6 ms·
One Second on the Internet
- valtron 13y agoDoes the emails/second take into account spam?
- airguitardesign 13y agoIt does. A little over 60% of that pile is spam.
- afjango 13y agoexact!
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- user24 13y agoVery interesting site, but I got bored of manually scrolling around dropbox. Why not stick in a button that autoscrolls to the next anchor?
- Moral_ 13y agoThere is a button for me, maybe they just implemented it.
- jd007 13y agoit's on the left side, the circled down arrow?
- user24 13y agoHmmm... Now I don't know if they just added it or if I just missed it. But thanks, that'll do the job! edit: judging by the 6 upvotes I've got so far for the original comment, it's either just been added (great) or it was already there and there's a UI issue.
- sixothree 13y agoI thought those were only visual cues.
- pydave 13y agoYou're right. I didn't notice it either. Could be better if it didn't jump around each time you click it (each one isn't identically placed).
- johnward 13y agoHow did people share cat photos 30 years ago?
- dmix 13y agoInefficiently.
- blatherard 13y agocompuserve
- tsax 13y agoCarrier pigeons
- MarcScott 13y agohttp://www.photohistory-sussex.co.uk/BTNPointerCats.htm http://www.photohistory-sussex.co.uk/BTNPointerCats.htm
- 205guy 13y agoExcellent link, thanks. I can't wait to see these old pictures get reused as new LOLcats. There must be a steampunk hovercat in there somewhere.
- greenyoda 13y agoUsenet binary newsgroups? E-mail?
- chrisstanchak 13y agoAnd all of it is scooped up by the NSA.
- saltyknuckles 13y agoDesignly? wtf, another -ly name. You guys are better than this.
- bherms 13y agoGive me an actual number. I have no clue what the scale really is other than visually or by diving the x since by current time elapsed
- andrewmunsell 13y agoYeah, I was looking for a number too.
- bargl 13y agoThere's a number on the left below the name and a time you've been there at the top, but I don't see an actual number for likes/second. You either have to calculate it or count the pics. They do a straight multiplication so the number doesn't appear to be pulled dynamically from any of the sites. I.E. You can take the total and the time you've been there, do a little division and get the number per second without having to count. EDIT: Also if you refresh the page near skype, reddit or any of the others and wait 1 second it'll show you the rate before it's modified by the time you've been on the page.
- aprescott 13y agoYou can at least look at the difference each second, when the figures update.
- nostromo 13y agoEven that was difficult because there was no thousands separator. It normally takes me a moment to understand that 3697893 is three million and not three hundred thousand. It's even worse if that number keeps changing. (Perhaps it's just me because I'm mildly dyslexic.) Cool project though!
- sixothree 13y agoA number with a link to the citation would be even better.
- pydave 13y ago
- matthewaustin 13y agoWould much prefer to be able to see the actual number of each thing, even if it's at the bottom. I instead found myself trying to extrapolate the number by staring at the "since you loaded this page" number and observing the difference as it changed each second.
- dpacmittal 13y agoCurious where its getting all that data from.
- jackmaney 13y agoAlthough interesting... [citations needed], especially for measuring the number of emails sent per second.
- aischa 13y agosehr interessant.^^ mal schauen was es da gibt. Ist nur ein Test Grüsse aus der Schweiz
- egypturnash 13y agoIn one second on the internet, there are Reddit votes cast. This sentence no verb.
- showerst 13y ago"Are" is the indicative of the verb "to be". "There are 10 strawberries." Is an English sentence, although it sounds funny out of context.
- egypturnash 13y agoMy point was that "In one second on the internet, there are Reddit votes cast" is missing the important information of the sentence: a number.
- IvyMike 13y agoI think these graphs are based on the reported number of queries from the companies themselves. But I think Google has always publicly under-reported the number of search queries they get. So I suspect the number is higher than we're seeing on this page, perhaps by quite a bit. (Google says "Every day Google answers more than one billion questions" [1]. But that number hasn't changed in years. And technically ten billion questions a day is more than one billion.) http://www.google.com/competition/howgooglesearchworks.html http://www.google.com/competition/howgooglesearchworks.html
- mgw 13y agoThe most surprising thing to me was that, according to this site, there are more YouTube videos being watched every second than there are Google searches made. Does anyone have a source to confirm this?
- RobinL 13y agoSounded implausible to me too. Perhaps its the number of videos currently being viewed such that e.g. viewing a 60 second video would effectively count for 60
- dandelany 13y agoThis. Comparing "the amount of google searches conducted in the past minute" and "the number of Youtube videos playing during the past minute" is a bit meaningless because one is a (basically) instantaneous event and the other is a continuous event that generally lasts longer than a minute.
- dxm 13y agoMy first thought too. I'm going to need citations.
- alexchamberlain 13y agoTo summarise, email - that insecure, yet open and mature standard - still beats, hands down without breaking a sweat, the latest fad websites' cool metrics of performance. It would be very interesting to compare this to whatever is current in 10 years time. I seriously hope we have at least started to consider replacing email by then.
- csomar 13y agoI can't up-vote this enough. This can go two ways: 1. Show you how open standards are important. This might be an argument for Bitcoin vs. Banks. 2. Tells you that the email business is ridiculously huge. Much bigger than Facebook Sharing, Google Searches or anything else for that matter.
- solistice 13y ago@2. But it's not easily harnessable, being essentially invisible, so it doesn't get as much rep. Facebook, Google, etc. are like Continents and Countries. Emails...that's the Ocean.
- dkrich 13y ago1. Show you how open standards are important. This might be an argument for Bitcoin vs. Banks. Eh? Speaking for the US, the Federal Reserve Bank is the US equivalent of a standard protocol. Before a central bank existed, states and colonies had their own currencies which created many problems, which makes your argument for open standards quite good. Which is why I don't think any paid service will ever beat a protocol for communication. Email may eventually diminish (I see no evidence of this forthcoming anytime soon, though), but I don't think it will be replaced by anything other than a better protocol on top of which independent services will be built.
- pluies_public 13y agoKeeping in mind 80-92% of it is spam, depending on studies (wikipedia numbers from 2010 apparently, if anyone has a more up-to-date source that'd be grand).
- 3rd3 13y agoRelative values to the user base would be equally interesting, if not, even more interesting.
- bittercynic 13y agoSeems to me the internet began over 40 years ago, in 1969. If you don't count the beginning as the first connection between two nodes, how do you mark the beginning? http://www.computerhistory.org/internet_history/ http://www.computerhistory.org/internet_history/