Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Boplicity who wrote (10602)	6/6/1999 3:51:00 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 29970

At least you're trying to cook up a solution. The problems obviously approach the intractable. What you're suggesting is giving you a lot of problems and I can confirm that what you've suggested is unrealistic for reasons of cost and control. The natural evolution you like doesn't move towards more expensive solutions. Oh, you like my Pure solution. Very good. The company which pulls their own Pure will benefit exponentially. The FCC would allow such a company to pull right along MSO ROW. MSO could not object. This will eventually happen, but it isn't necessary now to supply everyone adequate broadband delivery. I don't know what you mean by "I'm looking for technical reason why T shouldn't be forced to offer bandwidth for sale". I think you mean that T can't be expected to provide open access bandwidth because there is a network limitation to support a fully loaded bisynchronous transfer. I'll let Frank give his take on it, but if that is the question, the answer is what you know from the Fremont experience. A 500 drop loop incrementally slows as the upstream load increases. If all 500 feeds are downstream only, the transfer rate is also slowed but not to the degree that mixed upstream downstream experiences. If you'll remember, one bandwidth hog who was running a subnet when there was no 128 kbps upstream delimitation, commandeered the loop and cluster bandwidth such that the pipe was very thin for all the others attempting say, only downstream draws. That slowed the transfer for most to below dial-up. Somehow that's very humorous. Part of the problem is upstream constraint which we have discussed previously. The problem arises from signal attenuation because origination from cable modem isn't robust so they have to be boosted and there are other factors inherent in the movement of ethernet em waves in an HFC waveguide. There are several solutions which alleviate this problem, but for unknown reasons neither T nor ATHM seems to want to invoke them. Perhaps they aren't ready for prime time. Others will disagree but I don't believe that HFC is adequate even on the local loop for full motion video. You need 10 mbps to each user undiluted. Frank and I started the Silkroad thread in order to investigate viable ways to achieve the kinds of bandwidth needed to get around all these irritations which do what you suggest --- compromise the possibility of open access. So your struggle with this issue is appreciated. It should be recognized that the current nature of the net is asynchronous. We ask for more data than we give, so upstream is not so critical. But the current model delimits where interactivity could go, and it is interactivity that has the added value. TV was the quintessence of one-way and it has evolved beyond the rational limit so that now it's a caricature of itself. The future lies in interactivity as SI though still a primitive example, has profusely demonstrated. We can't explore the interactive potential with this bandwidth constraint though.