Basically with things like Gnutilla and Bit Torrent the cost is pushed out to the clients ISP's and spread around. But these video blogs are being served from some sort of CDN (Content Delivery Network, what I used to call Distributed Servers). They are either paying for bandwidth at some incredable expense to the company or have planned from day 1 to get so much traffic to be able to force all the major backbones to PEER with them and this would basically give them free Bandwidth. Peering is only an option for the very largest players where there is so much user Demand that is starts to cost a large ISP more money to not host your content or provide a free conntection to you then to not do that. This is the equavalent of a cable company charing small player to put of TV shows, but fot HBO the have to provide it or loose customers.
From a Dec 15, 05 press release: "YouTube already is serving more than 3 million videos, adding 8,000 video uploads and transferring 16 terabytes of data. " From Feb 14, 06 "is now receiving more than 20,000 uploads per day." and from About YouTube "With over 25 million videos served up daily " and "YouTube is currently serving over 45 terabytes of video per day"
I think the cars should be smart enough to negotiate some protocol on there own to cross an intersection. Maybe a automatic digital cost bidding process during high congestion periods? How about that? The Rich can afford to cruse through intersections.
Hey I kinda like that. Your on board computers can have a high speed bidding war to cross an intersection so only if two billionaires come to an intersection will they collide.
Unless you have been a hacker and seen the scope of the stuff that can go down, you'd never know how high the odds are that these machines are either rigged or hacked.
Just stop and think for a moment that in 5 minutes any freshly installed windows box put on the internet without a firewall will be infected with a worm.
Now we are going to trust our elections with similar technology. A technology that is secret and is not open to peer review, verification, or questioning? Doesn't matter if the conspiracy theory's are real or not, the lack of concern for such scenarios is.
Just read http://techdirt.com/articles/20080317/185348564.shtml
if you need any red flags raised.
Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by John Sokol.
He also invented Facetime!
If you notice in the image, he's having a video conference.
It's amazing how close Arthur C. Clarke called it.
The computer is a cloud made from blade servers, too.
I wrote about this in March of 2006
See my article: Exploring YouTube
One thing they will all hit very quickly is the cost of bandwidth as explained in my paper Economics of Video and the Internet. April 2003.
Basically with things like Gnutilla and Bit Torrent the cost is pushed out to the clients ISP's and spread around. But these video blogs are being served from some sort of CDN (Content Delivery Network, what I used to call Distributed Servers). They are either paying for bandwidth at some incredable expense to the company or have planned from day 1 to get so much traffic to be able to force all the major backbones to PEER with them and this would basically give them free Bandwidth. Peering is only an option for the very largest players where there is so much user Demand that is starts to cost a large ISP more money to not host your content or provide a free conntection to you then to not do that. This is the equavalent of a cable company charing small player to put of TV shows, but fot HBO the have to provide it or loose customers.
From a Dec 15, 05 press release: "YouTube already is serving more than 3 million videos, adding 8,000 video uploads and transferring 16 terabytes of data. " From Feb 14, 06 "is now receiving more than 20,000 uploads per day." and from About YouTube "With over 25 million videos served up daily " and "YouTube is currently serving over 45 terabytes of video per day"
Eliminate the lights altogether.
That's what I am talking about.
I think the cars should be smart enough to negotiate some protocol on there own to cross an intersection. Maybe a automatic digital cost bidding process during high congestion periods? How about that? The Rich can afford to cruse through intersections.
Hey I kinda like that. Your on board computers can have a high speed bidding war to cross an intersection so only if two billionaires come to an intersection will they collide.
Unless you've hacked.
Unless you have been a hacker and seen the scope of the stuff that can go down, you'd never know how high the odds are that these machines are either rigged or hacked.
Just stop and think for a moment that in 5 minutes any freshly installed windows box put on the internet without a firewall will be infected with a worm.
Now we are going to trust our elections with similar technology. A technology that is secret and is not open to peer review, verification, or questioning? Doesn't matter if the conspiracy theory's are real or not, the lack of concern for such scenarios is.
Just read http://techdirt.com/articles/20080317/185348564.shtml
if you need any red flags raised.
Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it.