> Cables can be tapped for information, or cut to drastically slow communication between countries. A greater emphasis on government protection of the cables may be in the future.
That left me wondering now, how would that even work? The wiretapping, that is
Stephenson’s piece is a classic, but it was written in 1996, when things were very different in the tech industry and geopolitically. Much more up to date (and with an explicit debt to Stephenson) is Samanth Subramanian, The Web Beneath The Waves: The Fragile Cables that Connect our World. Well worth a read to see what’s changed since Stephenson.
> The British involvement, then, was more catalytic than anything else. They didn't own the rubber plantations. They merely bought the rubber on an open market from Chinese brokers who in turn bought it from producers of various ethnicities. The market was just a few square blocks of George Town where British law was enforced, i.e. where businessmen could rely on a few basics like property rights, contracts, and a currency.
In 2026 this is a surprisingly non-pearl clutching take on British influence abroad.
Two notes of interest, it only covers "British influence abroad" at one specific location for a relatively short interval of time, and it neatly avoids looking too deeply into a classic of British colonialism; the divide and conquer approach of strategically favouring some over others to push any resulting unrest at arms length away from the actual British.
But it does mention the most classic classic: the outcomes of post-British colonies are incredible compared to either no colonialism or another power colonising.
> the outcomes of post-British colonies are incredible
By what metric? Recall that not all people value the same things.
The outcome of British colonialism in Tasmania was 100% extinction of locals - I mean sure, you can call that incredible as you did, but that was never a word used by Truganini
Jamaica, sure, greatest Winter Olympic team ever .. but hardly the poster child for colonialism and impossible to claim as "better off" than sans or alt colonialism.
I can't believe this article does not mention what I think is the most puzzling part of the repair: the delicate process by which the individual fibers are FUSED TOGETHER in a way that maintains near perfect total internal refraction.
You mean fusion splicing? That's common knowledge to anyone that's done any professional fibre cabling and you can easily find reading on it. The specifics of subsea cables however are much more elusive so it makes sense the article focuses on that.
This was a good read. I'm obsessed with undersea cables. I consider them one of the wonders of the modern world. Wikipedia says 99% of all internet traffic gets delivered via these ocean-spanning wires, just sitting along the sea floor. Almost unbelievable.
If you sink a few old ships around in the area you will never need to repair it again each two years. Extra bonus if they are exactly the same ships that you found red-handed damaging the cables.
tl;dr: They pull the damaged cable up, weld it to a new section of cable their brought, and then drop the cable with a detour to make room for the extra length.
> Cables can be tapped for information, or cut to drastically slow communication between countries. A greater emphasis on government protection of the cables may be in the future.
That left me wondering now, how would that even work? The wiretapping, that is
If you havent seen it, you owe it to yoiurself to read Mother Earth, Motherboard: https://www.wired.com/1996/12/ffglass/
A Neal Stephenson long read about undersea cables. So good!
Stephenson’s piece is a classic, but it was written in 1996, when things were very different in the tech industry and geopolitically. Much more up to date (and with an explicit debt to Stephenson) is Samanth Subramanian, The Web Beneath The Waves: The Fragile Cables that Connect our World. Well worth a read to see what’s changed since Stephenson.
About to read but your link is paywalled, here’s a copy: https://efdn.notion.site/Mother-Earth-Mother-Board-WIRED-a8f...
> The British involvement, then, was more catalytic than anything else. They didn't own the rubber plantations. They merely bought the rubber on an open market from Chinese brokers who in turn bought it from producers of various ethnicities. The market was just a few square blocks of George Town where British law was enforced, i.e. where businessmen could rely on a few basics like property rights, contracts, and a currency.
In 2026 this is a surprisingly non-pearl clutching take on British influence abroad.
Sure, it's easy enough to write in such a manner.
Two notes of interest, it only covers "British influence abroad" at one specific location for a relatively short interval of time, and it neatly avoids looking too deeply into a classic of British colonialism; the divide and conquer approach of strategically favouring some over others to push any resulting unrest at arms length away from the actual British.
But it does mention the most classic classic: the outcomes of post-British colonies are incredible compared to either no colonialism or another power colonising.
> the outcomes of post-British colonies are incredible
By what metric? Recall that not all people value the same things.
The outcome of British colonialism in Tasmania was 100% extinction of locals - I mean sure, you can call that incredible as you did, but that was never a word used by Truganini
Jamaica, sure, greatest Winter Olympic team ever .. but hardly the poster child for colonialism and impossible to claim as "better off" than sans or alt colonialism.
Uganda, well, ... enough said.
thank you!
Thanks, I loved this article, time to re-read it again!
For anyone who wants to know more about the early history of undersea cables, I also enjoyed ‘A Thread Across the Ocean’ by John Steele Gordon.
I can't believe this article does not mention what I think is the most puzzling part of the repair: the delicate process by which the individual fibers are FUSED TOGETHER in a way that maintains near perfect total internal refraction.
You mean fusion splicing? That's common knowledge to anyone that's done any professional fibre cabling and you can easily find reading on it. The specifics of subsea cables however are much more elusive so it makes sense the article focuses on that.
"Repeaters are included every 40-80 km to keep the signal strong."
Does it mean that there's a ton of repeaters under the sea? Where do they get the power from?
i believe they're simply powered by the electric conductors bundled with the cable
the extra interesting part i think is how they amplify the signal without having to decode it, just optically
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_communications_cable...
Along the same cable. Data cables usually carry power to some degree too, for their own use.
I've been attempting to buy a cross section of one of these cables for a very long time. Anybody got a lead on one?
Have someone with a .edu email address to email a company that makes them.
Do they maintain the original connection between the fibers or is that not worth the effort and is a swap not a problem?
This was a good read. I'm obsessed with undersea cables. I consider them one of the wonders of the modern world. Wikipedia says 99% of all internet traffic gets delivered via these ocean-spanning wires, just sitting along the sea floor. Almost unbelievable.
Also always interesting: https://www.submarinecablemap.com
If you sink a few old ships around in the area you will never need to repair it again each two years. Extra bonus if they are exactly the same ships that you found red-handed damaging the cables.
(2021)
tl;dr: They pull the damaged cable up, weld it to a new section of cable their brought, and then drop the cable with a detour to make room for the extra length.
(This is a really meandering article!)