| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (45)

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 6:08AM ArchiGamer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Astrophobia on Xbox Live confirmed?
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 6:13AM falcomadol said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Griffin demonstrates that he doesn't understand the difference between bandwidth and latency. No wonder he gets all the ladies.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 6:20AM Decanus said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
we will just sling a big wire across no one will know the difference
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 6:34AM dhelor said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Where's the "big-fricking-durr" tag for this article?
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 6:59AM Tre said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
You can also use "Well, DUH" and it'll give you the same effect.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 6:49AM (Unverified) said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
By the time we need to worry about intra-solar-networking for gaming, Quantum entanglement should offer a decent gateway for data transfer between data hubs, regardless of their distance.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2009/06/22/2604918.htm

And yes, this should also mean you could have low pings between North America and Europe/Asia.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 11:09AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is exactly what I was going to say.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 2:13PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Quantum entanglement doesn't get around the light speed barrier though, which is mainly what this is about.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 5:55PM kftgr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Raffi

Yes, it does. it can provide faster than light communications.
Light speed is approximately 1 foot per nanosecond.

If you can determine the status of the particle in 1 nanosecond, but have the entangled particles over 1 foot apart, that's faster than light transfer of information.
Reply

Posted: Aug 7th 2009 12:51AM Special Agent Steve said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well kftgr, if that's true, you just proved thousand's of scientists wrong; considering the speed of light is the fastest known movement of anything....-ever.

Speed of light=nature's speed limit.

Direct from wikipedia:
"Speeds faster than that of light are encountered in physics but in no such cases is any matter or information transmitted faster than c. The speed of light also plays a role in general relativity, and is believed to be the speed of gravitational waves."
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 6:53AM Ghen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Agreed with property damage. I don't know who would ever want to build on mars with me around.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 6:55AM sonicspike41 said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Am I the only one who found it odd that 100 megabit/second is supposedly fast enough for HD video to be sent there and back?

Are they confusing bit with byte?

I'd imagine they'd need something faster than 12.5 bytes/second, which is apparently 0.01 kb/s
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:34AM icase81 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well, seeing as HD is usually encoded at around 20mbit/sec, I'd imagine that a 100mbit connection would be just swimmingly fine. After all, we can stream HD just fine over current 54mbit/sec 802.11G connections.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:55AM Vidikron said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"After all, we can stream HD just fine over current 54mbit/sec 802.11G connections."

Hah... not in my experience.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 10:07AM sonicspike41 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
100 bits is apparently 12.5 bytes, which is about 0.012 kbytes, which is also 0.00001 megabytes.

My 1.5 mbyte/s DSL connection averages 150kbyte/s per second for downloads and such, but almost every HD video I watch needs plenty of time to preload/buffer.

That's at 150 kilobytes a second, which is supposedly 1228800 bits per second.

This is what I'm using for the conversion rates:
http://www.beesky.com/newsite/bit_byte.htm

The way i understood it was 8 bits = 1 byte, and 1024 bytes = 1 kilobyte, 1024 kilobytes = 1 megabyte.


Are they interchangeable now?
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 10:19AM R Planteer said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Byte is the correct term, but its not uncommon for non-techies to interchange them. Guess you'd have to do some research and see what the actual speed is.
Reply

Posted: Aug 8th 2009 8:29AM Rallion said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
There's a huge difference between 100 megabits and 100 bits, dude. A million-fold difference. 100mbit is 65 times the speed of your internet connection.

Also, you don't have a 1.5 megabyte/sec connection, you have a 1.5 megabit/sec connection. Every ISP on the planet speaks in megabits when they talk about speed.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 7:00AM Tre said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So I won't be able to play Burnout with my friends there?

CRAP!
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 7:06AM Alex R said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I can't see sales of the next Doom game being very good from Mars.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 7:23AM snarfoogle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If Ender's Game has taught me anything, it's that we need a race of buglike aliens to attack our species so we can steal their instantaneous communication technology to improve our interplanetary internet speeds.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 8:45AM Scratchcard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I could have gone without that whole subplot with Ender's brother and sister.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:31AM snarfoogle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
They weren't in the original short story but it's not bad and sets up some stuff in the sequels.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 7:35AM Red Son Rising said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
i swear i was expecting an article about patcher making another stupid prediction..

@snarfoogle

Ender's Game, havent read that in a long time. great book, mediocre follow ups: i really wish osc would stop milking the franchise tho. the last few entries were barely passable.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:46AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If you're talking about the short stories, then yeah, but don't be dissing my Children of the Mind!
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 7:48AM Slavik said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
*Takes aim*
Yes, headshot..... Haha, I have defeated you, Martian1337!
/Martian 1337 has logged out. "You guys suck"
*2 games later*
Anonymouse has killed Martian1337
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 8:14AM Muu said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Turn-based strategy games could withstand a 15min time delay.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:28AM Haggard said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Was thinking the same thing. Some turns towards the end of Civ 4 can take 5 minutes anyway.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 8:26AM LaughingTarget said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
People have overcome worse obstacles to gaming before, they'll do it again. Get between a gamer and a Halo 3 match and humanity can create miracles.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 8:41AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Can we, ya know...get to Mars before we start worrying about online gaming?

40 years and we still don't even have a moon base set up.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 8:50AM LuTon James said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It's tmac's fault dude. With all that time off he has been causing trouble at NASA.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:20AM StormEagle said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Rekall Live Confirmed?

Now, here is the plan. Get your ass to Mars. There's no lag there.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:23PM ch3burashka said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
GET TO DA CHOPPER!
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:25AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Have to work out a way to exploit quantum entanglement. If changes to two particle at any distance happen simultaneously, then you can use the changing state to represent 1's and 0's etc. and transfer information instantly.

Now that i think about it...

BRB going to the patent office.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:52AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah, but the nature of the subatomic particles means that if you can somehow observe the spin, it's going to be going both ways (so to speak). I think.
I'm not a quantum physicist, but I remember reading something about this.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 10:16AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Spin is just the term for an intrinsic angular momentum. I've only taken introductory Quantum Mechanics (pretty rudimentary course, at that), and spin wasn't discussed too much. Since angular momentum is governed by the uncertainty principle, it seems reasonable to think that intrinsic angular momentum is also governed by the uncertainty principle. So with that being said, if you can precisely know the spin then you will not be able to determine it's position. Take this with a grain of salt, though, since I'm fairly new to Quantum Mechanics.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 10:32AM ch3burashka said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
At this moment, yes, Earth-Mars games would be laggy. However, by the time colonies are established enough to be running interplanetary games those satellites will have multiplied into dozens, and smart programming would have them changing information with whichever satellite is closest. Also, by that time, we will be using single-beam lasers to transmit data, getting rid of the 4-20 minute problem.

Or we can rely on quantum mechanics. Either way, it'll work.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 5:47PM kftgr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
psst... yes, you, CH3BURASHKA. Lasers work with light. Light travels at ... light speed.

How long would it take, traveling at light speed to get from Earth to Mars, you ask? 4 to 20 minutes.

Yes, it is really the same speed as using radio waves. That's because they are both part of the electromagnetic spectrum.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 9:23PM ch3burashka said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Wow, I REALLY didn't think that post through. Man, light isn't as cool as it's hyped up to be; 4-20 minutes? Come on, photons, you could do better.

Well, then, the quantum majiggers are all we have left.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 10:51AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Maybe some of the humans working on Mars can create some kind of portal or teleportation device that can transmit data between two non-linear points. Hopefully unleashing the hordes of hell won't put strains on the network.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 11:01AM Stevetrop Man of Mystery said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Screw mars lets focus on on Earth & Moon online matches. I was to see some hard core matches between the earth and the moon.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 11:38AM TomCo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Relay satellites at lagrange points, mark my words.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 11:47AM Ashkental said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That's because Subspace communications hasn't been invented.... yet.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 12:24PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This reminds me. NASA is a blackhole of inefficiency that moves far too slowly and is far too cumbersome, financially speaking, to ever do anything satisfactorily. Even when we went to the moon, we were like "OOOOOOOH. Now what?"


Drop NASA, and give their toys to Apple, or Microsoft, or even Gibson.


ROCK....IN......SPACE!!!
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 12:52PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It was really funny to read this article, since I actually work on a daily basis with a lot of the data that's sent back from MRO (all publicly available imagery can be found here: http://ode.rsl.wustl.edu/mars/index.aspx). The cameras that are onboard the spacecraft are very high resolution; some of the grayscale images are pretty enormous in size (as big as 1 GB), so, unfortunately, the virtual pipes will likely be too gummed up even a game of Civ :(
However, luckily some new orbiters will be going up in the 201X's, so maybe if we ask NASA really really nicely, they'll let us have some playtime with our martian pals.
Reply

Posted: Aug 6th 2009 1:16PM Hardcore1 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So NASA uses Comcast too?
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Shank 2 review: Refined brutality

Posted on Feb 10th 2012 11:45AM

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW