4 ms·
I really don't like the idea of limited bandwidth or charging per gigabyte because I know ISPs will rip people off and still not upgrade their networks to handl
by bserge 6y ago
I really don't like the idea of limited bandwidth or charging per gigabyte because I know ISPs will rip people off and still not upgrade their networks to handle more traffic.
But I think it would considerably change the Internet landscape. No more listening to the same exact song multiple times on Youtube or Spotify or whatever. No more downloading then deleting the same stuff over and over again. I think about it often, what a massive waste of bandwidth, I don't even know why. It's a lot of electricity used, I guess?
Even though I've got unlimited fiber, I'm looking for some sort of local "Internet cache" solution that would store everything so it would be re-downloaded from my home instead of across the ocean. Would be great for outages, too.
- Hamuko 6y ago>It's a lot of electricity used, I guess? Is it though? How much electricity is used to serve a 1080p Netflix movie several times vs. playing the same movie from a local storage medium? If you asked me, I'd rather burn Bitcoin mining rigs if I wanted to get rid of electricity waste.
- bserge 6y agoYeah, I don't know. I just think about the bandwidth we all use sometimes and it seems extremely wasteful and it bothers me for some reason. I use around ~200-300 GB/month, which I thought was a lot until I saw how much other people use :D
- Hamuko 6y ago>I use around ~200-300 GB/month Pretty sure I use more than that in a day.
- brokenmachine 6y agoThat's a lot of linux isos to download per day. Seriously, why would you use that much data per day for? Even getting full blu-rays you wouldn't be able to watch that many.
- Hamuko 6y agoIt's more up than down.
- brokenmachine 6y agoBless you, good sir.
- carlhjerpe 6y agoA couple years ago I participated in a private tracker and wanted to get a good ratio, I uploaded constantly at about 95Mbps 95/8 = 11.875 (Mbit to MByte) 11.875 * 3600 = 42750 (MByte/s to MByte/h) 42750 / 1000 = 42.750 (MByte/g to GByte/h) 42.750 * 24 = 1026 (GByte/h to GByte/d) 1026 / 1000 = 1.026 (GByte/d to TByte/d) In a two month period I uploaded about 50TB according to the tracker so my calculations seem about right. It's easy to reach these numbers in a country where net neutrality is a thing.
- withinboredom 6y agoI was once working on some automation stuff once. I did, in fact, download 4tb worth of (the exact same) linux ISO in a day. From my house. Luckily it was over fiber and through a corporate VPN and I barely noticed it. But I was shocked when I saw the usage on my router later that month.
- chii 6y ago> I'd rather burn Bitcoin mining rigs that's because you benefit from it. You're not currently paying the cost of that 1080p stream - netflix (and the ISP/peering networks) are paying. Netflix recoups the cost from your subscription, and the ISP/peering arrangement is mostly cost neutral to them (save for a small amount i presume). But it's still not "free".
- wmf 6y agoWait until you hear how much CPU time and RAM is being wasted...
- bserge 6y agoIt's actually the reverse that bothers me in that case! I have more RAM and CPU time than I can possibly use :D Unless that's what you meant...
- Bnshsysjab 6y agoYeah but your hardware requirements are driven by software bloat.
- Red_Leaves_Flyy 6y agoI think what they're getting is how bloated software has become. Some websites download several megabytes of data to display a kilobyte or less of actual content.
- ohyeshedid 6y ago> I have more RAM and CPU time than I can possibly use :D Just open another tab; problem solved. :|
- rand49an 6y agoThat would probably increase the amount of storage space people would end up buying which would greatly increase the electricity demands on the end user. I would bet this is already the most efficient way of it working. You can setup a proxy service to cache internet requests too, but they're getting less useful due to greater use of HTTPS.