RE: [decentralization] p2p vs the browser
> My question would be: Will media-intensive, advertising-driven businessmodels like Joost and Spotify
> (similar to Joost, but for music) prevail in the near future or willbrowser-based
> centralized services make for too hard competition (tv-links.co.uk,last.fm, etc)?
You know, browsers can use non-centralized transports - it's just that
nobody has made it easy yet.
(Uh, I just read more of what you wrote & this is where you are going...)
> and the service with the least intrusive ads wins the users in the longrun, right?
I think the service with the most /helpful/ ads wins the users in the long
run. One way to think of ads are a form of advanced research - unfortunately
today's ads aren't that advanced. These future helpful ads may become
indistinguishable from 'intelligent agents' that do more than just show
stuff - they could help initiate actions.
See something Greg Linden wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> [mailto:email@example.com] On Behalf Of ericwahlforss
> Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2007 1:18 PM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Subject: [decentralization] p2p vs the browser
> Very interesting discussion here, and many great comments on p2p.
> My question would be: Will media-intensive,
> advertising-driven business models like Joost and Spotify
> (similar to Joost, but for
> music) prevail in the near future or will browser-based
> centralized services make for too hard competition
> (tv-links.co.uk, last.fm, etc)?
> Bandwidth is still not very cheap when you push 100:s of
> TB:s/day -- and the service with the least intrusive ads wins
> the users in the long run, right? So from an economics
> standpoint--disregarding the fact that people have to dl
> specific app:s rather than simply use the browser, etc--p2p
> wins in these cases, no?
> From a UI point of view however, technologies like Flash
> (latest) and Silverlight provide all components necessary to
> replicate the UI:s of the above-mentioned p2p services
> (full-screen mode is the latest addition). The only thing
> they can't do is save bandwidth costs through p2p-caching. if
> they could, p2p would probably be used *a lot* more than it is today.
> So wouldn't a solution here be to have a generalized p2p
> caching layer in the browser (with proper domain-based
> privacy levels, etc)? It could be based on bittorrent or a
> similar technology, but would have to be further abstracted
> and transparent in order to be user-friendly enough to
> compete wt existing services. Maybe the WHAT-WG and/or W3C is
> already thinking about this? It would certainly help the
> Or will CDN:s be able to further lower prices by pushing
> their architectures in some new way? The same goes for
> storage (S3 is setting a new standard here, but is still centralized).
> So the second question is then: Isn't the "failure" of p2p
> adoption really more a question of the browser increasingly
> becoming the dominant UI paradigm vs. the older, separate
> apps/desktop paradigm--in effect preventing a higher use of
> Announce or discover P2P conferences on the P2P Conference
> Wiki at
> Yahoo! Groups Links