[slavox]

I found this article, rather vague..

How is it that computer networks will override moore's law? Either networking is inherently too costly on CPU/Hardware Or someone miscalculated that with a rise in computer power the networking infrastructure also rises in power..

Also using Youtube as an example for "clogged tubes" is silly, Youtube is clogging their own tubes (Ours too but only because we're not keeping up in rolling out new networks) Think of delivery via means like Bittorrent (no that doesn't instantly mean piracy) But rather as a protocol for distribution and even streaming media..More efficent so it makes the youtube costs much smaller and the overall load more distributed.

There is a maximum amount of traffic that could flow on the internet currently, but theoretically we will one day have a limit to our consumption above 1080p we might only ever need 2k and so that will be video, text is too small to worry about and music will only change in quality to a few gigs per album, So what more could we transfer?

[jodrellblank]

Ah, another "we must be at the end of the future now" post.

So what more could we transfer?

Multiple video streams for a start, for enhanced 3D or choose-your-own-viewpoint or choose-your-own-ending.

[slavox]

I agree, But how many Video streams would we need to stream at once for it to overrun moore's law is what i don't get, Sure it's a heck of a big job, but it's not a falling sky as such.

3D enhanced video sounds great! but all these technologies really won't be loading more than 3-6 streams of data at once, which we can keep up with easily.

It's just that choking bandwith doesn't cause any loss of customers until the competition offers better..at least that's how it is here

(NZ)

But i get it, there are huge files, But i still think we can keep up.

[jodrellblank]

It's only routing tables that they claimed are growing at a rate outstripping Moore's Law, as I read it.

[DannoHung]

Murder the spammers.

Like, literally find them in their homes and dead them.

[slavox]

I think spam is still a technology problem more than a person problem, Spam can be beaten. Things like piracy can't.

EG, There are only so many ways to display spam to someone, And if we aren't seeing it it's going to stop.

But there will always be a way to share information, and it's the end user that cares they don't mind how they get it so it wont be stopped.

[CodeMage]

Spam still exists because there are enough people who, upon receiving it, generate profit by buying spamvertised products.

Piracy still exists because people want things for free and copying digital content is a lot easier than stealing a physical product.

Both of these things share two key aspects:

1) The technology in charge of suppressing them cannot suppress them 100% (yet).

2) They appeal to basic nature in a large pool of humans.

Yet everyone seems to focus so much on the first aspect...

[DannoHung]

So you're suggesting deading the people that respond to spam email?

That would also works for me.