The fucking apocalypse

Every Tuesday he starts out with a simple, yet valid question:

"What is the difference between digital communication via circuits and communication via information packets?"

And then the prof replies with some sort of analogy, relating circuits to the old method of physically connecting phone lines with a wire at a switchboard, and packets with something more decentralized, like mail delivery or transmission of power through electrical grids.

"Well, aren't they the same things?"

"No," the prof says, "I just explained the difference..." and then continues with analogies, this time of rivers and a road trip to New York, eventually concluding that networks and packets was a more stable, reilable way to send things.

"But what if a part of the network goes down?"

"Then the information reroutes itself through a different part of the network."

"But won't there be a problem with transmission?"

"No, because it will just pick a different way to get there."

"But what if it was all down?"

"It won't all go down. You would have to knock out each individual server one by one."

"But what if that happened?"

"It wouldn't happen. It's almost impossible. There will always be part of the network that will work. That's the beauty of it."

"But what if-"

"If they dropped a nuclear bomb on Vancouver then it would knock everything out at once, but then it would be the fucking APOCALYPSE AND WE WOULDN'T CARE IF OUR FUCKING INTERNET WORKED!"

The guy shut up after that. We were all glad.

I love university.