's a filter bubble issue. When I first started Ruby, it had been popular for 10+ years already. Many articles. Despite that, it was still impossible to search for. Look for Ruby, get gemstones. Look for gem, get even more gemstones. Eventually Google figured it out and now it's almost impossible to search for gemstones. If I search for gem almost all search results are about Ruby things. Same when searching for Rub…

Have you tried searching when logged out of google? I'd imagine a rail worker searching lots of train stuff would generally get the right results when they searched on their account.

But yea, worth bearing in mind when naming stuff.

Re: How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

#33

Post by kbenson »

johnsmith21006 wrote: post #25
sofaofthedamned wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook or Amazon may have a say in that, a lot of those 1 in 4 bytes are video from Youtube. That said, those bytes still need to be delivered, Google really don't have peers in this stuff, apart from maybe Facebook.

YouTube doubled in hours of video watched last year going from 500m to 1 billion hours daily. FB total video is 100m hours. So Google added 5x FB total. Netflix was about 128 million hours daily. So Google should get to 1 out of 3 pretty quickly.

Youtube has some really good content creators, and apparently they are getting paid. I've actually subscribed to a few channels finally that I look forward to seeing new releases in (CGP Grey, YSAC).

My 7yo son is obsessed with the whole Let's Play phenomenon, and other associated minecraft content. I've looked up some of these people on Social Blade[1][2], and some of these people are likely making millions, but I can't fault the system. While the content of some isn't exceptional, it is professional, and some of these people keep up that pace for multiple content releases each day.

1: https://socialblade.com/youtube/user/thediamondminecart

2: https://socialblade.com/youtube/user/matthiasiam

Re: How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

#34

Post by Theodores »

zzzcpan wrote: post #8

I don't know, feels like a massive waste of resources and if Google is doing it simply because it can. It's probably much cheaper for everyone else to handle latency/throughput problems on the client side and application level, sticking to all the traditional networking, but not relying on it for quality. Even in the web browser we already can send all kinds of asynchronous requests to multiple servers in multiple da…

From the keyboard of a Chromebook Pixel I think I can feel where this is going. I can see a time when ChromeOS works on this internal Google network for most of what it does, running on protocols that are orders of magnitude quicker than regular 'https://' style TCP/IP networking.

There is this danger that these pieces Google work on get joined up, e.g. Android apps on your Chromebook. With Google owning the network from the server 'encapsulated' over public networks and then on Google's own home router and on to Google gadgets like Chromebooks, there is a high likely hood that some glorified 'SPDY' that hooks in at OS level is going to happen. Therefore pieces of the puzzle may not have any obvious benefit, to take a train analogy, who would build a railway through Utah? On its own it might not make sense but as part of a transcontinental railroad it was an important part of the puzzle to get done. With Google there is some of this shrewd aspect with added 'moonshot' thrown in for good measure.

Re: How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

#35

Post by kbenson »

allannienhuis wrote: post #6
sofaofthedamned wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook or Amazon may have a say in that, a lot of those 1 in 4 bytes are video from Youtube. That said, those bytes still need to be delivered, Google really don't have peers in this stuff, apart from maybe Facebook.

netflix last year was reported at 37% in NA, so I suspect it will continue to be a contender as it gets more traction globally. http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/01/20/netflix-boasts-37-... 'peak download internet traffic' whatever that means.

The content may be Netflix, but it's delivered over CDNs, and much of that infrastructure isn't operated by Netflix. That's what the "originate" in the original statement is likely implying. Content ownership and access vs content delivery at a network level.

Re: How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

#36

Post by wmf »

Theodores wrote: post #34
zzzcpan wrote: post #8

I don't know, feels like a massive waste of resources and if Google is doing it simply because it can. It's probably much cheaper for everyone else to handle latency/throughput problems on the client side and application level, sticking to all the traditional networking, but not relying on it for quality. Even in the web browser we already can send all kinds of asynchronous requests to multiple servers in multiple da…

From the keyboard of a Chromebook Pixel I think I can feel where this is going. I can see a time when ChromeOS works on this internal Google network for most of what it does, running on protocols that are orders of magnitude quicker than regular ' https://' style TCP/IP networking. There is this danger that these pieces Google work on get joined up, e.g. Android apps on your Chromebook. With Google owning the network…

It's already happening with QUIC. Google is backporting as many improvements as they can into the traditional network stack though, like HTTP/2, BBR, and TLS improvements.

Re: How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

#37

Post by manigandham »

konpikwastaken wrote: post #3

Can someone ELI5 the difference between this and https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/expressroute/ ? Is the technology principle the same?

Azure ExpressRoute = AWS Direct Connect = Google Cloud Interconnect

All 3 are ways to connect your private datacenter or on-premise location (maybe your corporate office) directly to the cloud provider's network over a fast private link, like an industrial-sized VPN. This way you can access your cloud servers/services over this private connection rather than the public internet. Lots of companies do this if they have sensitive data or have their own "cloud" system running VMWare or something and want to augment with public providers.

This article is discussing lower-level infrastructure describing Google's global network components, from load-balancing, routing, internal datacenter connections to servers, etc.

Re: How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

#38

Post by milcron »

komali2 wrote: post #29
trafficlight wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really hate the naming trend over the past 10-15 years of using common words for projects. I can't really search for Espresso, or Jupiter, or Andromeda without additional qualifiers that I may not know yet.

Heh, that for me culminated when windows released a ubuntu subsystem. The names in order of popularity when it was originally announced (now they push for WSL) 1. Bash for Ubuntu on Windows 2. Windows Bash Shell 3. Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL) Trying googling WSL - it's world surf league. Windows Bash Shell is impossible, so is Bash for Ubuntu on Windows. It's getting better as more and more articles are being w…

And the 3rd name is backwards. It ought to be called 'Linux Subsystem for Windows'.

Re: How Google Wants to Rewire the Internet

#40

Post by weberc2 »

deegles wrote: post #2

"one out of four bytes that are delivered to end users across the Internet originate from Google" Such a mind blowing statement. Wonder when (if) they'll hit one-in-three bytes.

Especially when you think of services like Netflix, Spotify, and online games which deliver lots of bytes that definitely don't originate from Google. Without these services, this must be closer to 1/2.
Post reply on HN