On Mon, Oct 11, 2021 at 10:09 AM Michael Thomas <mike@mtcc.com> wrote:
On 10/11/21 12:49 AM, Matthew Petach wrote:
Instead of a 4K stream, drop it to 480 or 240; the eyeball network should be happy at the reduced strain the resulting stream puts on their network.
As a consumer paying for my 4k stream, I know who I'm calling when it drops to 480 and it ain't Netflix. The eyeballs are most definitely not happy.
Mike
I apologize for that. I was tired after two back-to-back days of board meetings, and I missed putting a clear sarcasm marker on that last line about "the eyeball networks should be happy at the reduced strain..." :( There should have been a clear ;-P at the end of the line to make it unmistakeable I was poking a very sharp stick at the eyeball networks and what it takes to actually make them happy. ^_^; Yes--the end consumers really shouldn't be the hostage in this battle, being moved about the chess board by either side, whether by their ISP trying to squeeze more money out of the content side, or by the content side trying to force more complaints into the service desk of the ISP. I mean, imagine this scenario for any other utility. Pacific Gas and Electric calling up Hoover Dam to say "hey, we're going to need to charge you some additional money this month." Hoover Dam: "...what?" PGE: "well, you're sending a lot more electricity to our customers this month, and we're going to have to upgrade our power lines to handle it; and since you're the one sending the electricity, you should pay for part of the costs." Hoover Dam: "...we're only sending enough electricity to meet the demands YOUR customers are placing on the grid. If they want to run their air conditioners all summer long, you need to charge them enough to cover your costs for it." Drat. My analogy just ran out, because I realize the dollars already flow the other way, and the hydroelectric station would just laugh at PG&E and threaten to raise the cost of the electricity simply for having to listen to their BS. ^_^; You can run the same scenario with your municipal water company, and imagine how it would play out if the municipality that put the pipes in to every home tried to charge the water supplier more because homes were taking longer showers. It's just such a fundamentally broken model, we laugh at it in any other industry. :( Again, I'm sorry for being tired and missing the explicit sarcasm indicator--not just for you, but for others who also responded to that paragraph. ^_^; Thanks! Matt