in your opinion, what would meet the definition of "broke the Internet?"
The term is quite over used in my opinion, it is very often used in hyperbole. Whether it is in terms of popularity and driving traffic to a website or a threat said to break the Internet, it doesn’t seem to live up to the meaning of the term.
In my defence, internet was setup to share information, openly. That’s broken now.
It’s ruined as well, but you’re right, semantics is important.
I’d say if the action starts to affect those trying to use the internet for other purposes.
So if visits to X affect people’s ability to do Y, then that might count. This would depend on scale (ex. a town might get overloaded more easily) and reasoning (ex. both X and Y used the same bottleneck service)
Maybe?
I'd say, hypothetically, if gigantic corporations somehow managed to lock users into walled gardens and effectively destroyed the independent and decentralized nature of the Web as we know it.
Good thing that would never happen.
When there was a giant Ralph made up of virus clone Ralph's destroying everything in sight.
Good thing we have the power of friends or whatever.
It was a fairly reasonable guess back when they designed it, especially since you need an account to like a video.
That would mean close to 1/3 (~33%) of the world’s population "like"d the video.
Nowadays it’s only about 1/4 of the world’s population (25% for those who don’t get fractions).
It’d take massive amounts of bots to like a video that many times, and what would be the point?
Of course, they probably never imagined they’d scale quite this much.
I mean, yeah, it is a bad design but you have to remember that YouTube wasn’t always a Google owned service, this sounds exactly like the kind of thing that gets overlooked in a hobby project because no video ever will have more than 2 billion views, right?
So yeah, bad design but really easy to forget about for a video view counter.
I think it’s two meanings used in different situations.
One is literal with internet going down from either “the hug” or some other natural disaster happening to an endpoint.
The other is for hype, which is less spectacular, and to what I usually see as the same case “slam/ slammed” is used in news ex. “new ai that teases you while insulting your questions slammed the internet” (made up)
I vote for the first one but the second is happening from marketing so it is unavoidable.
Root zone for DNS is pretty reliable have you seen how many of those there are around the world? root-servers.org
Root certs are generally offline for security reasons and everything is generated via the intermediate certs.
Highway map of the internet. BGP doesn’t care about the individual local roads just the highways or national roads between cities.
Say you want to get from your place (221B Baker St London) to the Eiffel Tower. BGP doesn’t care that you need to take a left at the end of your street then a right after 200m to get onto the highway. BGP cares that in London you get onto the A13 to Dover one in Dover get on the Eurostar to Callie, once at Callie take the E44 to Paris.
So, it would take an even more world-shattering event to overwhelm the Internet to the point that normal functions have to be downgraded to basic functions as a result.
Is it even possible to overload the Internet in that way anymore?
Is it even possible to overload the Internet in that way anymore?
Not with all the cloud servers and Load balancing between their servers as well as redundant Internet connections.
Yeah, let a nuclear bomb go off in American city with over 50,000 residents.
That would probably do it
LOL, the internet was invented specifically to route communications around nuclear bomb blasts.
You got me wondering though, things have changed a lot since DARPANET. Taking out Amazon US-EAST-1 would leave a massive hole in the internet.
A successful DDoS against Amazon Web Services.
Much of the Internet as we westerners know it runs off those servers. If that could be brought down for at least 5 hours…
Of course it is. Imagine having to climb over 300 meters to plug in an ethernet cable into the internet. Who would want that?
Ethernet only works up to 100m anyways.
The original answer is Kim Kardashian.
The phrase was popularized by appearing on the cover of the Winter 2014 issue of Paper magazine.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paper_(magazine)#Breakthein… you can see the cover here: vanityfair.com/…/kim-kardashian-paper-magazine-nu…
Usernameblankface
🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 🇮 🏆
Call me Lenny/Leni
AeronMelon
TheInsane42
Otter
cabbage
verity_kindle
Rikudou_Sage
Scrubbles
SnausagesinaBlanket
Bizarroland
Anarch157a
squid_slime
Jack Waterhouse
Arthur Besse