Talk:Sneakernet

message: Should we make a see also or take up Courier?
:Perhaps a link in the prose might be better than a "see also". --Damian Yerrick (serious | business) 14:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Courier 

message: I was expecting something more along the lines of "physically carrying data between computers, sometimes also humorously referred to as sneakernet", and then I get this dead serious article instead.
It is a good article though, nice work.  But my question: Do people actually seriously use the term sneakernet to refer to carrying data around?
I would have thought that at least references to hacker culture and to the term's origin as a joke would be the first thing you see.
Anyway, I'll put in a reference to Hacker culture, fix the reference to Jargon File, and such.  Hmm, should I link to the Jargon File entry or just include it?  It's short.  I'll just link to it for now.
-- magetoo 10:09, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are we serious? 

message: A bit esoteric, but this mock memo inspired by Minority Report and response offer an insightful hypothetical justification of a sneakernet:
Memo from Lily Wong of Wong and Associates Industrial Design Consulting Group
In Response to Your Memo by Rich Thomas
Tatwell 23:42, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sneakernet in Minority Report 

message: I would like some precise information where the article needs copy-editing. I would like to refrain from copying it right now because I want to take part in its assessment process. --Click me! 15:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: precision

message: A {Refimprove|section|date=August 2008} was added to the =Copyright concerns= section because there are no references at this time, and this section is somewhat likely to be deemed as having a non-neutral point of view without references. - Bevo (talk) 22:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: references needed in Copyright concerns section

message: In the Theory section is seems to mention that using a sneakernet for transferring encrypted files would improve security. Isn't the neccesity of transmitting a key obsolete due to public key encryption? ce1984 (talk) 08:18, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You still need sneakernet to transmit some public keys so that you can authenticate their owners. These can be the public keys of certificate authorities, or the public keys of key signing party participants. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 11:10, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Security enhancement? 

message: This is a well written article dispite having the unfortunate and uncontrolable urge to collapse into hystrical giggles due to its inexorable seriousness. Overall it receives my rating of an 8 out of 10. -- Erin  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.214.1.115 (talk) 02:40, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, gosh, we were all breathlessly waiting to hear how you'd rate it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.120.110.108 (talk) 00:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good article 

message: *The good:  This article is well written and is an excellent treatment of the subject.
*The bad:  This article is almost entirely original research.  Is everything in it true/correct?  Probably.  Are all claims made verifiable using reliable sources, and not synthesis of thought?  Not a chance.  :-(
All that being said, one might make an argument to ignore the rules, but I think the better course of action would be to try and source most of the claims made.  Don't let me sound all negative though... it's very well done!  :-)  //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 12:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The good and the bad 

message: From this article, it looks like Amazon is trying a similar approach to load massive amounts of data from customers.
"Amazon cloud uses FedEx instead of the Internet to ship data"  http://www.networkworld.com/news/2010/061010-amazon-cloud-fedex.html .
72.163.205.100 (talk) 13:18, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Amazon follows a similar model ? 

message: :There is also the limitation of read/write speeds on a computer. There are three ways disk speed can be increased. The speed of the drive and/or the media may be increased, multiple disks may be used (one disk may be read as another is written to), or simultaneous use of multiple disks. This is generally not an issue for a sneakernet, as it often makes use of removable media.[3][not in citation given]
The last sentence which I see was only added recently  makes little sense which probably explains why it isn't mentioned in the citation. At best, the citation supports the claim 'sneakernet' makes use of removable media although even that is questionable since it's really only discussing certain types of sneakernets (having said that, I don't think this really matters since there's no much disagreement sneakernets generally use removable media). However the bolder claim isn't supported and as I said makes little sense. Removable media still have read/write speed limits. Multiple media may help speed things up, it may not, it depends on where the limitations come from. How easy it is to use multiple media depends on the type of media (memory cards or tape drivers for example would require multiple readers at the destination). Whether the read/write speeds will be significant will also vary. For example if you're transferring a full 128GB USB key or memory card and it takes 30 mins to move it, the read/write times could easily be significant. Similarly if you're transferring a full 2TB HD and it takes a 4 hours to move it between locations the read/write times could easily add 2 hours. On the other hand if you're transferring a 2TB HD and it takes 80 hours to move from one location to the other, the read/write times aren't likely to that significantly.  Nil Einne (talk) 11:19, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statement which doesn't make sense 

message: "Boeing 747-400 carrying capacity in cargo configuration, in cubic meters:159
Volume of 3.5" Drive ( 102mm x 25mm ) in cubic millimeters: 0.00255
Number of 3.5 Drives per 747: 62,353
Data capacity of 3.5 Drive ( TB ): 3
Data capacity of 3.5 Drive ( GB): 3,000
Data capacity of 747 in Terabytes:187,059
In Gigabytes: 187,058,824
bits per byte: 8
In Gigabits: 1496470588
Distance between LAX and JFK in miles: 2470
Speed of a Boeing 747-400, in knots: 507
Time to fly between LAX and JFK at 507 knots, in seconds: 16080
Bandwidth of the 747 in Gbits/Second: 93064
So our 747-enhanced Sneakernet Bandwidth: 93 Terabits per second"
This calculation leaves out the dimension of write speed X amount of data.
I'm not aware of the write speed of a BD drive.
And also needs sneakernet citation :-P
: Should this updated factoid be added to article (perhaps replacing the BD factoid)? Also, this person got a different number in similar calculation: http://www.imarc.net/communique/594-theoretical_limits Bratling (talk) 14:10, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  'sneakernet calculation' 

message: I'd just like to point out that MicroSD cards are ~166 mm³, which, with 32 GB MicroSD cards filling 1.66 x 10^-7 m³ and requiring no protection, leaves us with, I think, a data density of 192.8 PB/m³.
If our 747 has 159 m³ of usable space in it, that's 30.66 EB. Iain Dawson (talk) 23:48, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  A MicroSD addendum 

message: "If an Airbus A380 were filled with microSD cards each holding 512 gigabytes of storage capacity, the theoretical total storage space onboard would be approximately 91 million terabytes."
Seems like that's less than what you'd get with 100x100x100 microSD cards, which would be a block 1.5m x 1.1m x 0.1m or a couple of seats on an A380. If you use the cargo hold storage you get 460 exabytes: 171m^3/(15mm*11mm*1mm)*512GB.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazycasta (talk • contribs) 18:13, 2 March 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A380 calculation seems off 

message: since i am too lazy to write anything meaningful on the subject, i am just going to drop a link to randal's what if? article, where he does some math on the subject of SneakerNet -- also too lazy to sign in, 01:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fedex Bandwidth 

message: The following text was added to the section Sneakernet#Non-fiction by 173.51.10.223 in 2013, but it's written from a personal perspective and as a commentary on the previous text, so it rather belongs on the talk page. Some of it could maybe be moved back after a rewrite. //Essin (talk) 17:09, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comment on the non-fiction section 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Sneakernet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091119134710/http://www.wired.com:80/culture/lifestyle/news/2002/08/54739 to http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2002/08/54739
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091205080459/http://queue.acm.org:80/detail.cfm?id=864078 to http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=864078
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20150628135144/http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk:80/research/srg/netos/haggle/ to http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/research/srg/netos/haggle/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:31, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I strongly doubt the reference to "sneakers" in the opening paragraph. The word obviously comes from the verb "to sneak" freely joined with the "internet/ethernet/cybernet" class of words. Unfortunately I don't have any reference to proof my point.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.133.90.84 (talk) 11:09, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: It's sourced now. --Zac67 (talk) 10:08, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of the word 

message: Digital cinema misses.
As of 2013, physical deliveries of hard drives were most common in the industry. Promotional trailers arrive on a separate hard drive and range between 200 GB and 400 GB in size.
Earlier:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digitales_Kino
Meist werden Festplatten eingesetzt, da ein Film mit 90 Minuten Länge und in HD-Auflösung etwa 70 GByte groß ist. (German)
--Helium4 (talk) 17:23, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Digital cinema 

message: Bah!! never ever heard either - it is only sneakernet that was in reasonable use.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.184.76 (talk) 17:57, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:   trainnets or pigeonets 

message: As several other Wikipedians have mentioned, there's a lot of original research in this article. In addition, much of that original research is now outdated (5kBps, or 0.4Mbps, is nowhere near a "modest broadband download speed," although it is unfortunately perhaps still not far off of a modest upload speed for many residential connections...but lots of people now have gigabit fiber and other much faster connections), and so rather than trying to keep the article revised and updated with current examples, it would be better to talk about the theory (citing a reliable source, like the aforementioned XKCD article) and citable past usage examples but leave out the original research and speculative math.
On another note, how much is Sneakernet used today (2019, on the cusp of 2020)? Residential connections have come a long way since that XKCD FedEx Bandwidth What-If article was written (in 2013). "If you want to transfer a few hundred gigabytes of data, it’s generally faster to FedEx a hard drive than to send the files over the internet" isn't actually true anymore--I can transfer the full contents of my 500GB hard drive over my gigabit fiber connection in just over one hour.
Another example: while apparently (at least as of 2016), the SETI@Home project was still using Sneakernet to transfer data from Arecibo (there's ~80Tbps of capacity between San Juan and Florida, but Arecibo itself seems to still be on a relatively slow AT&T-provided fiber link--try a traceroute to aosa.naic.edu or load this page and watch your data transfer rate), SETI is now receiving data over the net at somewhere between 1Gbps and 10Gbps from the Green Bank telescope in West Virginia (source). Obviously, as connections improve, Sneakernet is less and less the case these days. cluth (talk) 03:24, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  So much outdated info and original research--propose deletion of most of the Theory section? 

message: ... during my 35 years as a software and hardware developer.
Is this really Wikipedia material? 85.224.253.171 (talk) 13:06, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, as a sysadmin you like would have. The article is well sourced btw. --Zac67 (talk) 18:57, 3 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Never heard of this corny jargon... 

message: The South Africa section for usage examples states that experiment was run by Australian show Hungry Beast to best internet speeds. This experiment was done in Australia and should not be under the South Africa section. 202.175.137.165 (talk) 03:03, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect example listed under South Africa