Wasn't there recently some guy that encoded images into a bird singing?
post
That series of RFCs (1149, 2549, 6214) keeps getting rediscovered by new generations of technical folk. Among other issues that have never been completely addressed are accidental encapsulation of packets in hawks, and whether the Internet is doomed to be slow in locations where the only avian carriers available are flightless.
There has been one successful implementation of the protocol to date. 55% of ping attempts went through.
(As April Fools RFCs go, the only one that's arguably more popular than IPoAC is the Hyper Text Coffee Pot Control Protocol, the source of 418 I am a teapot).
and whether the Internet is doomed to be slow in locations where the only avian carriers available are flightless.
Where would that be? Even inland Antarctica has skuas.
The coffee pot protocol is such an interesting anachronism. Nobody would make a hardware control protocol by extending HTTP like that anymore.
For good reasons, really. It's unnecessary to do it that way.
That was kind of the author's point: that HTTP is so broadly specified, and at that point had so many unnecessary RFCs extending it, that you could halfway-sensibly write a hardware control protocol by HTTP alone even if that was a terrible idea.
Source: I wrote the tea-brewing extension to HTCPCP, which takes it another notch into the ridiculous.
hope it goes better than when they carried it in tubes.
Its a series of tubes.
Its seared in my brain.
The part I hate is how many overconfident internet technicians will be like "well ackshually the metaphor isn't that far off" completely missing the very important difference between an information channel and a power channel and what the capacity limits are for each.
For example, free space is a pretty great information channel, but it absolutely sucks for reliably transmitting fluids.
I suppose this is one way to keep the CIA spy drones from becoming E-waste when they introduce the new models.
What is the bandwidth of a cargo plane? You fill the hold with data storage disks, fly them to the destination and then read them in.
Is there a published date on there somewhere? I didn't see one but I'm curious. It cites an estimate that total internet throughput is 167 terabits per second but I can't imagine it's that low these days.
archive.org suggests that What-If #31 appeared sometime around the 10th of February, 2013. That fits with one of the links in the article which first appeared (again, according to archive.org) in 2008 and ceased to be valid around 2015.
Randall has (or his team has) updated the formatting on the What-If site, but they haven't bothered to fix the links.
explainxkcd.com gives the publication date as 2013‑02‑05.
That's kinda how aws got companies into cloud storage.
A truck that would duplicate a companies disks, then drive to a data center and make the data available on s3 or whatever.
Retired now, tho.
https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/aws-retires-snowmobile-truck-based-data-transfer-service/
Should I upload a dead cat or dog? Make a funny about that? Don't post this shit.
all 26 comments