🚀 go-pugleaf

"paulmd@efn.org" <paulmd@efn.org> wrote in
news:1177430988.571457.266060@u32g2000prd.googlegroups.com: 

> On Apr 24, 3:24 am, "Noozer" <dont.s...@me.here> wrote:
>> "thanatoid" <wait...@the.exit.invalid> wrote in message
>>
>> news:Xns991C97AB1B12thanexit@66.250.146.158...
>>
>>
>>
>> > Radium <gluceg...@gmail.com> wrote in
>> >news:1177378238.361891.73650@y5g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >> Hi:
>>
>> >> Is it possible to obtain a 56 Mbps connection using
>> >> 1,000 dial-modems with a 1,000 different telephone
>> >> ports and numbers?
>>
>> >> Each line gives a max of 56 Kbps, so if 1,000 are used,
>> >> could this give a max of 56 Mbps?
>>
>> >> Thanks,
>>
>> >> Radium
>>
>> > Can't believe anyone took this question seriously. Even
>> > *I* can tell the guy is a fucking troll.
>>
>> And what's worse, someone giving a reasonable response to
>> a stupid question, or someone who just likes to bitch?
>>
>> ...and 56k modems were regulated to 53k. Also, There is no
>> easy way to amalgamate all the connections into a single
>> stream. Just put two 100mbit network cards in a PC. It
>> won't let you download at 200mbit. It will let you have
>> two 100mbit streams though. 
> 
> You can never tell in advance who's a troll, and who
> actually just wants an answer to a wild thought they had.
> It is an interesting question, in theory.

1) Not "in advance", I read the question!

2) In theory, exactly. And not THAT interesting, IMHO. And 
anyone who knows the difference between a modem and a graphics 
card knows it can't be done. 

3) NO ONE would ever attempt to try it in real life if nothing 
else because of the cost.

4) Ergo: troll.


-- 
Disagreements and the usual insults expected and welcomed.