Facebook building subsea cable that will encompass the world

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Who Builds and Owns Subsea Cables

  • Historically built by telephone/telecom consortia; now also by “hyperscalers” (Meta, Google, Microsoft, Amazon) and Tier 1 ISPs.
  • Other large private players (e.g., Tata) reportedly own substantial cable assets.
  • Some finance firms use microwave radio for ultra‑low‑latency trading, but bulk financial traffic still rides subsea fiber.

Regulation and Routing

  • Ownership in international waters is private; countries don’t “own” the cable, but regulate via international conventions (e.g., UNCLOS, 1884 cable convention).
  • In international waters, no permit is needed; permits and landing agreements are required in territorial waters and at endpoints.
  • ITU may play a role; details are unclear.
  • Routes are planned with detailed surveys; cables are often buried in shallow water and laid to avoid existing infrastructure when possible.

Maintenance and Technical Details

  • Maritime operations and repairs are contracted to specialist firms and “agreement ships.”
  • Decommissioned cables are typically left on the seabed unless repair/disposal is needed.
  • Cables can migrate over time; one example reportedly moved ~15 km from its trench.
  • Optical repeaters every ~60–100 km amplify light; they are powered by high‑voltage DC carried in the cable. There is some disagreement over whether the ocean is used as a return path.

Capacity, Upgrades, and Commercial Models

  • Initial claim: modern fiber cables have fixed bandwidth once laid.
  • Counterpoint (supported by several examples): capacity can be dramatically increased by upgrading terminal/DWDM equipment without touching the wet plant; one system is said to have gone from 20 Gbit/s to 4.6 Tbit/s.
  • Channels are multiplexed by wavelength; spectrum slices or entire fiber pairs can be leased (“spectrum sale,” “lease a wave,” “dark fiber”).
  • Service tiers range from best‑effort retail internet to guaranteed enterprise bandwidth to dedicated wavelengths and full‑cable leases.

Motives, AI, and Hyperscaler Strategy

  • Large tech firms build cables for more capacity, cost savings versus leasing, and operational control.
  • Some commenters argue “AI” is a marketing label; model training needs huge data movement but isn’t extremely latency‑sensitive.
  • Others note that positioning their own AI layer may be defensive, to avoid being disintermediated by OS/browser‑level AI.

Security, Governance, and Public Interest

  • Cables have been treated as national‑security‑relevant for decades, but they remain private assets.
  • They are effectively impossible to fully protect given global length and seabed exposure.
  • Tension noted: companies treat cables as private when selling capacity, but may invoke national security if attacked to seek government protection or subsidies.
  • Some worry about critical infrastructure being controlled by companies with poor trust reputations; others liken this to private offshore rigs or ships.

Status of the Rumored Meta “World Cable”

  • Core claim: Meta is building a W‑shaped system linking the US East Coast → South Africa → India → Australia → US West.
  • The blog author in the thread states this overall route and fiber‑pair count come from involved sources.
  • Branching units to additional countries are explicitly labeled as speculative “wish list” additions.
  • Other commenters describe the article as “rumors and speculation,” so the level of confirmation remains partially unclear.