Sen. Stevens and Internet Tubes

Nominated for Cartoon of the month. The YouTube remix … and the powerpoint  (tip).
It even made the MSM; this is from Kansas City. It’s in the NYT as well.

"The Internet is not something you just dump something on. It’s not a
truck. It’s a series of tubes," Stevens said during a June 28 committee
session."

"And if you don’t understand, those tubes can be filled. And if they
are filled, when you put your message in, it gets in line and it’s
going to be delayed by anyone that puts into that tube enormous amounts
of material, enormous amounts of material."

Finally, the accompanying, unedited, undoctored mp3.

 

OH, this is Sen. Ted Stevens (AK-R), as he shares an 11 minute stream of consciousness diatribe on the internet during markup on the net neutrality amendment. Note: he is one of the most powerful Congressmen in Washington. Scary.

Edwards “Streams” Via BitTorrent

We’ve taught a class in streaming media this summer — but we
mustn’t forget a powerful method of sharing video: peer-to-peer (P2P)
networks.

One of the most successful is BitTorrent. Dave Winer reports today that former Sen. John Edwards is using BitTorrent to distribute campaign videos. He says this is a big deal.

They are using MoveDigital as their service/host. There’s a list of benefits
on their ‘how to’ page — one of these is "pay as you go" for
bandwidth. Plus, your visitors can help pay for bandwidth, in very
small increments (cents, not dollars). Of course, there’s RSS, so your
viewers know when you’ve added files. And a lot of other things (ease
of use being a biggie).

Right now, there are four movies and four
licenses — the largest is 26mb. One suggestion off the bat: they need
to name their files with human-readable names, if the file name is the
only descriptor for the download!

Clicking on the "download" link
does not start the BitTorrent version — for that, you need to click
the P2P link. And to have a BT application installed. My straight
download (the .mov) was much faster than the BT download (unlike Dave’s
experience, I’m still "waiting").

From the BitTorrent website:

Bram
wanted to enable effective swarming distribution – - transferring
massive files from server to client with the efficiency of peer-to-peer
- – reliably, quickly and efficiently. By 2003, BitTorrent had sparked
a global revolution in file distribution on the web. Today, we are
providing millions of users worldwide with a valuable platform to
publish, search and download popular digital content.

I’ve created an account (it’s painless!) and will test the interface
next week. One month free — basic account $10/year. (Yes, you read
that right – per YEAR.)

Here’s the direct link to the minimum wage video (mov).

Sharing Space, Not Content

Newsweek reports that couples are watching streaming video or iTunes "TV" while sharing "space" with their partner, who is watching "real" TV. Not so different from our house, where Mike watches TV while I share the sofa, Powebook on lap.

ABC is in the midst of scrutinizing data from a two-month-long
streaming test that ended in June. NBC just completed "Today’s Media
Consumer: Attitude, Behaviors and Trends," a survey of 1,000 digital
consumers conducted from March through April. And countless independent
researchers are hawking reams of fresh data. All are looking for clues
to crafting strategies for growth and profits in the new age of
television-to-go…

Continue reading

And a note on broadband

The San Jose Mercury News, February this year, asserts:

  • Two-thirds of the 108 million US households have a computer connected to the Internet (71 million)
  • Two-thirds of those have broadband (48 million – 44.4% of all US HH)
  • Approximately
    three-fourths of Americans (adults?) are online at either home or work
    … leaving 25% not connected (by choice). The author says 90%
    penetration is needed for a technology to be considered "ubiquitous."

Broadband
access in the US differs from most of the rest of the world (Canada
being the exception) — most of us use cable and the rest of the world,
DSL. December 2005 data: the US ranks 12th in broadband subscribers per 100 inhabitants — 6.5 with DSL and 9.0 with cable … 1.3 "other" for a total of 16.8 or 49 million subscribers.

Now
– let’s compare this with those industry numbers from SJMN. OECD data
say "49 million subscribers" and industry data say "48 million
households." If the terms are equivalent, then this looks pretty sound.
But the math makes it look like OECD is talking about people
(inhabitants) – which brings this far fewer than 48 million households.
(Headache!)

Continue reading

The Race Is On

The Sundance Channel has joined the rush to distribute online, partnering with Google Video, not iTunes. “The deal allows consumers to download their choice of 18 of the network’s movie titles at $3.99 for a 24-hour rental or $9.99 to own. Three of the Sundance Channel’s original series are available only for purchase starting at $1.99 an episode.”

Last month, AppleInsider reported that iTunes should be serving full-feature films by the year’s end. It already provides access to shows from 32 channels — including ABC, CBS, NBC and FOX.

I bought a Daily Show With Jon Stewart episode this week (because I’d lost my own recording on ReplayTV). Quality was clearly not up to my own recording — frame rate was too slow, action and audio were often out of sync. However, it was good enough for my purpose — but not worth more than the $1.99 that I paid. (And fortunately, they do strip commercials.)

As content providers rush to serve this nascent market, it behooves us all to watch what Congress is doing to ensure that content zeros-and-ones have no artificially imposed constraints or tolls.

Cable companies and telecos are pushing Congress to give them the freedom to charge Google or Apple or Amazon an additional fee — beyond what they already pay for traffic — to ensure that their content is promptly delivered to your computer. Cable and telecos want to be able to prioritize content that they own — or charge other firms a fee to prioritize their content over their competitors. Their proposal is the antithesis of net neutrality, which is a prohibition on network discrimination.

Behavior like this is explicitly prohibited in telecommunications. Verizon can’t treat phone calls from Qwest or Sprint any differently than it treats its own.

Of course, companies don’t want to behave this way! They’d love to discriminate so that they could seek network effects (use this behavior to grab a larger market share). The loser in that case would be you and me, because we’d eventually have even less competition than we have now. [Aside: the telecos already have us in a lock with wireless phones ... we can only use the phone that they've picked for their network. It ain't this way in the rest of the world.]

Because we have next-to-zero competition in the broadband market, it’s even more imperative that those who provide our high-speed access should not be allowed to institute additional tolls. Of the estimated 35 million customers with broadband, only 1 percent has a choice of broadband provider. [Choice = competition.]

Learn more about this issue at SaveTheInternet. Then call or write (on paper!) your Congressman. Don’t e-mail; don’t use a webform (except to add to the numbers … SaveTheInternet has a million signators, but it’s no match for PAC money.) Electronic communication with Congress has less impact than phone or mail (because these two take more energy and show commitment).

Technorati Profile
Technorati tags: ,
gada.be tags: Net Neutrality, Politics