Exaflood Pseudo-Scientists Need A New Gimmick
Scaring children and puppies is getting tired...
Earlier this month we discussed
how "research firm" Nemertes Research had returned once again with their Chicken-Little prognostications that the Internet would soon start facing an Exaflood, or Internet capacity collapse. As we argued then, the entire Exaflood idea is a myth cooked up by carriers to help scare lawmakers and the public into believing that bandwidth is a dangerously limited and precious resource, and if you don't give carriers what they want (the right to metered billing, fewer consumer protection laws, no neutrality laws, removed price controls) the Internet will explode and you'll all be sorry.
Nemertes co-founder Johna Till Johnson has done a particularly stellar job consistently writing editorials for Network World that sound scary, but aren't based in any perceivable real world science. Her latest unscientific screed
attempts to argue that network neutrality laws would result in the collapse of entirely unrelated peering arrangements, something we argued
made little to no sense. Ars Technica's Nate Anderson pens an article
that essentially mirrors our two week old post:
What's most odd about Johnson's argument about network neutrality is that she admits that this is default network behavior right now. And while she frets about the huge growth of Internet traffic, the reality is that the growth rates have been much faster in the past (doubling every year or faster) --and the Internet abides! As for ISPs not having the money to invest in enough infrastructure to keep up with demand, well... just take a look an ISP balance sheets. Tremendous profits are being made now, even as cable operators roll out DOCSIS 3.0 tech and boost download speeds to 50Mbps or 100Mbps.
One amusing thing is that every time Johnson opens her mouth to let loose a stream of unscientific fear mongering policy gibberish, other Nemertes analysts come to our comment section
to post more reasoned policy positions that almost sound like science, while lamenting that Nemertes positions are being distorted. But if they're so concerned with Nemertes being taken seriously, they might want to talk to Johnson about toning down the nonsense. They might also inform her how "scientists" let the data dictate policy positions -- not the other way around.
It's sad, really... You work really hard in school. You make good decisions, you take hard classes, you manage to achieve a pretty good record of grades and achievements. But you're on the outside; you don't make the same networking connections others do. You find yourself left behind as the cream is skimmed off the top and plucked away for top slots in government, the corporate world, and so on.
But you want it; you desire it; you feel this sense of entitlement that you -- like them, like the smart, honorable ones -- deserve the chance to set policy, to attach your name you ideas and have people pay attention to you.
But what are your options? Through chance, perhaps an introduction at a party (the sort of introduction you wish you'd received 10 years ago), you become aware of organizations that exist to try and muscle their way into the corporate and government worlds from the outside. "It's brilliant!" you think. The boys and girls who left you behind so many years ago will now pay YOU to say important-sounding things, to stand in front of the microphone and let your voice be heard! Now people will recognize you for who you are!
...and indeed, we do. Out-classed, out-maneuvered, and exposed as paid whores, charlatans, and liars. Not by the elites above you you so desperately try to emulate, but by us regular shmoes just trying to put two and two together.
Re: It's sad, really...
said by andrewbw:That is the sad truth. People are hired only if their ideology follows the cooperation's ideology. Kind of like the way FCC commissioners make decisions that pave the way to a nice job as a lobbyist when they get leave their government job.
You find yourself left behind as the cream is skimmed off the top and plucked away for top slots in government, the corporate world, and so on.
Looking back over my life, I could be making $200,000 a year if I played my cards right. I
might have been probably was a slut when I was younger, but I was never a whore.