Comcast to limit Internet users to 1TB per month, Unlimited to cost $50/month extra.

Post by sms
<http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/10/11/comcast-broadband-data-caps-coming-to-california-next-month/>
AT&T already has this cap.
Looks like it's an effort to stem the tide of cable cutters dropping
cable TV.
Might be a good time to start an antenna installation business.
---

I have AT&T, just the 12 Mbps tier. I watched a lot of streaming including Netflix and VUDU HDX (which is 9 Mbps). I once estimated with all the viewing I still was only around 200 GB a month. Turns out I only use 190 GB a month now that AT&T puts usage on the monthly bill. My cap 600 GB so I have little to worry about.

Since I also like to work around with video I keep track of what is happening in the streaming world. Next spring they are hoping to start using AC-1 for streaming. That will most likely be mostly Google's VP10 codec. Even their VP9 codec cuts file size about in half. So does HEVC (h265) but there's royalty for using that. I also note that where a lot of companies streamed using the Baseline profile which is a constrained and constant bitrate for older devices and decoders some are now using higher profiles and VBR encodes which drop the file sizes too.

On Android there is a function to tell you how much data has been received whether it be over wifi or Ethernet. I implemented a small app that uses in conjunction with my Shield TV and it helps me track these changes via file size. Also getting logs off the device will often tell you what resolutions are being streaming and in what codec. Most newer Android devices have VP9 and h265 decoding built in.

John Slade

2016-10-19 05:29:34 UTC

On Wednesday, October 12, 2016 at 7:09:37 AM UTC-7, sms

Post by sms
<http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/10/11/comcast-broadband-data-caps-coming-to-california-next-month/>

AT&T already has this cap.

Post by sms
Looks like it's an effort to stem the tide of cable cutters
dropping cable TV.
Might be a good time to start an antenna installation
business.
---

True but imagine a family of five who watch a lot of online
HD video. That cap doesn't seem like a lot then. If they use the
same amount as you do, the cap can be easily reached. I would
advise paying the extra or getting a business account, whichever
is cheaper.

Since I also like to work around with video I keep track of
what is happening in the streaming world. Next spring they
are hoping to start using AC-1 for streaming. That will most
likely be mostly Google's VP10 codec. Even their VP9 codec
cuts file size about in half. So does HEVC (h265) but
there's royalty for using that. I also note that where a lot
of companies streamed using the Baseline profile which is a
constrained and constant bitrate for older devices and
decoders some are now using higher profiles and VBR encodes
which drop the file sizes too.

I think it's a lot better if they just concentrate more
on delivering faster speeds rather than trying to eliminate a
little more quality out of the video. It's getting pretty bad as
it is.

John

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

David Kaye

2016-10-19 07:22:00 UTC

True but imagine a family of five who watch a lot of online HD video.
That cap doesn't seem like a lot then. If they use the same amount as you
do, the cap can be easily reached. I would advise paying the extra or
getting a business account, whichever is cheaper.

Is there such a thing as a family of 5 anymore? What's more, any family
that watches that much video has some serious problems. They need to get
outdoors, get some exercise, meet people, etc. Social engineering? You
betcha.

Travis James

2016-10-29 03:20:48 UTC

True but imagine a family of five who watch a lot of online HD video.
That cap doesn't seem like a lot then. If they use the same amount as
you do, the cap can be easily reached. I would advise paying the extra
or getting a business account, whichever is cheaper.

Is there such a thing as a family of 5 anymore? What's more, any
family that watches that much video has some serious problems. They
need to get outdoors, get some exercise, meet people, etc. Social
engineering? You betcha.

Yes. My Silicon Valley 900 employee workplace has highly variable
family sizes among the married from 0 to 4 kids. Most are 2 kids (me
included) but a good chunk of 3, a lot have twins involved.

As far as bandwidth, I got the Comcast email about the cap. I think the
kids take in too much and still not remotely close to the cap.

David Kaye

2016-10-29 09:14:02 UTC

Yes. My Silicon Valley 900 employee workplace has highly variable family
sizes among the married from 0 to 4 kids. Most are 2 kids (me included)
but a good chunk of 3, a lot have twins involved.

People should learn about ZPG, zero population growth. So much of the
global warming problem can be solved by not having more kids. Humans are
terrible for the environment, belching out carbon dioxide and methane, and
eating meat that also creates huge amounts of carbon dioxide and methane to
produce.

Yes, I'm serious about this.

John Slade

2016-11-17 11:25:20 UTC

Yes. My Silicon Valley 900 employee workplace has highly variable family
sizes among the married from 0 to 4 kids. Most are 2 kids (me included)
but a good chunk of 3, a lot have twins involved.

You have got to be joking. Realistically, people
fall in love, get married and want to have children. They aren't
going to be thinking about the environmental impact and decide
not to have kids.

John

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

David Kaye

2016-11-18 01:25:22 UTC

You have got to be joking. Realistically, people fall in love,
get married and want to have children. They aren't going to be thinking
about the environmental impact and decide not to have kids.

Stupid heterosexuals. When I was a kid ZPG was a Very Big Thing because the
population of the earth was doubling every 35 years. Okay, have one kid.
They did it in China and solved their huge growth problem. Having one kid
will satisfy the egos of the parents and it will result in less harm to the
environment, or it will be harmed at a slower rate.

It's funny. I have a punker communist friend who is all about preserving
the earth, fighting global warming, etc. I suggested to him that he
shouldn't have any more kids. He has one. He got REALLY pissed off at me,
but my position stands: human overpopulation is really what is destroying
the planet.

John Slade

2016-11-18 08:31:58 UTC

You have got to be joking. Realistically, people fall in love,
get married and want to have children. They aren't going to be thinking
about the environmental impact and decide not to have kids.

Stupid heterosexuals.

Two stupid heterosexuals got together and had you, you
owe your life to them. Or maybe you were born of immaculate
conception. Look, people don't live forever, so there needs to
be some new people to replace the ones that die. It's common sense.

Post by David Kaye
When I was a kid ZPG was a Very Big Thing because the
population of the earth was doubling every 35 years. Okay, have one kid.
They did it in China and solved their huge growth problem. Having one kid
will satisfy the egos of the parents and it will result in less harm to the
environment, or it will be harmed at a slower rate.

When I was a kid, I believed in Santa Claus for a while.
That has got to be one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
The problem is NOT the population. It's possibly technology that
is the problem with global warming. It's better to look at new
forms of energy over getting people to limit their family size.
That's because a person who isn't stupid would realize that it
will not work given that many people will not limit their family
size based on some pseudoscience from the 60's or 70's.

Post by David Kaye
It's funny. I have a punker communist friend who is all about preserving
the earth, fighting global warming, etc. I suggested to him that he
shouldn't have any more kids. He has one. He got REALLY pissed off at me,
but my position stands: human overpopulation is really what is destroying
the planet.

I find your stupid suggestion that overpopulation is
destroying the planet funny but not angering. The Earth can
produce enough resources to sustain a population many times what
it is now. It's the technology that's hurting the planet not the
number of people. One of the main problems are the idiots who
want to block the safest and cleanest power source which is
nuclear. When they successfully stop a nuclear power plant from
being built, a few coal plants take it's place. That's what's
hurting the environment not the number of people.

Here's an idea you might like. The idiots who want to blame
people who have kids for hurting the Earth should put their
money where their mouths are. They should prove they care about
the planet and go jump off a fucking bridge, that would convince
me they care and believe in the bullshit they're peddling.
Anything less proves they're full of shit and just talking.

John
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

David Kaye

2016-11-18 11:33:40 UTC

Two stupid heterosexuals got together and had you, you owe your life
to them.

But they only had one of me, not 2, 3, 4 or 8.

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-11-18 18:39:35 UTC

Two stupid heterosexuals got together and had you, you owe your life
to them.

But they only had one of me, not 2, 3, 4 or 8.

Yup, the "breeders" are busy these days and not satisfied just to have one micro-human so they're taking fertility drugs. This neighborhood has changed from older folks with homes to new young renters.

Travis James

2016-11-19 03:27:35 UTC

Two stupid heterosexuals got together and had you, you owe your life
to them.

But they only had one of me, not 2, 3, 4 or 8.

Yup, the "breeders" are busy these days and not satisfied just to have
one micro-human so they're taking fertility drugs. This neighborhood
has changed from older folks with homes to new young renters.

It isn't people paying big money on fertility drugs or me and my
married coworkers having 1.8 children who are overpopulating.
Personally, I had 2, considered 3 or 4 but felt comfortable in
parenting abilities and professional income potential to stop at 2. I
made sure of that with a little medical intervention.

John Slade

2016-11-21 21:50:02 UTC

On Friday, November 18, 2016 at 3:21:28 AM UTC-8, David Kaye

Post by John Slade
Two stupid heterosexuals got together and had you, you
owe your life to them.

But they only had one of me, not 2, 3, 4 or 8.

Yup, the "breeders" are busy these days and not satisfied
just to have one micro-human so they're taking fertility
drugs. This neighborhood has changed from older folks with
homes to new young renters.

I've heard this "breeder" bigotry from gay people in he
past, I don't know what you are, but you sound just as silly as
Kaye does on this issue. I belive Kaye is gay, IIRC. It's so
easy to point the finger at another group, guess it's more the
hate that hate created. Here's something ironic. Kay's Intenet
broadcasting means he probably uses more power resources than a
family of four. I'm sure if Kaye stopped his business, his
"carbon footprint" would go down. Then a couple can have another
kid or two. The issue is not people who have kids, it's the way
resources are distributed and what stops them from being
distributed easily. I really love it how certain people think
they can point the finger at someone else rather than themselves.

John

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

David Kaye

2016-11-22 21:08:48 UTC

For the record I am bisexual, and I have never ever used the term "breeder"
in any way, shape, or form.

I'm sure if Kaye stopped his business, his "carbon footprint" would go
down. Then a couple can have another kid or two.

Besides being an asshole, you're stupid. Want to try for 3 out of three? I
fix computers for a living, meaning that I keep computers that people were
going to throw away running to live another day. In about 10 minutes I'm
going to visit a customer who runs a catering business on a 12 year old XP
laptop. This is typical of the customers I have. I am doing my part to
help people avoid the landfill.

The issue is not people who have kids, it's the way resources are
distributed and what stops them from being distributed easily.

No, as a planet we're WAY overpopulated. That's simple reality. And the
U.S. uses more resouces per capita than any other country of the world.
That's also reality. You choose not to believe it, but you also probably
voted for Trump, too. So, there's not reaching you.

John Slade

2016-11-23 01:02:42 UTC

For the record I am bisexual, and I have never ever used the term "breeder"
in any way, shape, or form.

"Stupid heterosexuals" having more than one kid comes
pretty close though.

I'm sure if Kaye stopped his business, his "carbon footprint" would go
down. Then a couple can have another kid or two.

Well name calling is always amusing to me. I also repair
computers, been doing so for going on 30 years now. And I can
tell you from your scenario, you have no idea what you're
talking about. First of all I would never tell anyone using a
12-year-old computer to use it for a business. I would tell them
to buy something new. A 12-year-old computer can fail at any
time and it is probably going to happen sooner rather than
later. Secondly, the computer is going to die sooner or later.
That can't be avoided, even if you replace all the parts to keep
it running, you're still throwing away tons of shit that adds to
pollution even if you can recycle much of it. Thirdly, older
computer are less energy efficient than newer computers so you
are actually adding to the problem by telling people to use
older computers. I recently bought a new laptop for myself. My
old laptop maybe lasted three hours on a battery charge. My new
laptop last for six hours of normal use, 16 hours if I blank the
screen and run backup processes. The battery is smaller too.

The issue is not people who have kids, it's the way resources are
distributed and what stops them from being distributed easily.

You are incorrect, pseudoscience makes the claim that we
are overpopulated. It comes from granola munching hippies in the
60s and 70s. Technology will provide us with answers to make
our large population live better. We have technology that would
drastically reduce the pollution humans produce to make power.
Nuclear power is the main one right now and it's the irrational
anti-nuke conspiracy loonies that are keeping more nuclear power
plants from being built.

Well I guess I'm reachable because I would never vote
for a disgusting sack of racist crap like Trump. On that note,
there is hope for you yet because you didn't vote for Trump.
Your heart is in the right place but if you look at the actual
science you'll see I'm right about the overpopulation myth.

John

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Julian Macassey

2016-11-23 01:11:16 UTC

Post by John Slade
You are incorrect, pseudoscience makes the claim that we
are overpopulated. It comes from granola munching hippies in the
60s and 70s. Technology will provide us with answers to make
our large population live better. We have technology that would
drastically reduce the pollution humans produce to make power.
Nuclear power is the main one right now and it's the irrational
anti-nuke conspiracy loonies that are keeping more nuclear power
plants from being built.
Your heart is in the right place but if you look at the actual
science you'll see I'm right about the overpopulation myth.

Ah the modern Malthusians:

In the 1970's the world will undergo famines--hundreds of millions of
people are going to starve to death in spite of any crash programs
embarked upon now. - Paul Ehrlich "The Population Bomb" 1968

Alas Ehrlich hasn't died off yet. He hasn't apologised
for being so very wrong either.

There are some real wankers at Stanford, he's one.

--
It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting
them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile. - Napoléon Bonaparte

David Kaye

2016-11-24 01:33:01 UTC

I also repair computers, been doing so for going on 30 years now.
And I can tell you from your scenario, you have no idea what you're
talking about. First of all I would never tell anyone using a 12-year-old
computer to use it for a business. I would tell them to buy something new.

I suggest it but they insist on keeping their old computers. I have
customers who operate all kinds of businesses on old XP computers. I have a
publisher, a publisher's rep, a tree trimming service, a "personal chef",
three hotels, several accountants, etc. Even though their favorite programs
should all run well on Windows 10, they're still reluctant to change.

A 12-year-old computer can fail at any time and it is probably going to
happen sooner rather than later. Secondly, the computer is going to die
sooner or later.

I tell them that I don't replace motherboards when they fail because it
isn't worth it to them to pay me for a new mobo plus my labor, and I hate
replacing mobos anyway. When/if a mobo fails I tell them that they MUST go
out and buy a new computer and that I'm available to transfer their files to
a new one. At the moment I'm writing this on a 15 year old Sony which
originally ran Windows 2000. The computer still works like a charm. But
just in case of failure, I do clone my HD once a month, and I have two
automatic backups once a day. But, my Sony Vaio keeps chugging away.
During this message I just did a SMART test and both internal HDs look
perfect.

You are incorrect, pseudoscience makes the claim that we are
overpopulated.

A Trump supporter are you?

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-11-24 19:36:33 UTC

I still have a number of older computers including one Compaq laptop that runs XP. I also have an Acer Windows 7 64-bit media desktop that was getting long in tooth but still running but too slow for some things. So last December bought an iBuyPower Game PC on one of Fry's promo code deals. It screams and I have little problem with Windows 10 which even runs Jasc Paint Shop 8 (that's really old).

However yesterday I wanted to start some development on a cross platform product using Visual Studio 2015. I've done some Xamarin before but seems the current release has problems. Also discovered that Microsoft installed an other copy of the Android SDK in he Program Data folder. That caused some mixups. We are wondering if Microsoft does ANY testing any more before releasing. VS 2017 is about to release though and won't be as resource intensive or so they say.

Also got a new 55" 4K Roku TV so have been playing around with some Roku development.

David Kaye

2016-11-24 23:23:40 UTC

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
Also got a new 55" 4K Roku TV so have been playing around with some Roku development.

I see no reason why they had to develop yet another scripting language with
its own set of bugs and fixes. The fact that I got mine to work when it
violates most of their guidelines amazes me. I run mine without menus
because I prefer for it to look more like live streaming video so that an
employee such as a bartender can just click it on and let it run. They were
actually amazed that anyone would want to produce a channel that did that.
:)

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-11-25 19:06:20 UTC

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
Also got a new 55" 4K Roku TV so have been playing around with some Roku development.

Well there you go, limited vision of 23 years olds most likely. Run into that all the time developing for Android and now have to deal with foibles of Xamarin on VS 2015. We aren't going to get true cross platform until the companies subscribe to one kind of UI and one language. And we know that ain't gonna happen.

poldy

2016-11-25 20:31:49 UTC

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
Also got a new 55" 4K Roku TV so have been playing around with some Roku development.

WOuld you develop some streaming app. for Roku as an independent
developer or would you be developing it for someone?

Typically the streaming content companies develop their own, don't they?

It seems like the first 4K streaming apps. with support for HDR and
Dolby Atmos are from Netflix and Amazon Prime. ANd they develop for
"smart TV" platforms, that is the built-in apps. which come on 4K TVs,
so that you don't need an external box for that content.

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-11-26 22:04:20 UTC

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
Also got a new 55" 4K Roku TV so have been playing around with some Roku
development.

WOuld you develop some streaming app. for Roku as an independent
developer or would you be developing it for someone?
Typically the streaming content companies develop their own, don't they?
It seems like the first 4K streaming apps. with support for HDR and
Dolby Atmos are from Netflix and Amazon Prime. ANd they develop for
"smart TV" platforms, that is the built-in apps. which come on 4K TVs,
so that you don't need an external box for that content.

Yes, some of the streaming companies will hire a contractor to do their app. Some firms might little apps like David is doing. Some contractors are into programming in general but may not understand the streaming world and get some things wrong. One company I have been providing feedback to has HD content and is planning to release some 4K content. Their Android TV app was outputting a 540p stream even if you had a subscription and were supposed to get HD. I looked at the log off the Shield TV and found it was taking the video off their mobile server instead of their main server which definitely has HD on their Roku app.

Roku has a player which can be tweaked to fit what a client would want but many developers don't understand things like aspect ratios and how to adjust for that nor what is happening with codecs. A background in film and video helps. And understanding how CDNs work is helpful too.

The Android TV example player is also used by a number of companies tweaked for the client's UI. That player takes more knowledge of Android and is not as simple to implement as the Roku player appears to be.

It's been very interesting to find out how the company I'm providing feedback gets their videos and in what form.

poldy

2016-11-27 23:15:29 UTC

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
Also got a new 55" 4K Roku TV so have been playing around with some Roku
development.

WOuld you develop some streaming app. for Roku as an independent
developer or would you be developing it for someone?
Typically the streaming content companies develop their own, don't they?
It seems like the first 4K streaming apps. with support for HDR and
Dolby Atmos are from Netflix and Amazon Prime. ANd they develop for
"smart TV" platforms, that is the built-in apps. which come on 4K TVs,
so that you don't need an external box for that content.

Yes, some of the streaming companies will hire a contractor to do their app. Some firms might little apps like David is doing. Some contractors are into programming in general but may not understand the streaming world and get some things wrong. One company I have been providing feedback to has HD content and is planning to release some 4K content. Their Android TV app was outputting a 540p stream even if you had a subscription and were supposed to get HD. I looked at the log off the Shield TV and found it was taking the video off their mobile server instead of their main server which definitely has HD on their Roku app.
Roku has a player which can be tweaked to fit what a client would want but many developers don't understand things like aspect ratios and how to adjust for that nor what is happening with codecs. A background in film and video helps. And understanding how CDNs work is helpful too.
The Android TV example player is also used by a number of companies tweaked for the client's UI. That player takes more knowledge of Android and is not as simple to implement as the Roku player appears to be.
It's been very interesting to find out how the company I'm providing feedback gets their videos and in what form.

Does resolution, especially 4K, matter in mobile devices?

I use Xfinity TV app. a lot on my iPad and iPhone. It lets you select
channels and you can filter out non HD channels. I always select HD
channels since I tune only into them on my TV.

BUt if I chose an SD TV stream, I don't know that I'd notice it on a 5.5
inch screen or even a Retina 9.7-inch screen.

I hear that with the 4K TVs, they have built-in apps. for Netflix and
Amazon but that you can't necessarily choose a 4K stream. For Netflix,
they auto-select based on your connection. So you could be paying them
extra to get 4K but not get 4K at all.

And the TV platforms (who knows what OS they use, but LG uses webOS)
won't give you feedback or access to logs on whether you're getting a
native 4K stream or if the TV is upscaling some lower res up to the 4K
display.

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-11-28 19:40:04 UTC

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
Also got a new 55" 4K Roku TV so have been playing around with some Roku
development.

WOuld you develop some streaming app. for Roku as an independent
developer or would you be developing it for someone?
Typically the streaming content companies develop their own, don't they?
It seems like the first 4K streaming apps. with support for HDR and
Dolby Atmos are from Netflix and Amazon Prime. ANd they develop for
"smart TV" platforms, that is the built-in apps. which come on 4K TVs,
so that you don't need an external box for that content.

Yes, some of the streaming companies will hire a contractor to do their app. Some firms might little apps like David is doing. Some contractors are into programming in general but may not understand the streaming world and get some things wrong. One company I have been providing feedback to has HD content and is planning to release some 4K content. Their Android TV app was outputting a 540p stream even if you had a subscription and were supposed to get HD. I looked at the log off the Shield TV and found it was taking the video off their mobile server instead of their main server which definitely has HD on their Roku app.
Roku has a player which can be tweaked to fit what a client would want but many developers don't understand things like aspect ratios and how to adjust for that nor what is happening with codecs. A background in film and video helps. And understanding how CDNs work is helpful too.
The Android TV example player is also used by a number of companies tweaked for the client's UI. That player takes more knowledge of Android and is not as simple to implement as the Roku player appears to be.
It's been very interesting to find out how the company I'm providing feedback gets their videos and in what form.

Does resolution, especially 4K, matter in mobile devices?

At small phone sizes, no. That's why the one streaming service had mobile video limited to 540p. In fact I have a friend who has a Verizon account but also got a T-Mobile phone and cheap account so he could watch videos at 480p without a data hit. He and his wife travel around in an RV so they have mobile service only (or use my wifi while here).

Post by poldy
I use Xfinity TV app. a lot on my iPad and iPhone. It lets you select
channels and you can filter out non HD channels. I always select HD
channels since I tune only into them on my TV.
BUt if I chose an SD TV stream, I don't know that I'd notice it on a 5.5
inch screen or even a Retina 9.7-inch screen.

Notice more on 9.7 inch screen and usually you'd want HD not 4K. I edit video so the differences are very noticeable. But if I were sitting 3 to 4 feet away from a 32" screen 720p would probably be fine. I'm 8 feet away from my 4K TV and it upscales everything.

Post by poldy
I hear that with the 4K TVs, they have built-in apps. for Netflix and
Amazon but that you can't necessarily choose a 4K stream. For Netflix,
they auto-select based on your connection. So you could be paying them
extra to get 4K but not get 4K at all.

I got a pop-up when playing Netflix on the new Roku TV that they had 4K tier available for just $2 more a month. But right now that would be mainstream movies and stuff I may not be interested in. Roku has a section of 4K demo videos. And don't get confused as an Nvidia Shield TV is a game/TV console device intended to be hooked to TVs. It definitely can do 4K. I've had one for over a year.

Post by poldy
And the TV platforms (who knows what OS they use, but LG uses webOS)
won't give you feedback or access to logs on whether you're getting a
native 4K stream or if the TV is upscaling some lower res up to the 4K
display.

The Shield TV is Android and I have a long USB cable to connect it for testing and debugging apps. The streaming apps do some logging which can tell you what stream they are using and what codec. This is probably so if there is a crash the users can send a report which would include that log info. Roku has some logging but it does seem limited to the app but I haven't started playing around with Roku development.

Netfix recommends 24 Mbps for 4K and VUDU minimum is 11 Mbps. Obviously VUDU is taking advantage of one of the codecs like h265 or VP9 for that.

John Slade

2016-12-07 21:55:44 UTC

You are incorrect, pseudoscience makes the claim that we are
overpopulated.

A Trump supporter are you?

I believe I told you that I didn't vote for Trump. I
disagree with him on just about everything. What I believe
you're confusing is the science of global warming and the
pseudoscience of overpopulation on the Earth. Trump doesn't
believe in global warming, I do. It's a fact, the only debate is
the cause and the degree man contributes to the problem. Just to
solve my curiosity, what scientists and/or authors do you derive
your overpopulation theory from?

John

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-11-23 19:35:25 UTC

Post by John Slade

On Friday, November 18, 2016 at 3:21:28 AM UTC-8, David Kaye

Post by John Slade
Two stupid heterosexuals got together and had you, you
owe your life to them.

But they only had one of me, not 2, 3, 4 or 8.

Yup, the "breeders" are busy these days and not satisfied
just to have one micro-human so they're taking fertility
drugs. This neighborhood has changed from older folks with
homes to new young renters.

Actually "breeders" is an amusing term I used because of it's popularity in the SF Bay Area as well as on some TV shows. I know many people who can't imagine having children in this day in age. You are correct, it is a matter of resource management but more easily done if you can keep population growth down or even negative. But to do that we may need to take away the control of resources from big business as they only care about the bottom line.

Some couples I know chose not to have kids and other did but planned it and are limiting the number. Then we have the evangelicals and the like who seem to think kids are like puppies and have a lot of them.

And for the record I was a "mistake" born to a couple who probably were counting the days until their two teens were off to college. But they were good responsible parents.

David Kaye

2016-11-24 01:46:15 UTC

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
Actually "breeders" is an amusing term I used because of it's popularity
in the SF Bay Area as well as on some TV shows.

Funny, having grown up here I never encountered the term here, but first
read it in a NYC gay newspaper about 2 decades ago.

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
I know many people who can't imagine having children in this day in age.
You are correct, it is a matter of resource management
but more easily done if you can keep population growth down or even
negative. But to do that we may need to take away the
control of resources from big business as they only care about the bottom
line.

But there's only a certain amount of resource management that can be done.
SF has the record for the highest amount of recycling of any large city in
America, 77%. But that's pretty much the limit of recycling. To get that
far the trash companies have had to employ people to literally go through
the trash to make sure that things were properly separated. They sell off
what they can, turn organic matter into compost, and still they need to bury
the rest. At present the closest landfill is outside of Modesto. So, they
have to truck stuff that can't be composted or recycled 80 -- EIGHTY --
miles into the Valley to bury it.

The earth did not have any ecological disasters (air, water, and land
pollution) until medical and sanitation advances allowed people to have
healthier kids. In the past, a family had 4 to 6 kids knowing that before
puberty 4 or 5 of them would die from diseases. In many countries people
continue to have more kids because it's "tradition". Poor families have
more kids because they need more hands to do more work.

Americans seem obsessed with children as validation of their lives, or
perhaps trophies would be a better term. Some years back when there was a
baby boom in SF's Noe Valley I remember the mothers proudly walking down the
streets with double-wide baby carriages and bitching and moaning when
various shops didn't instantly cater to them. Somehow, people in the past
managed to get along without the need for "changing stations" and wide
aisles to drive their baby carriages.

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-11-24 19:28:24 UTC

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
Actually "breeders" is an amusing term I used because of it's popularity
in the SF Bay Area as well as on some TV shows.

Funny, having grown up here I never encountered the term here, but first
read it in a NYC gay newspaper about 2 decades ago.

"Jessica Jones" also used the term in the Netflix series. That's because the character was a bit acerbic and not PC at all. I just had to laugh when she uttered the term.

Travis James

2016-11-26 03:16:16 UTC

Post by n***@sbcglobal.net
Some couples I know chose not to have kids and other did but planned it
and are limiting the number. Then we have the evangelicals and the
like who seem to think kids are like puppies and have a lot of them.

Yes, here in California when I see a parent, usually just one, with 4
unruly kids under 10 and I look at them I see "evangelicals."

sms

2016-10-21 14:38:14 UTC

I have AT&T, just the 12 Mbps tier. I watched a lot of streaming including Netflix and VUDU HDX (which is 9 Mbps). I once estimated with all the viewing I still was only around 200 GB a month. Turns out I only use 190 GB a month now that AT&T puts usage on the monthly bill. My cap 600 GB so I have little to worry about.
Since I also like to work around with video I keep track of what is happening in the streaming world. Next spring they are hoping to start using AC-1 for streaming. That will most likely be mostly Google's VP10 codec. Even their VP9 codec cuts file size about in half. So does HEVC (h265) but there's royalty for using that. I also note that where a lot of companies streamed using the Baseline profile which is a constrained and constant bitrate for older devices and decoders some are now using higher profiles and VBR encodes which drop the file sizes too.
On Android there is a function to tell you how much data has been received whether it be over wifi or Ethernet. I implemented a small app that uses in conjunction with my Shield TV and it helps me track these changes via file size. Also getting logs off the device will often tell you what resolutions are being streaming and in what codec. Most newer Android devices have VP9 and h265 decoding built in.

I suspect that one reason for the cap is to prevent neighbors from
sharing a 1Gb/s fiber connection.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

John Slade

2016-10-19 05:24:39 UTC

Post by sms
<http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/10/11/comcast-broadband-data-caps-coming-to-california-next-month/>
AT&T already has this cap.
Looks like it's an effort to stem the tide of cable cutters
dropping cable TV.
Might be a good time to start an antenna installation business.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

I can remember when the cap was 350GB per month. However I
believe they rarely punished people for exceeding the cap. 1TB
is a lot and I don't think the vast majority will mind. 700
hours of HD video is a lot even for a family. I think if someone
needs more bandwith, they can find an unlimited provide, pay the
extra $50 or get a business connection from Comcas, I believe
they are unlimited. I'm sure this is no conspiracy to stop
people from watching on-demand video from sites like Netflix and
Amazon Prime.

John Slade

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

poldy

2016-10-19 18:48:16 UTC

Post by sms
<http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/10/11/comcast-broadband-data-caps-coming-to-california-next-month/>
AT&T already has this cap.
Looks like it's an effort to stem the tide of cable cutters
dropping cable TV.
Might be a good time to start an antenna installation business.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

I can remember when the cap was 350GB per month. However I believe
they rarely punished people for exceeding the cap. 1TB is a lot and I
don't think the vast majority will mind. 700 hours of HD video is a lot
even for a family. I think if someone needs more bandwith, they can find
an unlimited provide, pay the extra $50 or get a business connection
from Comcas, I believe they are unlimited. I'm sure this is no
conspiracy to stop people from watching on-demand video from sites like
Netflix and Amazon Prime.
John Slade
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Well there are a couple of streaming services with 4K video.

So while it may be enough for existing 720p or even 1080p streams, you
have to think of what's coming too.

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-10-19 19:30:30 UTC

Post by sms
<http://www.mercurynews.com/2016/10/11/comcast-broadband-data-caps-coming-to-california-next-month/>
AT&T already has this cap.
Looks like it's an effort to stem the tide of cable cutters
dropping cable TV.
Might be a good time to start an antenna installation business.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus
software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

I can remember when the cap was 350GB per month. However I believe
they rarely punished people for exceeding the cap. 1TB is a lot and I
don't think the vast majority will mind. 700 hours of HD video is a lot
even for a family. I think if someone needs more bandwith, they can find
an unlimited provide, pay the extra $50 or get a business connection
from Comcas, I believe they are unlimited. I'm sure this is no
conspiracy to stop people from watching on-demand video from sites like
Netflix and Amazon Prime.
John Slade
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Well there are a couple of streaming services with 4K video.
So while it may be enough for existing 720p or even 1080p streams, you
have to think of what's coming too.

Currently for compatibility purposes 4K is h264 but this spring they may start using AC1 which they've been betting on. It will basically be Google's VP10 which is open source. I've encoded with their VP9 and you get amazing reduction in file size but with high quality. Google has paid off MPEG-LA so there will be no lawsuits over anything in that codec that might infringe on h265. You can see the results of VP9 if you have a device that supports it by selecting "stats for nerds" on YouTube. Be sure to do this in Chrome which supports VP9.

Hulu has been serving things in file sizes that would have been usually seen on web sites at around 600 MB for a 44 minute TV series but the quality is good for 720p. This is because there is less need to encode things in Base Profile for compatibility and with DASH you an query the device to see what it supports.

I don't have a 4K TV yet but have Shield TV by Nvidia which will downrez any 4K video I send it to 1080p. I do post 4K videos of my animations to YouTube. But my experiments allow me to compare file sizes between h264, h265 and VP9 at the same quality. BTW, the main difference between h264 and the other codes is that where h264 encoded things in 16x16 blocks the others encode in 64x64 blocks.

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-10-29 19:30:57 UTC

I will be interested in seeing my data usage on next month's U-Verse bill. This one had my usage going from 190 to 224. But my "cap" is 1024. However I watched a lot of VUDU the last two weeks because they launched a free with ads service which still streams at their high bit rates (~9 Mbps). The ads are infrequent and the breaks short so it is tolerable. It sorta reminds me of how TV stations used to run late night movies.

poldy

2016-10-30 18:58:59 UTC

Are their estimates of usage trustworthy?

Maybe they game things so you go over.

Anyways, unless you're streaming 4K video all the time, on multiple TVs,
you should be okay.

n***@sbcglobal.net

2016-10-31 18:01:09 UTC