Comments on: I built the Bridge to Nowhere

By: Stuff n Stuff

Stuff n Stuff — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:23:51 +0000

thats a BAD thing

By: Magischer

Magischer — Fri, 22 Aug 2008 04:26:10 +0000

Ugh, do you guys have any idea how many politicians here in the AK have been convicted of bribery among other kinds of corruption in the past year or so? Everyone was involved in Veco, a company that bribed a LOT of people involved with things mostly dealing with the oil (highly lucrative business, just look at the PFDs {Permanent Fund Dividends} Not that I’m complaining about them, though, haha).

I have no faith in the state at the moment, and Ted Stevens… Go to jail, please. Get the heck out of our government. We don’t need you here. Seriously.

I’m personally glad Palin is cracking down on gvt. corruption with these new bills, and regardless of anything about her she has done some pretty good things for the state. While I’m a bit iffy about the government spending so much money with these Energy Rebates, I’m sure it will help a lot of the villages (8 dollars a gallon for gas?!) and rural community.

Also, love this pic. Makes me crack up, as long as I don’t think about the seriousness of the whole matter.

By: Sparhauk

Sparhauk — Fri, 08 Aug 2008 20:56:02 +0000

Ok, first off, the inter-tubes is now a slang reference to the internet. The man’s added to the lexicon. Give him some credit there (or the lobbyists who wrote the speech for him).

Next, does no one realize that this is the same jerk who screamed (literally) when the Senators were attempting to make the Oil Company executives swear to tell the truth when they we called to DC? So, in their “explanations” they were free to (and took great liberties to indulge in) lie through their teeth to the Senate and the American people, and not in any way be held accountable for it!

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 22:27:54 +0000

Uhm, no. Its built on his lack of understanding (gleaned from the overall context of the speech, which I’ve pointed out numerous times). Please provide even one citation showing he has even basic knowledge of what he was talking about.

By: zandy from AK

zandy from AK — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:12:43 +0000

He may be old and stupid, but anyone who is from AK and has had to go to Ketchikan by plane (and I’ve lived there) knows they need the bridge. It’s not to nowhere, it’s to the freakin airport, and currently the whole situation sucks because you have to wait for the little ferry to cart everyone in front of you to the other side before you cram in with your group. They might actually save money in the long run because they wouldn’t need to maintain the boats, pay for the fuel, pay the captain, etc.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:09:12 +0000

Once again, you are trying to avoid the issue by focusing on pipes and tubes. As i said before, a lot of the furor is not over the word choice, so much as the ignorance implied by the word choice in the context of his speech. Come back when you actually have something relevant to the issue to say.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 18:50:21 +0000

Actually, HE was talking about the internet backbone, not internet to your house. Net neutrality has NOTHING to do with individual houses. The very nature of packet switching was designed so that the networks DO NOT act like a pipe with limited throughput, due to the myriad paths available to each data packet. Obviously, the end points will always be the same for a given file, but the path through the middle need not be. By the way, bandwidth is not a measure of speed, but capacity, which is an entirely different matter. Maybe you should come back when you have a grasp of the underlying technologies.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 17:39:21 +0000

Heh. Sooooo…. you imagine that the pipe/wire/offramp/tube/stream that runs to any individual house has UNLIMITED BANDWIDTH? When was this magical infinite-speed transmission invented?

For that matter, you seem to imagine that “pumping” has some kind of upper bound, as if pipes can’t be made larger or more pipes added to a system.

You seem to be wrong on both sides of the analogy.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 17:34:58 +0000

The problem, though, is that your case is built on use of the word “tubes”. That’s it.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 04:02:23 +0000

The tubes analogy would make some sense if he weren’t using it to imply a limited capacity to the internet (a la plumbing) that does not actually exist.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 02:00:52 +0000

What makes him legit, the fact that he has a blog? In all seriousness, the “cleaned up” transcript shows that he doesn’t know what he is talking about. As your guy points out, Stevens’ claims about traffic slowdown are ill-informed at best. The majority of traffic slowdowns result from Server Loading and local (consumer) bandwidth restraints, NOT because the “tubes” are full. You CAN always add more fiber lines and switches to the internet to provide near-infinite capacity (at least with IPv6). Your example of Felten even agrees, though in a softer manner, that Stevens was wrong: “The bottom line? Stevens may have been trying to make a coherent argument. [u]It’s not a great argument[/u], and his examples were poorly chosen, but it’s far from the worst argument ever heard in the Senate.”

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 01:51:47 +0000

Actually, no. I heard his speech, from which it is evident that he does not have a clue. Take off the blinders, man. You DON’T have to defend him just becuase he is a member of your party. I never said anything about party affiliation. You don’t know what party I belong to, if any. I merely said you don’t have to defend every republican, even when they are wrong.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 01:40:29 +0000

And, once again, you simply assume his complete ignorance, presumably based on your terminology fetish.

Furthermore, you’re the ones that made an issue of party affiliation, not ,e…

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:59:28 +0000

Read the context. I was obviously referring to the word “pipe”

There is no difference between “pipe” and “tube” with respect to the analogical use…. semantically, they are the same.

You have no case.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:56:55 +0000

Fact remains, you needed to qualify your statement.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:17:19 +0000

You also missed my whole point that people without a clue about the subject matter have no business attempting to legislate it based on what their “employers” tell them. I could give two shits about which party the guy belongs to, he still doesn’t know what he is talking about. I criticize Al Gore just as much (and many others from both parties) for trying to influence environmental policy when he doesn’t even practice what he preaches.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:10:33 +0000

lolbammy == weasel words.

By: alethioraven

alethioraven — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 20:04:30 +0000

u r so rite!!

yay

By: alethioraven

alethioraven — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 20:03:16 +0000

acshully, teh apropriat wurd is teh “intarwebs”

get it rite!!

lol speak

ur doin it rong!

kthxbai

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 19:59:35 +0000

People use “tubes” all the time?

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 19:04:04 +0000

“For the most part” == weasel words.

I’m a software engineer and my last three jobs have been at major internet companies … and such terminology is used all the time … WHEN THAT IS THE CORRECT LEVEL OF ABSTRACTION.

It’s unclear to me that you are working at the level where the metaphor applied; it is fairly clear that the analogy applies; it is silly, though, to infer that the lack of application to you particular job means that “pipe” terminology is always and everywhere invalid.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 18:43:38 +0000

Way to focus on the issue at hand, which is of course the “witch hunt” of Stevens, and not whether policy should be made by people who are ignorant of the subject matter (which was my original point. I could give two shits about which party the guy is tied to). I am just as critical of Al Gore attempting to influence environmental policy when he doesn’t practice what he tries to force on everyone else.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 18:41:23 +0000

Actually, I AM a computer engineer, and for the most part, WE don’t use that terminology, marketing people and the media do.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:56:38 +0000

Heh. Cuz Ceiling Cat told you so?

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:55:44 +0000

You need to read for comprehension. I found the FIXATION ON HIS USE OF THE WORD “TUBES” to be funny, long before I knew if he was an (R) or a (D) Not the use of the word itself.

BTW, I first read about this silly “issue” on a blog that didn’t specify his party affiliation.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:33:55 +0000

Hmm… that makes it all the more amazing that he was able to generate an analogy that legitimate computer scientists, such as Edward Felten, have been able to identify as valid.

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1042

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:27:49 +0000

Heh… you have no clue, do you? Metaphors and analogies have no requirement to describe EVERY part of a system, just the aspects that are under discussion.

I note, in passing, that the more standard “pipe” terminology is just as bad as the “tube” terminology that you are obsessed with. I guess a few decades of computer scientists, network engineers and programmers have all been wrond.

Sheesh.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 17:22:35 +0000

Wow…. you just can’t get it in your head that some things aren’t “Republicans vs Democrats” … can you?

By: Forge

Forge — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 16:58:43 +0000

No, the man actually does think the Internet is a series of tubes. He was not speaking metaphorically.

By: jellybeans

jellybeans — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:15:00 +0000

NEVER insult ANY republican!!!!!

By: Michael.K

Michael.K — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 12:31:47 +0000

“Bridge To Nowhere”: *almost* a Talking Heads reference.

By: NameAlreadyInUse

NameAlreadyInUse — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 06:42:47 +0000

“But hey, at least it wasn’t an under-aged immigrant call-boy in a bus station toilet!”

Nah, it was a toothless Eskimo with a pick-up truck under an incomplete bridge abutment…or maybe it was Colonel Mustard in the Den with the blender…I dunno…

By: herb

herb — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 03:21:12 +0000

I can’t recall who mentioned it, but I second a comment heard on the airwaves: if Stevens was going to funnel elicit funds into his house, he should of hired a better designer. Thing looks like crap.

But hey, at least it wasn’t an under-aged immigrant call-boy in a bus station toilet!

By: momly

momly — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:37:52 +0000

What?

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:36:36 +0000

Defensive Defensive. A graphic calculator is similar to an abacus in the same way a pointy stick is similar to a tank. Yeah, you can get the same things done, but one is far more advanced and more effective than the other. The whole concept of distributed networks and packet switching goes against the tubes analogy. IF the internet were primarily circuit switching based, then yes, tubes would be appropriate, but its not.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:26:29 +0000

And yet you contradict yourself. You claim you thought it was funny long before you knew his party (I find that hard to believe since there is a little R or D next to everyone nowadays.), but then you rush do his defense “Wow. Using the word “tube” as a metaphor instead of “pipe” or “pipeline” or “highway” or “wire” or “stream”. How. Terrible.” when others say it is funny. So which is it? Is it funny or isn’t it. Maybe you should be a politician, you seem to want it both ways.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:08:08 +0000

Here’s a write up by a Computer Science Prof. Note that he states that the “tubes” analogy is ok… even though he disagrees with the Senator. Y’all could learn from his example.

http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/?p=1042

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:03:13 +0000

Teh Dems hate teh tubes, cuz tehy thinks u can pump oils in dem.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 02:01:41 +0000

BWAHHAHAH!

WTF are you talking about? I thought this wanna-be technoid fixation on the word “tubes” was funny long before I knew the guy’s party affiliation. I find it doubly funny here, where silly assumptions about party add to the silliness of the fixation.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 01:54:08 +0000

d00d… you don’t think the Live At Five Weatherman makes it rain, do yuh?

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 01:53:11 +0000

It’s called an analogy. People the people that developed the Internet and it’s underlying protocols use very similar analogies … and have for DECADES!

BTW, on a very real level, a graphic calculator IS similar to an abacus.

Sheesh.

By: hergieburbur

hergieburbur — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 23:26:38 +0000

So, I don’t know if you realize this, but it really isn’t necessary to defend a guy that everyone knows is wrong just because he is a member of the party you support. He gets made fun of for the tubes speech not because its a different metaphor (pipeline is a crappy metaphor as well BTW), but because the speech made it clear that he had no idea what he was talking about, yet he was trying to influence policy. This is a problem with politicians as a whole, left right, up the middle, whatever. They feel like because they can legislate things, they should (in order to justify their own existence), even when they are fawking clueless. SO get over the whole Rep vs Dem thing, because that has nothing to do with it.

By: AKguy

AKguy — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 23:10:11 +0000

Regardless of whatever. We love him. He brings us monies so we can has more tubes.

By: Free2B

Free2B — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 21:06:44 +0000

Instigated it even.

By: GomerPhyls

GomerPhyls — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 20:36:06 +0000

It wasn’t just a different buzzword and it wasn’t some innocuous situation. He was explaining how a system works to a bunch of old, clueless curmudgeons like himself that are supposed to be making informed decisions for an entire nation.
He basically equated the Internet and all things related to the Internet as a nationwide system of Pneumatic Tubes. That’s like saying a graphing calculator is just a glorified abacus – while a graphing calculator performs some of the same functions as the abacus, it’s completely misleading and distorted, especially when you’re trying to describe to a large group of clueless people how it works.
Here’s Ted Stevens’ full “series of tubes” speech:

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:59:39 +0000

Hmm. So your objection is that you think that the Internet IS a “big truck”? You might be thinking of UUCP.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:58:57 +0000

Hmm. So you’re objection is that you think that the Internet IS a “big truck”? You might be thinking of UUCP.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:57:31 +0000

… so you are merely assuming the premise. Using the word “tube” instead of “pipe” carries no difference in *meaning*. Simply assuming that someone who uses the term “tube” instead of “pipeline” (or any of the other, more standard metaphors) has very little foundation.

Now, if you’re REALLY saying that it was politically useful to pretend that thee was some kind of Deep Significance to the use of the word “tube”, I have no argument there – making the “other side” look bad is always USEFUL at some level… whether the means is honest or not.

By: Sean Work

Sean Work — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 19:04:06 +0000

I think the reason that people fixated on this was because it illustrated how the question of net neutrality was in the hands of people who so obviously did not understand how the internet works.

By: lolbammy

lolbammy — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 17:43:20 +0000

Yes, I did hear it. And all that the speech indicates is use of a slightly different buzzword than the norm. Such “lapses” are exactly the kind of thing that (especially non-techie) folks fixate on, so they can feel smarter than someone else.