28 ms·

I don't think mbit/sec are necessary. Today's telepresence for example can be done at less than 15mbit/sec , maybe even 6 mbit/sec. And if we look at local des

by ippisl 14y ago

I don't think mbit/sec are necessary. Today's telepresence for example can be done at less than 15mbit/sec , maybe even 6 mbit/sec. And if we look at local desktop just as a dumb terminal and using the cloud as the PC , offering compressed display doesn't take that much bandwidth. And i hadn't seen any really interesting apps in 50/100 mbps networks available around the world.

api 14y ago
I think those 50/100/etc. markets are too small to inspire the kind of innovation I'm talking about. One example that keeps coming to mind is "real" virtual reality (including next-generation MMORPGs and tele-presence stuff). Consider the bandwidth requirements of a world whose physics are malleable: in-world chemistry, in-world shaping of novel materials, in-world machines that actually work in-world or that function by means of realtime-modifiable embedded scripting, etc. All that state would have to be synchronized across millions of clients in near-realtime, requiring things like vastly distributed P2P "rumor mill" replication protocols. You can do that with Google Fiber grade Internet access. You can't do that with what we have now.
- ippisl 14y ago
  What prevents a game developer to offer such services , computed in the cloud and streamed to home displays ? the streaming speed wouldn't need to be that great, and the latency manageable, like onlive have shown us. And the economics will be quite nice for the game developer since they pay per use for onlive servers. Said economics would also be nice (at least in the beginning) , for users who wouldn't need to purchase an expensive machine.
  - jiggy2011 14y ago
    It depends on how much you are streaming. I can stream 1080p fine on my 20Mb connection but 2 1080p streams and the internet is basically unusable for anything else. If you have a street full of families with everyone all streaming 1080p near constantly you are going to need to greater capacity. And that's only at 1080p, what about high resolution 4K displays etc? What about when as well as keyboard and mouse input you want to send output for high precision accelerometers , biometric data etc etc.
  - api 14y ago
    That could be done. But what I wrote about above wasn't the only idea I can think of that could use heavy bandwidth, and the quality and richness would be better with local rendering anyway. What I'm ultimately talking about is a "640k is enough for anyone" mind-lock mentality around bandwidth. There are all kinds of possibilities when you have hundreds of megabits or more to work with.

by ippisl 14y ago

api 14y ago

I think those 50/100/etc. markets are too small to inspire the kind of innovation I'm talking about. One example that keeps coming to mind is "real" virtual reality (including next-generation MMORPGs and tele-presence stuff). Consider the bandwidth requirements of a world whose physics are malleable: in-world chemistry, in-world shaping of novel materials, in-world machines that actually work in-world or that function by means of realtime-modifiable embedded scripting, etc. All that state would have to be synchronized across millions of clients in near-realtime, requiring things like vastly distributed P2P "rumor mill" replication protocols. You can do that with Google Fiber grade Internet access. You can't do that with what we have now.

ippisl 14y ago
What prevents a game developer to offer such services , computed in the cloud and streamed to home displays ? the streaming speed wouldn't need to be that great, and the latency manageable, like onlive have shown us. And the economics will be quite nice for the game developer since they pay per use for onlive servers. Said economics would also be nice (at least in the beginning) , for users who wouldn't need to purchase an expensive machine.
- jiggy2011 14y ago
  It depends on how much you are streaming. I can stream 1080p fine on my 20Mb connection but 2 1080p streams and the internet is basically unusable for anything else. If you have a street full of families with everyone all streaming 1080p near constantly you are going to need to greater capacity. And that's only at 1080p, what about high resolution 4K displays etc? What about when as well as keyboard and mouse input you want to send output for high precision accelerometers , biometric data etc etc.
- api 14y ago
  That could be done. But what I wrote about above wasn't the only idea I can think of that could use heavy bandwidth, and the quality and richness would be better with local rendering anyway. What I'm ultimately talking about is a "640k is enough for anyone" mind-lock mentality around bandwidth. There are all kinds of possibilities when you have hundreds of megabits or more to work with.