Web-20 @ MindSay

 

 

 

 

From nothing in February 2005 to 8,000 video uploads a day, Youtube is every internet starup company's  dream. They opened all the doors and windows and the whole world joined the party. And it's a huge party at 16 terabytes a day. But, how long can the party last?

  "We don't have a monopoly, we have a market-share."       Steve Ballmer

  Nineteen months ago Chad Hurley and Steven Chen  flipped the switch on for Youtube. With a $11.5 million dollar investment from Sequoia Partners, the mega-video-file-sharing service was born. Keep in mind that essentially that's all Youtube is - a file-sharing site. It's kind of a video-orgy where nearly anything and everything goes. Remember Napster and Kazaa? The similarities, I believe, are soon to increase when the "L" and "M" words surface. L = litigation and M = monopoly.

 

  It is amazing that a company which was losing money could sell for $1.65 billion. Two weeks ago Mark Cuban said "Only a moron would buy Youtube." Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks was referring to Universal Studios heat over Youtube's copyright infringements. In other words, why would you buy a non-profiting company about to enter into expensive litigation? Market-share baby, market-share! Acquisition of market-share is the lifeblood of every monopoly. Morons are millionaires too.

 

  Genius is not a requirement of today's business models. In fact the more inane and philistine the product the better. A 16 terabyte a day orgy doesn't require a discussion of philosophy or quantum-physics. However, it might be a good idea to wise up before the party ends. You only have to look at what Yahoo did with its acquisition of Broadcast.com from Mark Cuban to get an idea of what will become of Youtube. I predict that within a year there will be a cover-charge for the vid-orgy, that and litigation will put a serious damper on the party. Better get your tube-on while you still can.

 

--- Also, look for this site to get ingested either by litigation or a buyout.

 

 

AND SPEAKING OF VIDEOS, PLEASE TRY AND SEE THIS ONE.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pablo

©2006

 

 

 

 

 

 Could The Information Superhighway Become A Toll Road?

 

There's a battle going on for control of the Internet, and if consumers don't watch out they're going to be playing second modem to the captains of industry.

 

The black hats are worn by a handful of media conglomerates who hope to build a two-tiered Internet, with the fastest tier going at premium prices. Everyone else will surf at reduced speeds, which can be the fast track to Net oblivion.

 

In the beginning the Internet was truly democratic -- anyone with a computer and a dial-up connection could log on and surf as fast as the equipment allowed. But the system was accessed via old-fashioned copper telephone wires that weren't capable of high-speed transmission.

No worry. In the 1990s phone and cable companies promised to re-wire America with fiber-optic cable, thus keeping pace with some European and Asian providers. All they wanted in return were tax breaks and the rate hikes to cover infrastructure outlays.

 

  The upgrade would be massive. By one estimate the old copper-wire dial-up connection would take 82 years to download the contents of the Library of Congress. The fastest fiber connection can do the job in about 45 seconds. A cable connection is a waste of time. Watch this video.

 

 

 

The promises, however, turned out to be a lot of fast talk, billed as a "telecommunications muckraker.''

According to the group, TeleTruth, telephone companies received $25 billion in tax breaks while their revenues soared 128 percent in the 1990s. But they didn't build the high-speed system.

 

Should telecom and cable companies be able to influence what Web sites you visit? That’s a key question in the debate surrounding Net neutrality.

It’s an issue being fought over tooth and nail in Washington.

Supporters of Net neutrality say the government needs to step in and ensure that cable and telecom companies who offer Internet service provide their customers equal access to every Web site in cyberspace.

Those against the idea say the government needs to stay out of the Internet business and let the market forces, which have made the Internet a success, play out.

Sen. Ron Wyden is among those pushing for a Net neutrality policy. He says the lack of Net neutrality would turn the information superhighway into a toll road with the best access given to Web sites willing to pay top dollar.

 

 

..............................................................................................................................................

 

Response to todays top-blogs:

 

    What are the requirments to be considered a homophobe?

    Is just my mildly contrary comment enough to mark me as one? Is it really about the actual marriage?

 

    If I go in for a colonoscopy tomorrow should I make a video of the process to offer as entertainment.

 

    Didn't Al Franken already cover this moronic shtik with his Stuart Smally character?

 

    Will I become # 4 if I re-post # 2?

 

   I vote for    misterghouliemisterghoulie
  misterghoulie

 

   

 

   Seriously, enough already!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pablo

©2006