this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
582 points (91.9% liked)

Technology

59414 readers
3769 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Yes, a Pigeon is Faster for Data Transfer than Gigabit Fiber Internet::A decade ago, a pigeon with a 4 GB memory stick outran an ISP’s ADSL service. A 2023 rematch features a bird with 3 TB of flash drives vs gigabit internet.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 223 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Yeah, but having that ping time of 36,000,000ms really kind of sucks.

[–] Tar_alcaran@lemmy.world 153 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Error-correction for dropped packets is also pretty shit.

[–] Rocketpoweredgorilla@lemmy.ca 79 points 1 year ago

oh, that's what's on my car.

[–] hansl@lemmy.ml 26 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Also having to manually bring the pigeon back to the launching site, because pigeons only work one way.

[–] Tranus@programming.dev 27 points 1 year ago

What if you attached two one-way pigeons together to make a two-way pidgeon? It would probably take a piece of string, and a coconut...

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Bobert@sh.itjust.works 141 points 1 year ago (4 children)

"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of magnetic tapes hurtling down the highway"

[–] MeanEYE@lemmy.world 35 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Interestingly enough NASA still sends data this way. Huge HDD delivered by hand. Not all data, but I remember reading about some satellite images and similar data where latency doesn't matter. Can't beat good old box full of HDD.

[–] glorious_albus@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

I wondered why NASA was using pigeons till I read the rest of your comment.

[–] smitty@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

yep, radio telescopes send data this way, thats how SETI@home got the Arecibo data

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] idunnololz@lemmy.world 97 points 1 year ago (6 children)

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.

[–] JigglySackles@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago (2 children)

All of these methods have extreme bandwidth but terrible latency and packet loss.

[–] idunnololz@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

Just use half the bandwidth for redundancy.

[–] Thetimefarm@lemm.ee 12 points 1 year ago

You've heard of RAID but have you ever tried SEIGE?

[–] starman@programming.dev 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)
[–] wahming@monyet.cc 17 points 1 year ago

If you use Western Digital, the HDDs won't notice the extreme transfer method. They'll be unreadable either way

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Agamemnon@lemmy.world 54 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Haha, in some parts of germany you can do that yourself. on foot. with a zipdisk.

[–] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Good ole sneakernet. It's hard to have dropped packets when they're delivered by hand

[–] c10l@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s not. Just drop the storage device in a manhole, or get mugged, or break it in some way. Also when you do so, pretty much all packets are lost and to retransmit you need to go back to the point of origin and make a new copy, assuming you still have the original.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CazRaX@lemmy.world 47 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Can't help but think that they are rigging this for the bird. Just calculate how long it takes the bird to get from here to there and then pick a capacity that takes longer to download.

[–] Steve@communick.news 60 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

That's kind of the point though. It's not about practicalities.

There is an ancient proverb.
"Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of magnetic tapes."

[–] theharber@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes hurtling down the highway. –Andrew Tanenbaum, 1981

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nous@programming.dev 16 points 1 year ago

There are no winners or losers here and they are not suggesting you start uploading things via pigeons, just gives a more interesting way to talk about and get people to think about how large volumes of data can and are still moved around via trucks and ships.

[–] Sludgeyy@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Yes and no.

If you could put a 1 petabyte flash drive on a pigeon, it would easily crush the gigabit internet

Does a 1 petabyte flash drive exist? Could it exist?

They put 3 stripped-down terabyte flash drives on the pigeon. Could it carry more weight?

You get to the point where the pigeon can't carry the weight.

All this is saying that sending data by pigeon can be faster and using 3 tb sticks proves it.

If it needed to be 4 tb, then they would have had to use 4 sticks. If it couldn't carry 4 sticks, then you have your answer that the pigeon can't do it with current technology.

[–] Appoxo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

We need to RAID pigeons in case of hawk outage.
More redundancy!

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Crul@lemm.ee 44 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] devbo@lemmy.world 31 points 1 year ago (3 children)

its like they choose 3 TB because they knew it was the smallest amount that would lose. lets make it a real re-match and go back to transfering 4 GB.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] meldroc@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a truck full of flash drives. The latency's most annoying though.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] FartsWithAnAccent@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Lag is a real bitch though...

[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 39 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Yea, and packet size is enormous, so one lost packet is catastrophic...

[–] nxdefiant@startrek.website 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This is why you use TCP: Trusted Concurrent Pigeons.

Trusted Pigeons so that a simple hash check can prove the veracity of your data AND provide a free dedupe / data integrity check for when multiple/single packets arrive.

Concurrent Pigeons so that transmission issues don't impact latency (throughput is essentially unlimited here, assuming sufficient pigeons)

Downsides include needing to implement a pigeon cache and power (birdfood) requirement increases.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Boldizzle@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When can I start using a pigeon to preload games like Starfield?

[–] lateraltwo@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Used to be called "install disks" that you would have to preorder for the convenience of having it available at your local game store

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] PM_ME_STEAM_KEYS@reddthat.com 23 points 1 year ago

This reminds me of the age when the egregiousness of home Internet data overage charges in Canada reached their zenith, with some back of the napkin math, I realized it would be more cost effectuvd to buy and fill a solid state drive (which had only begun to come down in price) with stuff, ship it overnight international, and then destroy it after downloading its contents, than to hit the overage charge limit with my provider.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I'd like to see that pigeon fly from Sydney to New York.

[–] Asymptote@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 1 year ago

I wouldn't. Sounds boring.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] irdc@derp.foo 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] pontata@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Is the time of loading and downloading the files from the flash drives of the pigeon included?

[–] nous@programming.dev 11 points 1 year ago

Yes it was. Though he did use faster SSD drives rather then cheaper and slower flash drives. Which is something reasonable to do IMO. He also tested various network transfer methods to use the fastest one and transferred unique data to each drive rather then just uploading the same file over and over giving both sides a fair but also their best shot at working.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Get back to me when a pigeon can deliver high-speed porn.

[–] orrk@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (3 children)

it already can, multiple terabytes at once

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Tar_alcaran@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of ~~tapes~~ flashdrives hurtling down the highway.

[–] Robin@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

For price per TB, modern tapes might still be a valid choice actually. But maybe not great for read/write performance. I guess that depends on how many tape drives you have on each end.

load more comments
view more: next ›