That's actually a load of bull. They're measuring the internet as data that is read, not taking into account that there are pictures, videos, and sounds that take up alot of space. Whoever did this is an idiot.
I honestly think that, if they took into account the pics, and did a frame-by-frame print of all the videos, then they're WAY OFF...
Mainly because of the fact that, from the time they started calculating to the time they finished, the internet has probably GROWN... so much so that they're original calculations are worthless...
Comments (7):
Show all commentsI honestly think that, if they took into account the pics, and did a frame-by-frame print of all the videos, then they're WAY OFF...
Mainly because of the fact that, from the time they started calculating to the time they finished, the internet has probably GROWN... so much so that they're original calculations are worthless...
Peace...