On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 8:25 PM, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
On Sun, May 4, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Charles N Wyble <charles@thefnf.org> wrote:
On 4/27/2014 3:30 PM, John Levine wrote:
In a non-stupid world, the cable companies would do video on demand through some combination of content caches at the head end or, for popular stuff, encrypted midnight downloads to your DVR, and the cablecos would split the revenue with content backends like Netflix.
So why hasn't someone like he or cogent done this?
Because 30 years later the big content owners still hate VCRs. Streaming doesn't bother them so much but they avail themselves of every opportunity to say no to the end-user recorded content.
This is hardly a surprise... A century later they still hate the first sale doctrine too and avail themselves of every opportunity to undermine it.
This UKNOF presentation gives another reason - the distribution of demand for content is such that "content bundling", i.e. pro-active push of content to users' machines based on predicted demand, doesn't provide much benefit compared to "historical cache", i.e. caching in the usual sense. https://indico.uknof.org.uk/materialDisplay.py?contribId=20&materialId=slides&confId=30
Regards, Bill Herrin
-- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004