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