News Researchers Shatter Bandwidth Record Using Existing 4-Core Fiber Cables

[Admin]

The key advance, facilitating this new transfer speed record, is the transmission system's support for optical bandwidth exceeding 20 THz.

Researchers Shatter Bandwidth Record Using Exisisting 4-Core Fiber Cables : Read more

 

[hotaru251]

even if this was widely possible

Comcast: Best I can do is 1gigabit and it'll cost ur left leg & ur upload is maxing at 20 mb


Still very impressive results

 

[spongiemaster]

even if this was widely possible

Comcast: Best I can do is 1gigabit and it'll cost ur left leg & ur upload is maxing at 20 mb

If Comcast had an entirely fibre network, it wouldn't be asymmetric. The way the cable companies' infrastructure was built out for cable TV which didn't require high speed upload is why we are stuck with such wildly asymmetric upload/download speeds. To fix that issue would require pretty much everything except the cable itself to be replaced, which isn't happening.

 

[gg83]

Think of all the 8k cat videos that can be watched simultaneously! 10 million of them

 

[Deleted member 431422]

If Comcast had an entirely fibre network, it wouldn't be asymmetric. The way the cable companies' infrastructure was built out for cable TV which didn't require high speed upload is why we are stuck with such wildly asymmetric upload/download speeds. To fix that issue would require pretty much everything except the cable itself to be replaced, which isn't happening.

Regural people don't need symetric links. What for? If you do need it, then buy a business internet connection. Those are symmetrical and bandwidth is guaranteed.

 

[Deleted member 431422]

even if this was widely possible

Comcast: Best I can do is 1gigabit and it'll cost ur left leg & ur upload is maxing at 20 mb


Still very impressive results

50MB/s download --> 500Mbps
2MB/s upload --> 20Mbps
Why would I need higher upload. I don't stream or work remotely. Download is what I'm concerned with. Translates to how fast a game is downloaded from Steam, i.e.
Grab a business internet connection to have symmetrical links. Then again, can you afford it?

 

[jkflipflop98]

I have Comcast internet and I already get over 1gbps and 30mbps for $45 a month.

 

[escksu]

50MB/s download --> 500Mbps
2MB/s upload --> 20Mbps
Why would I need higher upload. I don't stream or work remotely. Download is what I'm concerned with. Translates to how fast a game is downloaded from Steam, i.e.
Grab a business internet connection to have symmetrical links. Then again, can you afford it?

It's x 8 instead of 10 for bytes to bits conversion.

 

[hotaru251]

If Comcast had an entirely fibre network, it wouldn't be asymmetric. The way the cable companies' infrastructure was built out for cable TV which didn't require high speed upload is why we are stuck with such wildly asymmetric upload/download speeds. To fix that issue would require pretty much everything except the cable itself to be replaced, which isn't happening.

it was more at a jab that American ISP have no intention of giving ppl better speeds like rest of the world as there is no competition so they still make $ by being only option in area.

 

[escksu]

Of course this won't be for consumers. No consumer systems can even hit anywhere close to that speed (your cpu can't even transfer data that fast).

 

[w_barath]

According to the NICT researchers, with this amount of bandwidth on tap you could broadcast 10 million 8K TV channels simultaneously.

You're quoting NICT as having said they can broadcast 10M 8k TV channels?

Are they aware you of your speech on their behalf?

There exists no broadcast media through which you can deliver that density of information coherently.

I think you meant to quote them as saying they can transmit 10M 8k TV channels - in the context they announced it - on a closed 4-strand fibre link.

So I did your journalistic due diligence for you and here's the source of your misquote:

One petabit per second is equivalent to 10 million channels of 8K broadcasting per second.

https://www.nict.go.jp/en/press/2022/05/30-1.html

See the glossary section, which is not a claim on their part.

 

[w_barath]

50MB/s download --> 500Mbps
2MB/s upload --> 20Mbps
Why would I need higher upload. I don't stream or work remotely. Download is what I'm concerned with. Translates to how fast a game is downloaded from Steam, i.e.
Grab a business internet connection to have symmetrical links. Then again, can you afford it?

The reason to have symmetric, or near-symmetric links, is for being able to have relatively transparent cloud storage for live backups.

Without the convenience of transparent storage, the vast majority of people don't use remote backups. So then 99.99% of the population is needlessly prone to threats like WannaCry, or housefires resulting in loss of all your personal data.

The reason for asymmetric bandwidth has nothing to do with the capability of the ISPs. It has to do with the MPAA and RIAA making deals with them to limit customer uplink speeds because they have the false assumption that doing so will limit piracy and keep them holding the majority purse strings of all media consumption.

Oh wait, but your iPhone will keep your data for you in the cloud. Why? Because 5G has 20x the uplink speed of your home internet for your PC. Why can they give your phone 20x the uplink? Because RIAA/MPAA already cut deals with Apple and Qualcomm to enforce their distribution rights and fee structures.

But you accept dog-slow uplink for your home network, because your PC storage is so much less valuable then your phone's...?!

Isn't it great to live in a democratic and capitalistic nation where the money you spend is heavily budgeted towards anti-competitive restriction of your rights, and bullying you into accepting risk of data loss? And they've even brainwashed you into speaking up against your own rights?

Vote for Net Neutrality, and don't accept plans that are fashioned to restrict your rights because trillion-dollar media consortiums are afraid of change.

 

[intermelt]

"Shatter" no! Not at all. Also this being in a lab pretty much means nothing. We know this is possible. It's about cost, not about being able to do it.

And for all you Comcast people, this isn't for you. This is about the backbone. The "last mile" problem is solved. We can deliver 100's of gigs of bandwidth to people relatively easily. The problem is that the ISP has a connection to the greater net that could never support all their users using 100% of their bandwidth. Most fiber providers offering 1 gig or more have an upstream connection that is under 100 gigs total. A lot even less. They are serving that to 1000's of customers. Probably a ratio well over 1000 to 1. In the past, more than 10 to 1 was pretty bad.

This helps fix that problem which will soon be a very big problem.

 

[DougMcC]

You're quoting NICT as having said they can broadcast 10M 8k TV channels?

Are they aware you of your speech on their behalf?

There exists no broadcast media through which you can deliver that density of information coherently.

I think you meant to quote them as saying they can transmit 10M 8k TV channels - in the context they announced it - on a closed 4-strand fibre link.

So I did your journalistic due diligence for you and here's the source of your misquote:



https://www.nict.go.jp/en/press/2022/05/30-1.html

See the glossary section, which is not a claim on their part.

Kind of long-winded way of saying 'source in error'. Equivalent: equal in value, amount, function, meaning, etc. So it says their petabit transmission is equal in function to 10 million channels of 8K broadcasting per second. Seems wrong but clear.

 

[Deleted member 431422]

It's x 8 instead of 10 for bytes to bits conversion.

I know it is. It's to simplify things. No need to be 100% accurate here.

 

[Deleted member 431422]

The reason to have symmetric, or near-symmetric links, is for being able to have relatively transparent cloud storage for live backups.

Without the convenience of transparent storage, the vast majority of people don't use remote backups. So then 99.99% of the population is needlessly prone to threats like WannaCry, or housefires resulting in loss of all your personal data.

The reason for asymmetric bandwidth has nothing to do with the capability of the ISPs. It has to do with the MPAA and RIAA making deals with them to limit customer uplink speeds because they have the false assumption that doing so will limit piracy and keep them holding the majority purse strings of all media consumption.

Oh wait, but your iPhone will keep your data for you in the cloud. Why? Because 5G has 20x the uplink speed of your home internet for your PC. Why can they give your phone 20x the uplink? Because RIAA/MPAA already cut deals with Apple and Qualcomm to enforce their distribution rights and fee structures.

But you accept dog-slow uplink for your home network, because your PC storage is so much less valuable then your phone's...?!

Isn't it great to live in a democratic and capitalistic nation where the money you spend is heavily budgeted towards anti-competitive restriction of your rights, and bullying you into accepting risk of data loss? And they've even brainwashed you into speaking up against your own rights?

Vote for Net Neutrality, and don't accept plans that are fashioned to restrict your rights because trillion-dollar media consortiums are afraid of change.

Wow, no need to get hostile. I don't live in the USA. I'm from EU. Uplink is limited to avoid link congestion. Regular users don't need 500Mbps uplink and guaranteed speeds. The problem is most evident when new cellular network generation appears. 4G was very slow in the evenings - too many users - untill there was enough transmission towers.

Edit:
Fun fact. Virgin, a major cable operator in Scotland, imposed a weekly or daily (I don't recall which was it) download limit to ensure everyone had a good connection. It was in 2008, when I lived there. Not sure how it is now.

 

[w_barath]

Wow, no need to get hostile. I don't live in the USA. I'm from EU. Uplink is limited to avoid link congestion. Regular users don't need 500Mbps uplink and guaranteed speeds. The problem is most evident when new cellular network generation appears. 4G was very slow in the evenings - too many users - untill there was enough transmission towers.

If you find my hostility towards the ISPs disagreeable then you are supporting:

1) the ISPs taking kickbacks from the global mass media conglomerates in exchange for discouraging you from feeling like your own content/data has greater value to you than mass media content/data by charging you more for expression than for consumption, and

2) the notion that your daily hard work, expressed through the money you pay the ISPs, is best used to limit your personal liberty, by giving you a narrower pipe to speak through than the one you are allowed to listen through.

"Uplink is limited to avoid link congestion. "

That's a bald-faced lie from the ISPs, apocryphal at best when repeated by the general public, ie yourself.

In reality the common 10:1 down:up ratio leads to a situation where any meaningful amount of uplink usage rapidly begins to impact downlink capacity, because nearly all the uplink bandwidth is required just for ACK packets to downloads. With symmetric uplink, there's less congestion and latency both ways, less repeated packets, lower cost for the same bandwidth on the same link as a result.

Upstream is throttled not to improve quality, but to line the ISP and media companies' pockets by maintaining their monopoly on content creation and distribution, by making you the user fearful of using your uplink bandwidth... and you are proving their success by actively defending your right to be fearful, instead of allowing yourself to be angry at the true enemy.

Downlink limits make perfect sense, because most people do consume more than they share, so these limits encourage fair use of "unmetered" bandwidth.

10:1 Downlink:Uplink OTOH is a crime against humanity. I hope you're now more aware of how very successful MPAA/RIAA and the ISPs have been at brainwashing the masses into beliefs that are contrary to their own best interests, and you number yourself among those who don't want to be deceived by those you give your hard earned money to.