Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [decentralization] One to many broadcast should go thru wires?

Expand Messages
  • Dave Winer
    FYI, I m not thinking of caching, not at all. I ll have to write this up, no time now.. Dave
    Message 1 of 21 , Jan 3, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      FYI, I'm not thinking of caching, not at all.

      I'll have to write this up, no time now..

      Dave
    • Lucas Gonze
      ... You bet. Chat is like a duck in water on the internet because of that. And audio streaming on the internet is like a duck in a snowsuit: it s not going
      Message 2 of 21 , Jan 3, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        clay said:
        > Not just that. Chat is the human version of SYN/ACK. Chat's advantage
        > is not just low bandwidth, therefore, but tolerance of widely varying
        > latency, so long as its beneath a conversational threshold.

        You bet. Chat is like a duck in water on the internet because of that. And audio
        streaming on the internet is like a duck in a snowsuit: it's not going to fly no
        matter how hard it flaps.

        It's not that Real Audio doesn't work fine over broadband. It's that out-of-band
        transmission is cheaper, more scalable, uses well established open standards like MP3
        and HTTP, doesn't force me to re-download material, and allows me to listen according
        to my own schedule.

        - Lucas
      • Todd Boyle
        Justin said ... Lucas said ... Any scheme which involves users in choosing efficient methods of getting audio and video content, has an implicit incentive
        Message 3 of 21 , Jan 3, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Justin said
          > > What I would like to see is some economic signals back to the
          > > end user that tell him streaming content costs more, so that
          > > the system can be brought to equilibrium, and provide a more
          > > accurate allocation of what people really want.
          >
          > I don't think thats necessary. Users will soon start to realize the
          > drastically better speed and quality of cached content over real-time
          > content and tend to gravitate towards the cached. Content providers will
          > further push this by realizing massive bandwidth savings for cached
          > content over real-time content.

          Lucas said

          > It's not that Real Audio doesn't work fine over broadband. It's
          > that out-of-band transmission is cheaper, more scalable, uses well
          > established open standards like MP3 and HTTP, doesn't force me to
          > re-download material, and allows me to listen according to my own schedule

          Any scheme which involves users in choosing efficient methods of getting
          audio and video content, has an implicit incentive system somewhere.
          If people can get what they want with RealAudio or its open source
          counterparts, why would they look one inch further? The same goes
          for content providers (i.e. those 100,000 small broadcasters.)

          Beneath your plan lurks the soviet planned economy in which, for
          lack of any other economic means of allocatoin, consumer goods
          were allocated based on who was willing to stand in lines the longest
          number of hours. That is how our highway system works too. Why
          not hold your noses and let people pay pennies for bandwidth?? Is
          there something morally wrong with that?

          Remember, we are in an era of abundant bandwidth and it need not be
          costly on a micropayments basis. Avoiding a micropayments infrastruc.
          plays into the hands of centrallized power i.e. the telcos and ISPs
          will pay for the whole thing by extracting money in other ways.

          Wishing all those routers and fiber were really free, or trying to
          steal or freeload bandwidth is a losing game. I want to win.
          I will pay my $5 or whatever it costs, per month (this will tend
          to keep the spammers and commercial broadcasters out, by the way)

          I do honor your ideas and your accomplishments. I will not
          pester you further with these ideas.

          TOdd
        • Justin Chapweske
          ... I don t think thats necessary. Users will soon start to realize the drastically better speed and quality of cached content over real-time content and tend
          Message 4 of 21 , Jan 3, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            >
            > What I would like to see is some economic signals back to the
            > end user that tell him streaming content costs more, so that
            > the system can be brought to equilibrium, and provide a more
            > accurate allocation of what people really want.
            >

            I don't think thats necessary. Users will soon start to realize the
            drastically better speed and quality of cached content over real-time
            content and tend to gravitate towards the cached. Content providers will
            further push this by realizing massive bandwidth savings for cached
            content over real-time content.

            --
            Justin Chapweske, Lead Swarmcast Developer, openCOLA Inc.
            http://www.sourceforge.net/projects/swarmcast/
          • Clay Shirky
            ... This makes me wonder if its time to update Godwin s Law. ... This would make sense if it were merely a matter of nose holding, but people don t _want_ to
            Message 5 of 21 , Jan 3, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              > Beneath your plan lurks the soviet planned economy in which, [...]

              This makes me wonder if its time to update Godwin's Law.

              > for lack of any other economic means of allocatoin, consumer goods
              > were allocated based on who was willing to stand in lines the
              > longest number of hours. That is how our highway system works too.
              > Why not hold your noses and let people pay pennies for bandwidth??

              This would make sense if it were merely a matter of nose holding, but
              people don't _want_ to pay pennies for bandwidth, so any competitor
              offering all-you-can-eat pricing will tend to win.

              The Case Against Micropayments
              http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/p2p/2000/12/19/micropayments.html

              > Is there something morally wrong with that?

              Nope, its just a practical issue.

              Note that this does not mean that price cannot be used to segregate
              classes of service, as in Odlyzko's "Paris Metro Pricing" model.

              http://www.research.att.com/~amo/doc/paris.metro.minimal.txt

              It just means that micropayments are doomed as the method for doing so
              for any consumer app.

              --
              Clay Shirky | shirky.com - Essays on the Internet:
              http://www.shirky.com/ | Culture, Economics, Globalization
            • Oliver Willis
              At it s core the Humancasting system I m trying to develop, has caching at its core. Video isn t blasted all over the internet, but instead intelligently tries
              Message 6 of 21 , Jan 3, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                At it's core the Humancasting system I'm trying to
                develop, has caching at its core. Video isn't blasted
                all over the internet, but instead intelligently tries
                to work its way effeciently to the user. Its one to
                many without a "scattershot" approach...

                --- Todd Boyle <tboyle@...> wrote:
                > Dave Winer said
                > > Little-known fact: Most of the videos you see on
                > TV news are many hours if
                > > not days old.
                > >
                > > It's a pure tradeoff. The aha is that for some if
                > not most video, a few
                > > hours makes no difference at all.
                >
                > I fully agree with the goal of caching whenever it
                > can *possibly*
                > be achieved. e.g. music clips or nonurgent news
                > broadcasts.
                >
                > Who could disagree with THAT?
                >
                > Since there are also times when realtime audio or
                > video
                > is needed and desired, it will of course be achieved
                > by some
                > software, regardless of anything we do or say. And
                > those
                > users *will* clog the pipes if nothing is done about
                > it.
                >
                > What I would like to see is some economic signals
                > back to the
                > end user that tell him streaming content costs more,
                > so that
                > the system can be brought to equilibrium, and
                > provide a more
                > accurate allocation of what people really want.
                >
                > If they want to hear ANY music clip immediately
                > regardless of
                > whether it's in the cache, then, they are going to
                > get it! The
                > challenge for decentrallization workgroup is to find
                > a way to
                > provide the same content cheaper faster via cache or
                > edge
                > routing, etc. And to politically and economically
                > isolate the
                > streaming pigs so they don't consume the whole
                > commons without
                > paying for it, one way or another.
                >
                > IN traffic management this has never been resolved
                > and in Seattle
                > for instance we've decided for some decades now, to
                > let the
                > highways fill up with cars and let the delays
                > themselves provide
                > the message. That is not an optimal way of
                > everybody getting
                > what they need.
                >
                > In conclusion I urge developers of decentrallized
                > routing and
                > communication systems to build in a micro general
                > ledger into
                > the router so that it can conduct itself like a
                > business. Its
                > GL rows would charge for resources and also maintain
                > balances,
                > just as Mojonation does.
                >
                > Why use a GL structure? Because it interfaces with
                > real business
                > systems transparently, and, makes every node a
                > general purpose
                > business transaction platform. This enables the
                > exchange and
                > aggregation of balance sheet balances such as
                > payables and
                > receivables, as rows in a table, in a database like
                > PostgresQL.
                > This uncouples, finally, the decision to settle/pay
                > them from
                > the choice of a settlement provider. All of today's
                > payment
                > and settlment schemes are hardwired to a particular
                > bank (duh).
                >
                > Thus, the byproduct of these little GL structures is
                > to enable
                > individuals and small businesses to buy, sell, and
                > send and receive
                > payments over the network outside of banks. I
                > posted a detailed
                > example of how ledger settlement can work on the
                > tipster list
                > last week, after meeting with Jeff Kandt,
                > http://tipster.weblogs.com/discuss
                >
                > TOdd

                =====
                Oliver Willis
                owillis@...

                __________________________________________________
                Do You Yahoo!?
                Yahoo! Photos - Share your holiday photos online!
                http://photos.yahoo.com/
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.