One of the less publicized casualties of Hurricane Katrina was a branch of Abilene, Internet2’s high-speed research network. The storm severed the link that connects many of Abilene’s Southeastern members to the main network, but that rupture has had little effect on the network’s overall speed, according to Internet2 officials.
The hurricane, however, could set back efforts to set up the National LambdaRail, an even more powerful network that has already been completed in many Northern states. Officials had expected to wire Louisiana’s connection by November, but it’s likely that the project will be pushed back. (The Washington Post)
8 Responses to Katrina Claims a Chunk of Internet2’s Network
Guest - December 5, 2011 at 1:57 pm
Claire, forgive me if my typing is sloppy right now but I am recovering from the hysterical laughing fit you induced with this column. I think I love Tenured Radical like a rock. You are the best writer in the Chronicle of Higher Education. How do I nominate you for an award?
Let me go back to enjoying your puns and witticisms.
historiann - December 5, 2011 at 11:16 pm
TR–who is Tom Tomorrow’s wife? You must fill us in.
(Also, the link to the Leslie Bennetts story is broken.)
captain_chronicle - December 6, 2011 at 8:24 am
The proof that you’re a great writer is when I don’t agree with anything you say but read your stuff and really like it! As Larry the Cable Guy might say, “Now that there’s some good writin’, I don’t care who y’are”…
Also – thanks for the Paul Simon clip – I’m of that age where I gladly watched the whole thing.
tenured_radical - December 6, 2011 at 8:56 am
Thanks Ann: I put the link in by hand, and seem to have forgotten some of my html skills: I’ll convey the other info offline, as I’m not sure she would appreciate being uncovered in the Chron. Or at least I haven’t asked…..
bossylittlething - December 6, 2011 at 10:22 am
Dear TR,
I would vote for you for president. You would keep us all laughing as you revved up the economy, cleaned up in Congress, and dismantled heteropatriarchy rock by rock….
historiann - December 6, 2011 at 3:28 pm
I found the interview with Ginger White by Leslie Bennetts on my own–thanks for the recommendation. That’s what happens when a feminist journalist commits feminist journalism. I surely appreciated the attention paid to the individual & not the candidate, the horserace, etc.
LanceThruster - December 9, 2011 at 5:37 pm
I can’t say
much in regards to Huntsman as I am less familiar with him, but to cite Mitt’s
“intellect and experience” seem laughable. He either comes across
like a deer caught in the headlights when confronted with questions he’d rather
avoid altogether, or is prone to transparent posturing or pandering when he
thinks he can use it to counter some other negative perception of him (empty
suit, not tough enough, etc.). His experience seems to be largely involved in prevaricating
as he denies his track record and waffles on owning up to previous
positions/statements. Remember that this is the guy that bought and scrubbed
his office’s computers in order to delete any email correspondences that might
fly in the face of his currently crafted “official narrative.”
Granted,
we’ve digressed to the point where an empty suit figurehead is all the job
requires as the puppet masters are behind the scenes; aided by a lazy and
incompetent press. The fact that Ron Paul is not even mentioned indicates the
same could be said for academe. I may not agree with him on everything, but
here is a man with the courage of his convictions and the integrity to speak
truth to power, and *he’s* treated like the buffoon at the same time clowns
such as Cain, Newt, Santorum, Bachmann, et al get treated (however fleetingly)
as ‘serious’ candidates.
Who benefits
from this cyclical dog and pony show while not addressing the elephant in the
room of candidates prostrating themselves before the Israel lobby? While your
slant on the comical properties of the candidates being fielded is not without
merit, at the same time it is both shameful and depressing to think that this
process will somehow bring forth the best and the brightest rather than those
meant appeal to the lowest common denominator as they again choose to vote
against their own interests.
Hard to get
happy, in any context, about that.
alexis_v - December 10, 2011 at 2:08 am
Thank you for the link to Adam Hochschild’s book review of New Gingrich’s dissertation. I have become more impressed with Dr. Gingrich than I had ever been before. His critique of Belgium’s system of colonial education appears to have been more subversive than I would have expected from the man. I also have newfound respect for Dr. Gingrich’s willingness to tackle a topic that most historians avoided during that era.
True enough, Dr. Gingrich did not delve into Congolese impressions of the Congolese educational system. Yet, one can legitimately question whether Belgian educational policy in Congo had anything to do with the Congolese. The Congolese were a subject population; their opinions did not matter to the Belgian colonial system. Although Dr. Gingrich could have asked Congolese people what they thought of Belgian policy or their opinions of Belgian schools – and their views would have been illuminating for the history of the culture of Belgian colonial education – they would have had little if anything to do with Belgian education policy (which was the subject of his dissertation).
When one studies federal education policy vis a vis Native Americans, one needs to realize that federal education policy had little if anything to do with what Indians wanted, needed, or were interested in. Indian schools were a matter of federal (white) policy imposed on Indians; those in authority usually regarded what Indians thought about the subject as irrelevant. The essence of federal Indian policy for most of its history is an absence of human detail; people got coldly moved again and again as pieces on a chessboard without any concern about human feeling or attachment.
Given how Belgium’s colonial tyranny in Congo was clothed in paternalistic rhetoric, Newt Gingrich’s paternalistic critique sounds quite damning. One needs to differentiate between paternalism that takes itself seriously and a tyrannical system that uses paternalistic rhetoric yet shirks the very parental duties it proclaims for itself.
Belgium’s paternalism in Congo was a control fraud, one among many. One is reminded of Harry Lime’s commentary about dots.
Now, this doesn’t mean I’m voting for Gingrich – I think he is a corrupt narcissist. Still, after Adam Hochschild’s book review, I would like to read his dissertation.