2 ms·

To be short: Netflix doesn't accept uploads from customers via postal mail—so it doesn't exactly match the example. Most people want content that requires more

by sj4nz 14y ago

To be short: Netflix doesn't accept uploads from customers via postal mail—so it doesn't exactly match the example. Most people want content that requires more than 2GB/month. Yes, NYTimes is much less than 2GB/month, but this wouldn't be about receiving "just" the NYTimes---the newspaper delivery service would work as a "carrier" of bits. Users signal for the data they're interested in via what they upload. Publishers of bits upload indexes to the content network. It can be implemented now with the postal service, by sneakernet in communities of people, or it could be something that newspapers implement, it doesn't matter who does the physical work of bit-moving. And finally, I'm not interested in supporting the "large majority of the sites" because they're all Fast Web. If they want Slow Web, they can add it, but they don't have to, it's not mandatory and its not expected of them.

dalke 14y ago
My examples were all meant to show areas where a slow web would not be effective. Who are the people and what are the use cases for a slow web, and why doesn't it exist now on top of the existing postal system? The newspaper delivery service would not work. Period. Delivery service only covers the local service area, where there is a high enough density of subscribers to make a special delivery service worthwhile. These people can get broadband and/or cell service. Otherwise newspapers use the postal service, and charge a premium to those customers who want that service. Now you say that "upload" is important. Yes, when my wife was deployed in Iraq, we mailed USB sticks back and forth, containing music and video files. So that service exists now for point-to-point, and scales decently well to several people. Who are the people who want one-to-many data broadcasting via the slow web? What do they want to accomplish? And I return again to mechanics. How does one "signal for the data they're interested in via what they upload?" If I send videos of our baby to family, do I get baby videos in return? Or do I get ads for baby products? I can't think of any mechanism which would handle what you are describing, other than having a human concierge service - and that's expensive. If there are no adapters to make the slow data resources which are available on the fast web available to the slow web, then why would people use the slow web?

by sj4nz 14y ago

dalke 14y ago

My examples were all meant to show areas where a slow web would not be effective. Who are the people and what are the use cases for a slow web, and why doesn't it exist now on top of the existing postal system? The newspaper delivery service would not work. Period. Delivery service only covers the local service area, where there is a high enough density of subscribers to make a special delivery service worthwhile. These people can get broadband and/or cell service. Otherwise newspapers use the postal service, and charge a premium to those customers who want that service. Now you say that "upload" is important. Yes, when my wife was deployed in Iraq, we mailed USB sticks back and forth, containing music and video files. So that service exists now for point-to-point, and scales decently well to several people. Who are the people who want one-to-many data broadcasting via the slow web? What do they want to accomplish? And I return again to mechanics. How does one "signal for the data they're interested in via what they upload?" If I send videos of our baby to family, do I get baby videos in return? Or do I get ads for baby products? I can't think of any mechanism which would handle what you are describing, other than having a human concierge service - and that's expensive. If there are no adapters to make the slow data resources which are available on the fast web available to the slow web, then why would people use the slow web?