You Don’t Want Super-High-Speed Internet...

[wraith808]

...Says Time Warner Cable

Sounds like a joke with a bad punchline.  But it's not.

Photo: Flickr/Tristan Schmurr

You Don’t Want Super-High-Speed Internet, Says Time Warner Cable (via Wired)


(I started to start this in the basement, just because of the response I wanted to give.  But I refrained, so at least it can start here.)

[Renegade]

(I started to start this in the basement, just because of the response I wanted to give.  But I refrained, so at least it can start here.)

-wraith808 (March 01, 2013, 06:33 AM)

I can see that entirely! I don't think I have anything to add here that people can't use their imagination for. (Hint: A dash of cynicism, a tablespoon of apathy, a half cup of paranoia, and a liberal handful of vulgarities. )

It's just too surreal.

[40hz]

They're right. We all want to go back to dial-up speeds and plaintext BBS systems that support RIP graphics for our online communications and shopping needs.

 

or better yet...



Since it is a 'known fact' that all the content people actually watch, listen to, or read is copyrighted (and owned by major publishers and media outlets) there's absolutely no need to ever provide any content over an open Internet or unrestricted device. Set top boxes, media players, e-book readers, and other appliances (that have permanently enabled DRM controls embedded in their hardware) are the only acceptable and 'legal' way copyrighted materials can be delivered or viewed.

To allow otherwise would be to automatically increase unemployment, fuel the spread of terrorism, and disseminate kiddie-porn throughout the "free" world.

And what "right thinking" person would want to see, or be a party to, that?

Time-Warner! They're doing God's work here.  

----------------------------------
Ok Renegade - on that note maybe you'd better hit the B button for this elevator car...

----------------------------------

@Mouser - Sorry. I just couldn't resist. And I do promise not to do it again. Seriously.

"No joke ever benefits from too much repetition."

Or so my grandmother used to say.

[TaoPhoenix]

I saw slashdot's copy of this and the mood over there was that it was so silly they probably don't believe it themselves. Rather it was more of the typical modern desperation "Look, here's a microphone and 2 minutes of dead air costing a million bucks a piece if we don't fill it with lots of words."

It's like showing a clip of the movie "Frequency" and then asking Yahoo what happened to them vs Google. Then you jam a mic at them and the best the PR rep can do is say non-lawsuit-inviting things.

[mahesh2k]

You need better quota and even 1 mbps is fine for the usage. I don't think we need more than 2 mbps. With unlimited quota, you can go cloud with your data and work and with limited quota, you're basically being frugal with the possibilities with internet.

[wraith808]

I think that this is the same as Kotick's remarks to gamers- the sign that a company doesn't really respect its consumers.

Hey!  I was actually civil with that remark...  I should get cookies!


For more interesting reading, see Gamasutra's response.

[app103]

Kind of reminds me of the sales pitch from a friend's dad, back when he was selling magazines door to door:

"You don't want to buy any magazines, do you, lady?"

Maybe he is in charge of PR at Time Warner Cable, now. 

[Tinman57]

  Right, and no one needs more than 64 Kb of RAM according to Bill Gates.....

  1 Mbps (that's Mega bits) is barely fast enough to stream 360P, and even then there are a lot of pauses.  I'd say 15 Mbps would be the minimum needed for true broadband....

[kyrathaba]

might wind up with faster internet anyway,  due to zopfli