Even Cracked realizes this:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-internet-access-in-america-disaster
That can't be good.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC
On Jun 9, 2011, at 8:43 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> Even Cracked realizes this:
>
> http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-internet-access-in-america-disaster
I would describe this as "local market failure". It's common even in highly
populated areas, not just rural ones here in the US.
What I
Once upon a time, Jared Mauch said:
> On Jun 9, 2011, at 8:43 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> > Even Cracked realizes this:
> >
> > http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-internet-access-in-america-disaster
>
> I would describe this as "local market failure". It's common even in highly
> populated a
I think the point is the ubiquity of access isn't what it should be.
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Jared Mauch said:
> > On Jun 9, 2011, at 8:43 PM, Jay Ashworth wrote:
> > > Even Cracked realizes this:
> > >
> > >
> http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reason
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:47, Chris Adams wrote:
> I'd go so far as to say "user failure". If I wanted cable TV
> (especially if I needed it at home as part of my job), I wouldn't
> buy/rent/lease/whatever a home without checking that cable TV is
> available at that location.
Yeah, he messed up
Please consider the environment before printing e-mail
-Original Message-
From: Kyle Creyts [mailto:kyle.cre...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, June 10, 2011 8:01 AM
To: Chris Adams; NANOG
Subject: Re: Yup; the Internet is screwed up.
I think the point is the ubiquity of acce
On Jun 10, 2011, at 10:01 AM, Kyle Creyts wrote:
> I think the point is the ubiquity of access isn't what it should be.
I think there were several good points made in the article.
1) Data caps and how they impact software updates (or downloads) - hughesnet
was mentioned but ..
Looking to the
On Jun 10, 2011, at 10:04 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 09:47, Chris Adams wrote:
>> I'd go so far as to say "user failure". If I wanted cable TV
>> (especially if I needed it at home as part of my job), I wouldn't
>> buy/rent/lease/whatever a home without checking that cable
Funny, how in the title refers to the Internet globally when the article is
specific about the USA.
I live in europe and we have at home 100Mbps . Mid sized city of 500k
people. Some ISPs even spread WiFi across town so that subscribers can have
internet access outside their homes.
On Fri, Jun 10
On Jun 10, 2011, at 10:06 AM, Ricardo Ferreira wrote:
> I live in europe and we have at home 100Mbps . Mid sized city of 500k
> people. Some ISPs even spread WiFi across town so that subscribers can have
> internet access outside their homes.
Cablevision does that somewhat.
Greg
Jay Ashworth wrote:
Even Cracked realizes this:
http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-internet-access-in-america-disaster
That can't be good.
"up to 10 percent of the country can't even get basic broadband"
I think I saw much larger numbers a few years ago when I read some hype
stories
On Jun 10, 2011, at 7:43 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Jay Ashworth wrote:
>> Even Cracked realizes this:
>> http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-internet-access-in-america-disaster
>> That can't be good.
>
>
>
> "up to 10 percent of the country can't even get basic broadband"
>
> I think I
I love how articles like this seem to convienently ignore the fact that the
US is a BIG COUNTRY, and countries like Korea and Japan are very small
countries comparitively. I haven't done any research to backup the
following claim, but I suspect that the Russian Federation's internet
probably isn't
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 16:43:39 PDT, Jeroen van Aart said:
> Jay Ashworth wrote:
> > Even Cracked realizes this:
> >
> > http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-reasons-internet-access-in-america-disaster
> >
> > That can't be good.
>
>
>
> "up to 10 percent of the country can't even get basic broadband"
valdis.kletni...@vt.edu wrote:
So the *actual* numbers are much worse than the FCC numbers.
Be that as it may, when I moved to the States I had to give up DSL back
in the Netherlands. But since I got flat rate dialup in return in the
USA it wasn't such a big deal, for me the internet worked j
> 2) Last mile is expensive to install and hard to justify for people. This
is because of a long history of universal service and
subsidization/regulation.
Not only that, it makes it even worse when you hear firsthand accounts of
"yea, this customer's DSL is screwed because at&t was too cheap to
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011 17:59:38 PDT, Jeroen van Aart said:
> Maybe flat rate local phone calls is one of the reasons broadband lags
> behind here. Because your bills actually increase with broadband. From a
> mere $10 to something like $30 and up per month. That's a considerable
> difference for ma
> (Biggest single issue? Probably that some companies got really big
> incentives a
> number of years ago to deploy broadband, and were allowed to pocket the
> money
> without actually deploying. Will take quite a bit to reverse *that*
> fiasco...)
>
>
It sounds, Valdis, like you've been listening
On 6/10/2011 7:43 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> I wonder, what's wrong with dialup through ISDN? You get speed that is
> about the same as low end broadband I'd say. And I think it'd be
> available at these locations where DSL is not.
Well, it "was" available. I had one ~15 years ago, and a Cisco
I had dual ISDN from nynex in the 90s. 128k woohoo! It cost me $500+/mth.
j
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 9:59 PM, Jeff Kell wrote:
> On 6/10/2011 7:43 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> > I wonder, what's wrong with dialup through ISDN? You get speed that is
> > about the same as low end broadband I'd say
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 21:11, Joly MacFie wrote:
> I had dual ISDN from nynex in the 90s. 128k woohoo! It cost me $500+/mth.
>
> j
>
I still have 128k ISDN in one site in rural TN, and it's the POP for my
WISP! I'd spring for a whopping 256k, but I can't justify the cost. Been
running on my rem
Once upon a time, Jeroen van Aart said:
> I wonder, what's wrong with dialup through ISDN? You get speed that is
> about the same as low end broadband I'd say. And I think it'd be
> available at these locations where DSL is not.
For the most part, it probably isn't, especially now. Telco front
Ricardo Ferreira wrote:
Funny, how in the title refers to the Internet globally when the article is
specific about the USA.
I live in europe and we have at home 100Mbps . Mid sized city of 500k
people. Some ISPs even spread WiFi across town so that subscribers can have
internet access outside th
> Though it's nice to have why would one *need* 100 Mbps at home?
some of us try to get work done from home. and anyone who has worked
and/or lived in a first world country thinks american 'broadband' speeds
are a joke, even for a home network.
randy
> some of us try to get work done from home. and anyone who has worked
> and/or lived in a first world country thinks american 'broadband' speeds
> are a joke, even for a home network.
amen
-J
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 02:34:10AM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Ricardo Ferreira wrote:
> >Funny, how in the title refers to the Internet globally when the article is
> >specific about the USA.
> >
> >I live in europe and we have at home 100Mbps . Mid sized city of 500k
> >people. Some ISPs even
On 11/06/2011 9:34 p.m., Jeroen van Aart wrote:
I don't regard simultaneously streaming 6 channels of TV and downloading
the latest movie torrent in 2 minutes as a basic necessity, let alone
essential.
100/40 isn't about 6 channels of TV and even less about torrents.
It's about BIR not CIR.
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 02:34:10AM -0700, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Though it's nice to have why would one *need* 100 Mbps at home? I
Residential broadband is asymmetric, so it's typically more like
6/100 MBit/s, though VDSL and FTTH are also making (slow) progress.
Even with that slow upstream
On Jun 11, 2011, at 1:54 AM, Chris Adams wrote:
> IIRC in the several years I
> had ISDN service, my bill was never exactly the same amount two
> consecutive months (and I never had any usage charges, so it wasn't
> because of that).
I upgraded several years ago to ISDN at home to move the D<->A
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 05:34, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Ricardo Ferreira wrote:
>
>> Funny, how in the title refers to the Internet globally when the article
>> is
>> specific about the USA.
>>
>> I live in europe and we have at home 100Mbps . Mid sized city of 500k
>> people. Some ISPs even spre
anog.org
Subject: Re: Yup; the Internet is screwed up.
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 05:34, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Ricardo Ferreira wrote:
>
>> Funny, how in the title refers to the Internet globally when the article
>> is
>> specific about the USA.
>>
>> I live
> I don't regard simultaneously streaming 6 channels of TV and downloading
> the latest movie torrent in 2 minutes as a basic necessity, let alone
> essential.
Ten years ago, most people would have been shocked at the idea of a
cell phone that had a touchscreen, a 600MHz CPU, 16GB flash, and the
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 05:34, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Though it's nice to have why would one *need* 100 Mbps at home?
The essential point is: if people have the bandwidth, they fill it,
sometimes with uses we haven't dreamed up yet. In the USA at least,
creativity and productivity are _often_
>Also, the telcos generally made getting a BRI difficult to impossible.
>An early string of Dilbert cartoons covered Dilbert's attempts to get
>ISDN at his house, and IIRC they were based on Scott Adams' real-life
>attempts (and this was either when or shortly after he worked for the
>phone company
On Jun 11, 2011, at 2:34 AM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Though it's nice to have why would one *need* 100 Mbps at home?
"640K ought to be enough for anybody" -- Bill Gates
Regards,
-drc
On Jun 11, 2011, at 5:34 10AM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Ricardo Ferreira wrote:
>> Funny, how in the title refers to the Internet globally when the article is
>> specific about the USA.
>> I live in europe and we have at home 100Mbps . Mid sized city of 500k
>> people. Some ISPs even spread WiFi
Randy Bush wrote:
some of us try to get work done from home. and anyone who has worked
and/or lived in a first world country thinks american 'broadband' speeds
are a joke, even for a home network.
I understand, but I was referring to the average home internet
connection. But even for work 100
Matthew Palmer wrote:
Well, you probably live in a premises with only a couple of people. A
household with the "standard" 2.3 kids might need to stream 4.3 TV channels,
Right, but now you're talking about the luxury aspect of it. And then
all bets are off. The necessity would already be fulfi
Don Gould wrote:
100/40 isn't about 6 channels of TV and even less about torrents.
It's about BIR not CIR.
It's about dropping my HD video recorder, with 2 hours of random video
recorded at todays 'family birthday party', on its 'hot shoe' and it
All these new gadgets will drive the need fo
Eugen Leitl wrote:
It definitely reduces need for moving human bodies in metal boxes
back and forth, and reduces road wear and carbon dioxide emissions.
I think a world of telecommuting employees is a utopia that will not be
reached in my lifetime. Most companies have proven to be unwilling to
On Jun 11, 2011, at 6:37 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Eugen Leitl wrote:
>> It definitely reduces need for moving human bodies in metal boxes
>> back and forth, and reduces road wear and carbon dioxide emissions.
>
> I think a world of telecommuting employees is a utopia that will not be
> reac
On Jun 11, 2011, at 19:00, TR Shaw wrote:
> I'm not sure where this thread is going but rural america and rural canada
> are rolling their own broadband connectivity in places.
This is my eventual goal where I'm moving. (Oswego Co., NY).
I'm well aware that I'm moving outside of "broadband-lan
> But this is all luxury, it's not the fulfillment of a basic need and
> even a right (as proclaimed by the UN). It's going above and beyond
> that, which is fine, but it's not *needed* in the sense of survival and
> being able to further yourself in life and career.
A smartphone may be a luxur
On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
I wonder, what's wrong with dialup through ISDN? You get speed that is about
the same as low end broadband I'd say. And I think it'd be available at these
locations where DSL is not.
No you don't. BRI with 2 B channels bonded is 128kbit/s. Does an
- Original Message -
> From: "Jay Murphy, DOH"
> The umbra of it all. We have jobs though.
Not all of us.
Cheers,
-- jra
--
Jay R. Ashworth Baylink j...@baylink.com
Designer The Things I Think RFC 2100
Ash
- Original Message -
> From: "Jared Mauch"
> On Jun 10, 2011, at 10:01 AM, Kyle Creyts wrote:
> > I think the point is the ubiquity of access isn't what it should be.
>
> I think there were several good points made in the article.
>
> 1) Data caps and how they impact software updates (o
- Original Message -
> From: "Jared Mauch"
> The current set of iphone/ipad firmware updates are about 700mb per
> device. Not counting the latest combo updater (or incremental) for
> MacOS. (Hopefully with the 5.0 software announced they will do OTA
> updates on a different APN that does
On 6/11/2011 4:29 PM, Christopher Pilkington wrote:
On Jun 11, 2011, at 19:00, TR Shaw wrote:
I'm not sure where this thread is going but rural america and rural canada are
rolling their own broadband connectivity in places.
This is my eventual goal where I'm moving. (Oswego Co., NY).
I'm w
- Original Message -
> From: "Valdis Kletnieks"
> (Biggest single issue? Probably that some companies got really big incentives
> a
> number of years ago to deploy broadband, and were allowed to pocket the money
> without actually deploying. Will take quite a bit to reverse *that*
> fias
- Original Message -
> From: "Jeroen van Aart"
> Though it's nice to have why would one *need* 100 Mbps at home?
(I can't imagine that no one's gone here yet...)
Jeroen: does your computer have more than 640KB of RAM?
Cheers,
-- jr 'or your cellphone? Watch?' a
--
Jay R. Ashworth
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 11, 2011, at 15:16, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Randy Bush wrote:
>> some of us try to get work done from home. and anyone who has worked
>> and/or lived in a first world country thinks american 'broadband' speeds
>> are a joke, even for a home network.
>
> I understand
>
>
> Also remember there are a lot of moves afoot to *make it illegal* for
> cities
> and other municipalities to deploy last-mile fiber, as we discussed a
> couple
> weeks ago. Who's responsible for most of that?
>
> Verizon.
>
> Can you spell FiOS?
>
> My assertion's been that they need it to s
On 12/06/2011 1:02 p.m., Owen DeLong wrote:
On Jun 11, 2011, at 15:16, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
Randy Bush wrote:
some of us try to get work done from home. and anyone who has worked
and/or lived in a first world country thinks american 'broadband' speeds
are a joke, even for a home network.
100mbit is not luxury, it's something my business needs all it's
customers to have to drive more uptake of my services.
My customers already have 10/1 today. Now I need them to have 100/40 so
they have a reason to buy other CPE that in turn drives my business.
See: http://home.bowenvale.co.
On Jun 11, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Roy wrote:
> On 6/11/2011 4:29 PM, Christopher Pilkington wrote:
>> Options seem to be limited to HughesNet and dial for the moment, but
>> things may change if I put a tower on the property. HughesNet seems to
>> relax it's bandwidth cap between 2am and 7am, which is
On 6/12/11 1:04 PM, Christopher J. Pilkington wrote:
On Jun 11, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Roy wrote:
On 6/11/2011 4:29 PM, Christopher Pilkington wrote:
Options seem to be limited to HughesNet and dial for the moment, but
things may change if I put a tower on the property. HughesNet seems to
relax it'
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:04:46AM -0600, Christopher J. Pilkington wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Roy wrote:
>
> > On 6/11/2011 4:29 PM, Christopher Pilkington wrote:
> >> Options seem to be limited to HughesNet and dial for the moment, but
> >> things may change if I put a tower on the pr
; nanog@nanog.org
Subject: Re: Yup; the Internet is screwed up.
On 6/12/11 1:04 PM, Christopher J. Pilkington wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Roy wrote:
>
>> On 6/11/2011 4:29 PM, Christopher Pilkington wrote:
>>> Options seem to be limited to HughesNet and dial for the mo
On June 11, 2011 at 20:53 jle...@lewis.org (Jon Lewis) wrote:
>
> Have you heard the joke...ISDN = I Still Don't kNow? For whatever reason,
> BRI service is something the US telcos apparently never really wanted to
> sell...perhaps because it might have cut into their T1 business.
FWIW,
option.
When I called AT&T to order the ISDN line years ago, their answer was - Huh,
What, Do we sell that.
-Original Message-
From: Barry Shein [mailto:b...@world.std.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2011 1:03 PM
To: Jon Lewis
Cc: NANOG list
Subject: Re: Yup; the Internet is screwed up.
On
lto:b...@world.std.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 12, 2011 1:03 PM
> To: Jon Lewis
> Cc: NANOG list
> Subject: Re: Yup; the Internet is screwed up.
>
>
> On June 11, 2011 at 20:53 jle...@lewis.org (Jon Lewis) wrote:
>>
>> Have you heard the joke...ISDN = I Still Don'
On 6/10/2011 7:04 AM, Scott Brim wrote:
The
Internet is now more important than electricity or water --
This being a silly Sunday, I'm rolling that around on my tongue and savoring it
a bit.
While the image of a desiccated user, still typing away, is appealing -- but
possibly not all t
Once upon a time, Barry Shein said:
> The attraction of DSL was, among other things, that it was nailed down
> to one and only one service provider, you couldn't just "dial" some
> other provider like with ISDN.
When BellSouth switched their DSL from PVC-per-customer to PPPoE, it was
set up with
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 01:16, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Randy Bush wrote:
>>
>> some of us try to get work done from home. and anyone who has worked
>> and/or lived in a first world country thinks american 'broadband' speeds
>> are a joke, even for a home network.
>
> I understand, but I was refe
Once upon a time, Eugeniu Patrascu said:
> I need 100Mbs at home because I want to see a streamed movie NOW, not
> in a month because someone considers broadband a luxury :)
> Pretty simple usage scenario I might say.
The top profile for Blu-Ray is 36 megabits per second, and that is
not used on
>When BellSouth switched their DSL from PVC-per-customer to PPPoE
I remember having to compress the config due to static pvc config on many of
7204/6 kit, the switch made it much more intuitive to manage.
--
m
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 2:31 PM, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Barry Shein
- Original Message -
> From: "Chris Adams"
> The top profile for Blu-Ray is 36 megabits per second, and that is
> not used on most titles. Over-the-air HDTV is 19 megabits or less.
> Cable HD channels are often only 12-15 megabits per second.
Chris glances off, but doesn't quite say, tha
Once upon a time, Jay Ashworth said:
> - Original Message -
> > From: "Chris Adams"
> > The top profile for Blu-Ray is 36 megabits per second, and that is
> > not used on most titles. Over-the-air HDTV is 19 megabits or less.
> > Cable HD channels are often only 12-15 megabits per second.
dcroc...@bbiw.net wrote:
> While the image of a desiccated user, still typing away, is appealing --
> but possibly not all that remarkable, given recent reports of Internet
> addiction -- what's especially tasty is the idea of having an Internet
> connection that works without electricity...
Abou
- Original Message -
> From: "Chris Adams"
> Well, the OTA providers are doing it to the network feeds first, so I
> don't see focusing on the cable providers doing it to the OTA providers
> as the sole source of quality issues. The OTA providers also reencode
> to add bugs, weather/break
On 6/12/11 2:22 AM, Don Gould wrote:
> 100mbit is not luxury, it's something my business needs all it's
> customers to have to drive more uptake of my services.
>
> My customers already have 10/1 today. Now I need them to have 100/40 so
> they have a reason to buy other CPE that in turn drives my
Once upon a time, Jay Ashworth said:
> TTBOMK, no, the affils don't actually reencode the whole feed; there are
> boxes these days that can insert your bug without trashing the rest of
> the stream -- and I think their contract with the network *requires* them
> to run their primary streams as-h
On Jun 12, 2011, at 10:04 AM, Christopher J. Pilkington wrote:
> On Jun 11, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Roy wrote:
>
>> On 6/11/2011 4:29 PM, Christopher Pilkington wrote:
>>> Options seem to be limited to HughesNet and dial for the moment, but
>>> things may change if I put a tower on the property. Hughe
* 2.5GPON isn't symmetric.
* DSL and cable can be symmetric.
* Business reasons - providers don't want you hosting content at home,
they want you hosting content in their data centers so they can charge
for that space. So when a provider gets a 100/100 from a telco, it uses
90/10 dl to feed it
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 22:48, Chris Adams wrote:
> Once upon a time, Eugeniu Patrascu said:
>> I need 100Mbs at home because I want to see a streamed movie NOW, not
>> in a month because someone considers broadband a luxury :)
>> Pretty simple usage scenario I might say.
>
> The top profile for
Joe Greco wrote:
that things are changing. The number of TV's in a household are going
up. Some can now stream directly to the TV. I have numerous devices
How can it go up even more? I thought every bedroom and living room has
one by now, in the average family house. In my experience famili
Steven Bellovin wrote:
When I was in grad school, the director of the computer center (remember
those) felt that there was no need for 1200 bps modems -- 300 bps was
fine, since no one could read the scrolling output any faster than that
anyway.
Right now, I'm running an rsync job to back up my
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> If you have a 100 mbps broadband connection and your toddlers are slowing
> down your video conference call with your boss by watching the newest Dexter
> (hah!). Then your *need* can be easily satisfied by telling your toddlers to
> cut
On 6/22/11 12:48 PM, "Jeroen van Aart" wrote:
>Steven Bellovin wrote:
>> When I was in grad school, the director of the computer center (remember
>> those) felt that there was no need for 1200 bps modems -- 300 bps was
>> fine, since no one could read the scrolling output any faster than that
>
Landon Stewart wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
If you have a 100 mbps broadband connection and your toddlers are slowing
down your video conference call with your boss by watching the newest Dexter
(hah!). Then your *need* can be easily satisfied by telling your
If you have a 100mbps video connection and you can't handle a video
conference in parallel with Dexter you may have bigger issues. :)
-Hammer-
On 06/22/2011 03:45 PM, Michael Painter wrote:
Landon Stewart wrote:
On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jeroen van Aart
wrote:
If you have a 100 m
Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 3:19 PM
To: Jeroen van Aart; NANOG list
Subject: Re: Yup; the Internet is screwed up.
On 6/22/11 12:48 PM, "Jeroen van Aart" wrote:
>Steven Bellovin wrote:
>> When I was in grad school, the director of the computer center
>> (remember
>&g
> Joe Greco wrote:
> > that things are changing. The number of TV's in a household are going
> > up. Some can now stream directly to the TV. I have numerous devices
>
> How can it go up even more? I thought every bedroom and living room has
> one by now, in the average family house.
That's no
On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 15:52:17 CDT, Erik Amundson said:
> I agree, the whole use of the terms 'need' and 'want' in this conversation
> are ridiculous. It's the Internet. The entire thing isn't a 'need'. It's
> not like life support or something that will cause loss of life if it isn't
> there.
If
On Jun 22, 2011, at 12:30 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Joe Greco wrote:
>> that things are changing. The number of TV's in a household are going
>> up. Some can now stream directly to the TV. I have numerous devices
>
> How can it go up even more? I thought every bedroom and living room has o
life safety systems run over the internet and pstn all the time if you want to
talk about need.
Replace need with business requirement, and you're most of the way there...
This discussion was going on this list 10-15 years ago and the numbers being
squabled over were three orders of magnitude l
> I agree, the whole use of the terms 'need' and 'want' in this conversation are
> ridiculous. It's the Internet. The entire thing isn't a 'need'. It's not
> like life
> support or something that will cause loss of life if it isn't there. The
> only thing
> to even discuss here is 'want'. Ye
> > Be that as it may, I don't think current methods and techniques in use =
> will scale well to fully replace antennas, satellite and cable to =
> provide tv and radio signals.
> >=20
> > (remembering for example the recent discussion about multicast)
> >=20
> They won't, but, that's not what con
> This discussion was going on this list 10-15 years ago and the numbers
> being squabled over were three orders of magnitude lower then they are
> today.
and will be discussed again when the numbers are orders of magnitude
greater than they are now. i think we should keep a pointer to this
threa
Owen DeLong wrote:
If you don't believe that consumer content acquisition is shifting away from
traditional methods towards internet-oriented mechanisms rapidly, you haven't
been paying attention to the bandwidth growth at Netflix as just one example.
Hulu, Youtube, and even the various networ
On 23/06/2011, at 8:07 AM, Joe Greco wrote:
>>> Be that as it may, I don't think current methods and techniques in use =
>> will scale well to fully replace antennas, satellite and cable to =
>> provide tv and radio signals.
>>> =20
>>> (remembering for example the recent discussion about multica
On Jun 22, 2011, at 4:06 PM, Jeroen van Aart wrote:
> Owen DeLong wrote:
>> We're going to have to either find a way to convince consumers to change
>> direction, or, we're going to have to develop new methods and techniques
>> that will scale to fully replace antennas, satellite, and cable bec
On 6/22/11 3:07 PM, Joe Greco wrote:
> Your average person cares a whole lot less about what's crossing their
> Internet connection than they care about whether or not "this works"
> than I do.
>
> I continue to be amazed at the quality of Netflix video coming across
> the wire. Our local cable
Joe Greco wrote:
>> toddlers around and drive to and from work. An SUV in almost all cases
>> is added luxury.
>
My SUV carries seven passengers and allows me to haul gear including
conduit, lumber, ladders, etc. It's actively dangerous to do some of
these things in a sedan.
Hence I said "in a
On 6/22/2011 14:33, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
>> I agree, the whole use of the terms 'need' and 'want' in this conversation
>> are
>> ridiculous. It's the Internet. The entire thing isn't a 'need'. It's not
>> like life
>> support or something that will cause loss of life if it isn't there. The
On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 05:47:18PM -0700, Seth Mattinen wrote:
> On 6/22/2011 14:33, Nathan Eisenberg wrote:
> >> I agree, the whole use of the terms 'need' and 'want' in this conversation
> >> are
> >> ridiculous. It's the Internet. The entire thing isn't a 'need'. It's
> >> not like life
> >
ime ago trying
to backup that data...
The 'cloud' is going to create a strong 'want' (some may choose to call it a
'need') for higher speed brodband, and symmetrical speeds.
- Erik
-Original Message-
From: Seth Mattinen [mailto:se...@rollernet.us]
S
Subject: Re: Yup; the Internet is screwed up.
On Jun 11, 2011, at 7:07 PM, Roy wrote:
> On 6/11/2011 4:29 PM, Christopher Pilkington wrote:
>> Options seem to be limited to HughesNet and dial for the moment, but
>> things may change if I put a tower on the property. HughesNet see
Hi List,
Farmer Don here... Wonder if I could get some help please?
40°46'42.77"N - 73°58'0.83"W
I found a bit of land that I like the look of, with what appears to be a
nice water reserve so my animals can drink and I can water the grass.
Being from New Zealand (a farming community a bit
Yes thank you very much Mr J for the links you provided. :)
We have actually done our research, unlike the gent having a rant in the
initial linked article, and were aware of the abundance of both low cost
2g, 3g and free wifi in the area. Again, as I explained it is one of
the reasons for
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
