If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Sen. Stevens explains the internets: "And again, the internet is not something you just dump something on. It's not a truck. It's a series of tubes"   (dailykos.com) divider line 245
    More: Dumbass  
•       •       •

11809 clicks; posted to Main » on 03 Jul 2006 at 12:34 PM (8 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



245 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2006-07-03 12:46:58 PM  
Yea, a tube is nothing like a pipe...
 
2006-07-03 12:47:23 PM  
home.comcast.net
 
2006-07-03 12:47:36 PM  
Dancin in Anson


Remind me again why there isn't a push for term limits for these people...If it's good enough for one elective branch, it's good enough for another.


Because of the committee system. It works for the Executive Branch because it has a number of departments with staffs that are, for the most part, retained and permanent from one administration to another. That means that every 4 to 8 years they don't have to rebuild those staffs and re-invent the wheel. It is a pool of expertise upon which the new department heads can draw on (especially with regards to State and Defense). This helps to maintain continuity from one administration to another.

Congress doesn't have such an aparatus. Each Senator and Representative is expected to learn and develop expertise on the subject of their committee assignment. The amount of power these committees wield goes without saying. Now, since they don't have a large pool of experience to draw on and lean on (like the Department of State or the DoD) these individuals, with equally untried and ignorant staffs, must pick up where their successor left off and develop an incredibly high degree of knowledge and familiarity on subjects they have, more than likely, little knowledge of.

Its a lot like being enrolled in college, you register for a history class, and being expected to have doctorate or better knowledge about that subject by the end of the first week.
 
2006-07-03 12:47:40 PM  
Rockdrummer: DailyKos? Daily - farking-Kos?

The entirety of the article is quoting Stevens.
What have we told you about attacking the messenger?
 
2006-07-03 12:48:06 PM  
Someone email him this link

http://www.yzzerdd.com/
 
2006-07-03 12:48:10 PM  
Anyone here represented by the guy? Why not compose a polite letter (mailed by traditional post -- which ensures he'll see it) explaining the technology to him and pointing out where he got it wrong.

Perhaps you could make the gent an advocate for your point of view rather than a laughing stock.


HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Yes, I'm sure he will listen to the people who elected him as opposed to the people who are filling his pockets. What do you think this is? A country of ethical politicians?

This guy has his opinion (that he sees as fact) and wouldn't change it unless you created some new lobbying group who paid him more than the cable companies.
 
2006-07-03 12:48:11 PM  
Cdn_Nrrd - although your proposition is lost on most farkers, you are obviously an adept person at strategy and people skills.
 
2006-07-03 12:49:20 PM  
Hickory smoked - you mean like dismissing stories quoted by Drudge, NesMax, etc?

/double standard
 
2006-07-03 12:49:36 PM  
This is the "Bridge to Nowhere" moran. I write him "internets" every so often reminding him that he is a schmuck.
 
2006-07-03 12:49:38 PM  
Cdn_Nrrd - although your proposition is lost on most farkers, you are obviously an adept person at strategy and people skills.

With no clue about politicians/human nature. If this were someone sane, then that would work just fine. A teacher, perhaps. Maybe some public speaker. But a politician?
 
2006-07-03 12:50:04 PM  
Yeah... Reading that almost physically hurt. I can sort of guess at what he's trying to say, but still not sure any of it really made sense strung together. It's as if he was told what conclusion he was supposed to enforce, but had no earthly idea of how to get there at all. Maybe he should have read some Cliff Notes on teh intarweb.

/I agree, boxes packed and on the curb by the morning.
 
2006-07-03 12:50:25 PM  
People get the kind of government they deserve - never truer than now...
 
2006-07-03 12:50:44 PM  
I'm glad that our policy-makers have a firm grasp on the English language, really. What the hell was he saying? I couldn't even decipher most of that stuff.

I want someone to send me an internet. ^_^

/boobies post
//behold, for I have slashies and I don't know how to use them.
 
2006-07-03 12:50:44 PM  
In the words of Cartman:

Durrr Durrr Durrrrrrr *drool* *shuffle*

He does however, sound like he's getting his knowledge from Dell tech support. "I want to remove a game my child put on my computer" = "Alright, do you have your Dell Restore CD? This process will take about 3 hours..."
 
2006-07-03 12:51:25 PM  
I_C_Weener

That is maybe the greatest description of the internet ever. If you didn't rip that off from someone else, props to you man.
 
2006-07-03 12:52:55 PM  
tonesskin


Yes, I'm sure he will listen to the people who elected him as opposed to the people who are filling his pockets. What do you think this is? A country of ethical politicians?

This guy has his opinion (that he sees as fact) and wouldn't change it unless you created some new lobbying group who paid him more than the cable companies.



Is this based on your personal knowledge of the man or an assumption?

As for your comment about whether or not he'd read a letter from a constituent...you're pretty much wrong. Politicians have their failings but they generally go out of their way to respond to constituents who make the effort to contact them...generally operating under the assumption that if they went so far to write to them they might do something to hurt their reelection if they don't get a response.


/knows some Congressional staffers
//gf worked for a Representative
///has received written and signed responses from my Rep.
 
2006-07-03 12:53:37 PM  
I think we should all email the schmuck and show him what a clogged tube really looks like.
 
2006-07-03 12:53:38 PM  
Alaska needs to quit sending this clown to Congress.

Old men who can't fathom technology need to be phased out. Our govt. really needs some new blood. If you can't understand how email works you have no business making technology laws.

Ever notice the Senators pushing technology laws are always these old senile coots like Stevens or Hatch.
 
2006-07-03 12:53:39 PM  
I_C_Weener: Its more like an old west saloon where people come in, drink up, leave a deposit of information, get their wallet stolen, occasionally duel, watch some dancing girls, then leave and go back to the real world.

And the only music played is anything by Steve Perry.
 
2006-07-03 12:53:43 PM  
Dear Senator Stevens,

As a constituent, I felt motivated to write regarding recent statements made by you about the Internet. I work for the Internet, and I have to say that some of the posts are just hillarious...

/etc.
 
2006-07-03 12:53:59 PM  
tonesskin

Yes, I'm sure he will listen to the people who elected him as opposed to the people who are filling his pockets. What do you think this is? A country of ethical politicians?


Don't re-elect him then?
 
2006-07-03 12:54:03 PM  
Cdn_Nrrd


So the guy's wrong. Technology isn't his forte -- politics is.


Correct. And that would be just fine, except he's head of the farking committee currently considering a major telecommunications overhaul that will funadmentally change the way the internet works by shifting power to telephone and cable companies (who just happen to have him in his pocket). For him to clearly not have the slightest farking clue how the internet WORKS and yet have the single largest influence on its immediate future is frightening (in all seriousness).
 
2006-07-03 12:54:10 PM  
oh man thats bad... Thats like, wow, I just don't know. Where is this guy from? Who the hell elected him? A series of tubes? Ah, thats painful.

/Still questioning.
 
2006-07-03 12:54:20 PM  
ToxicVodka: I think we should all email the schmuck and show him what a clogged tube really looks like.


Or how about an unclogged one like goa.... ahh hell no I ain't getting banned today.
 
2006-07-03 12:55:14 PM  
and if you hear the actual audio clip of him saying this stuff, he keeps stammering and stumbling over his words like porky pig. really weird. a whole bunch of pages on ytmnd.com have gone up focusing on this stuff.
 
2006-07-03 12:55:27 PM  
The pipe analogy is not so bad. A TCP connection is called a pipe after all. If he thought a bit more about the analogy, he would have been fine.

When someone has to take a bath, the rest of the city doesn't have to wait until the bath is filled before they can use the water again. Likewise for movies and the internets.
 
2006-07-03 12:55:34 PM  
Rockdrummer: "The whole concept is that we should not go into this (regulation) until someone shows that there is something that has been done that really is a viloation of net neutraility that hits you and me."

You disagree with this position?


The position is retarded. If you think we should regulate when net-neutrality is violated, then why the hell not regulate now?

Hell if that's your position, pre-emptive regulation is business-friendly. Since pre-existing regulation will prevent businesses from spending money developing a revenue model that we will regulate out of existence if it ever gets implimented.
 
2006-07-03 12:56:22 PM  
I was gonna say something about how stupid Senator Stevens is but I'm not sure WHAT WAS SAID! Someone teach this guy about about punctuation, sentence formation and logical flow of ideas before we show him about "the internets"........
 
2006-07-03 12:56:35 PM  
img285.imageshack.us
 
2006-07-03 12:57:11 PM  
Is this based on your personal knowledge of the man or an assumption?

The former. Look at his voting record.

As for your comment about whether or not he'd read a letter from a constituent...you're pretty much wrong.

Or not. Been there, done that.
 
2006-07-03 12:57:59 PM  
Does anyone have that in English?
 
2006-07-03 12:58:14 PM  
MWeather -

"If you think we should regulate when net-neutrality is violated, then why the hell not regulate now?"

Because government intervention should be a last resort, not a pre-emptive policy.
 
2006-07-03 12:59:33 PM  
Contact your representatives and tell them to keep net neutrality.

http://action.freepress.net/campaign/savethenet
 
2006-07-03 12:59:57 PM  
Rockdrummer: Because government intervention should be a last resort, not a pre-emptive policy.

Ok, educate me. What harm could possibly come from pre-emptive regulation on this issue?
 
2006-07-03 01:01:02 PM  
He should have used pipes instead of tubes. It's true that internet connections are like pipes and can be filled. A lot of network people use that analogy. I would venture to guess that most internet pipes are not full. What he doesn't realize is that probably not why his "internet" sent on friday arrived late, it's probably the crappy email system they use. (The same one that keeps losing emails that are needed in investigations!)
 
2006-07-03 01:01:10 PM  
FTA "...what happens to your own personal internet?"

My own personal internet Senator? Let me tell you about my own personal internet. On my own personal internet there is no government clown trying to censor images I can see, even if they are of naked people. On my own personal internet there is no government clown even thinking about the possibility of placing restrictions on political speech and discussion even during election years. My own personal internet also allows gambling, and forever will, because a grown up can decide for themselves if they want to play a little poker online.

You are not invited to play on my own personal internet Senator, because you are a jackass and you will ruin it. I'll stay off your half billion dollar bridge and you stay off my internet, ok?

/boy I wish I had my own personal internets.
 
2006-07-03 01:02:57 PM  

So, let's see.

There's one company now you can sign up and you can get a movie delivered to your house daily by delivery service. Okay. And currently it comes to your house, it gets put in the mail box
Accurate enough.
when you get home and you change your order but you pay for that, right.
No idea what he means there, probably just a "senior moment" or tripped over his tongue.
But this service isn't going to go through the interent
All right, I don't know what service he's talking about here... is he talking about NetFlix still, or streaming video?
and what you do is you just go to a place on the internet and you order your movie and guess what you can order ten of them delivered to you and the delivery charge is free.
What? Are you talking about YouTube, or something that does streaming movies for a monthly subscription fee?
Ten of them streaming across that internet
Well, even if you did them all at once, people do this all the time with file sharing systems.
and what happens to your own personal internet?
What? If you're talking about your Internet connection, I guess it's common that other applications get slowed down due to the videos hogging your bandwidth, but usually not to the point of being unusable.
I just the other day got, an internet was sent by my staff at 10 o'clock in the morning on Friday and I just got it yesterday. Why?
Ignoring the fact that he called an "e-mail" an "internet," it's probably because the sender computer's clock was off. Either that or something was up with your mail server.
Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the internet commercially [...]
Wow. Either they're making routers with huge buffers, or the e-mail was split into packets with a bigger-than-standard TTL field and just bounced around for a few days because for whatever reason the routers didn't have your destination information. Or, you know, someone's mail server was screwing up.
The regulatory approach is wrong. Your approach is regulatory in the sense that it says "No one can charge anyone for massively invading this world of the internet"
What? You're getting a little confusing... but going back to charging people Internet usage fees is a step back. Maybe routers with QoS policies to de-prioritize LimeWire packets or something...
No, I'm not finished.
Awesome.
I want people to understand my position, I'm not going to take a lot of time.
Fabulous.
They want to deliver vast amounts of information over the internet.
Sure. Information Age and all that.
And again, the internet is not something you just dump something on.
Okay, fair enough, I mean, look at IPv6.
It's not a truck. It's a series of tubes.
Kind of. At a really basic level, okay, fine, call it a series of tubes.
And if you don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and its going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.
Microseconds, dude. Microseconds. Queuing delays. A few dropped packets. A difference of a fraction of a second per packet during periods of high congestion. All right?

I mean, installing routers with QoS functions would be nice, you know, to make sure your e-mails are delivered in a more timely fashion than, say, pirated MP3s someone downloads via LimeWire... but total deregulation here could (not necessarily would) amount to basically ISPs charging extortion fees to high-bandwidth sites to keep them high priority... or charging users who use the Internet a lot. Which is a real step backwards. YA RLY.
 
2006-07-03 01:04:29 PM  
2KanZam: I was gonna say something about how stupid Senator Stevens is but I'm not sure WHAT WAS SAID! Someone teach this guy about about punctuation, sentence formation and logical flow of ideas before we show him about "the internets".......

It's not a punctuation issue. The guy is almost 90. It's hard to string words together when you're senile.
 
2006-07-03 01:04:39 PM  
the senator is absolutely correct.

the internet is NOT a truck.
 
2006-07-03 01:05:34 PM  
Stevens clearly doesn't know how to articulate his point, but I understand what he's saying. He's saying that if the internet is required to carry, for a fixed price, whatever anyone wants to send, the upcoming high volume services will probably swamp it. That's a valid concern. With no incentive (i.e. a higher cost) to increase capacity for things like video-on-demand, ISPs will stick us with the bandwidth we have for a very long time, and it could choke off many new services that won't be able to get the throughput to the consumer that's needed to run them.

I'm hoping Congress will keep its nose out of this issue and let market forces shape things, but that's probably too much to hope; the siren call to regulate, control, and play favorites is just too great.
 
2006-07-03 01:06:12 PM  
OMFG they're going to shut down YouTube!1!
 
2006-07-03 01:06:47 PM  
The good Senator is a moron, but he also demonstrates that even morons vote correctly once in a while.
 
2006-07-03 01:07:22 PM  
And if you don't understand those tubes can be filled and if they are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and its going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts of material, enormous amounts of material.

So if my load time is slow, it's because my tube is full of enormous amounts of material? Ridiculous. If fapping gave you a faster connection, Farkers would be surfing at speeds that would defy physics.
 
2006-07-03 01:07:33 PM  
Well, jjorsett, some regulation is fine -- if it helps people. You know, preventing ISPs from blocking or throttling access to certain sites and what not.

But paying ISPs like $200 billion of our tax dollars to do things that they have apparently not done in the years since their pork barrel handout... that's bad, mmkay. I mean, we're really falling behind other developed nations in terms of broadband access.
 
2006-07-03 01:07:47 PM  
actually, now that i read it closer...

the guy is probably speaking in metaphore. Metaphorically speaking, the internet IS a collections of tubes (or, more technically, a tunnel where packets are delivered via tcp/ip).

but since this guy isn't a very skilled orator, it probably didn't come across that way.

/still wiping away tears of laughter @ "Because it got tangled up with all these things going on the internet commercially"
 
2006-07-03 01:09:40 PM  
This is what you get when you have someone from ALASKA heading up commissions that deal with technology.

Not trying to put down Alaskans here, but come on now, what are the normal constituents of Alaska worried about really? Probably in this order: Oil exploration, oil checks, de facto legalization of teh evil weed, and hunting and fishing.

TUBES?!?! WTF?!?!?!, is this guys tech advisor some old HAM radio guy?

There must be some sweetheart deal going on here where telcos are offering to run free massive fiber link upgrades along the Alaskan pipeline to turn Alaska into some sort of almighty hunting, fishing, oiling, and bandwidthing superstate.

Note to senator: shut the hell up and stop pretending you are technically knowledgable and stick to your bought and paid for activities you moron.
 
2006-07-03 01:10:57 PM  
Deregulation worked so well for Savings and Loans why wouldn't it work for the Internets?
 
2006-07-03 01:11:02 PM  
Somewhere out there in cyberspace is a video of Ted Stevens picking his nose and carefully examining the results, on the floor of the Senate no less. Of course he's spent most of his career picking your pocket with "Bridge to Nowhere" schemes and cozying up to oil interests.
 
2006-07-03 01:11:58 PM  
i21.photobucket.com
 
2006-07-03 01:12:48 PM  
MyMindIsGoingDave

Well played!
 
Displayed 50 of 245 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report