Pit Schultz on Mon, 17 Jun 2002 02:46:11 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> where has all the bandwith gone? |
the broadband issue is of great interest for nettimers for different reasons. the materiality of the internet besides the invested labour of users, is represented by its lowest layers, the physical one and the the one of switched packets. controling those layers means controling the 'means of production'. non-mainstream content shouldn't be hirarchized by data-types. a usual text needs 40 kb, a usual audio track 4 MB, and a usual movie takes 800 MB (divx) and in DVD quality 4,5 GB. it would be a bit absurd, to claim that trough 'bandwidth scarcity' textual production would play a higher role in cultural production than other formats. the cultural politics of the net are very much co-determined by it's economical basic conditions. the implications might be different for producers, distributors, consumers and their various mixes, but it certainly matters if i have to pay 6 euros per gigabyte or just 10 cents. the latter would be possible if kpnquest, firstmark, globallcrossing and however the fibreoptics backbones are called, would have made their full capacity available to resellers. interestingly there is not much investigative online journalism concerning the developments of the bandwidth market. a long time ago, i tried to remember nettimers to george gilder's dream of the bandwidth glut. like other messianic out-of-control consultants he influenced the dot-com mania a lot, in its underlaying ideology of hypergrowth. the negativity of this absolute optimism turns out today as a phase of restauration, a rethorics of dull praxis, a culture of looking backwards and historify the last glorious years. that not all nice ideas about the future (like free bandwidth) get real as fast as promised by the cyber-prophets mean that they are completly wrong. first it seems that the users themselves stand in the way of an unlimited bandwidth future. enjoying the new possiblities of digital fluidity (p2p etc.) they activily supported the crash of almost every 'soft' content driven audio, video, streaming or otherwise broadband driven dot-com project, which started with 'free services' in expectation to "buy out" the "free floating" productivity of its users. this 'fall of the profit rate' resembles the story of immaterial labour, the promises of communism... the question is what went wrong in building up a consciousness of the users? clear is, that there are no larger numbers of customers which pay for the infrastructure layed out arround these glorious info-autobahn-plans, might they be called broadband, next generation mobile phones, video-telephony or flying cars. it is the tragedy of the wired economy, that the leading american technological dreams, were inspired by a immature or at least incomplete intellectual culture and not by social needs. the broadband future was mostly described in scenarios resembling the techno-futurism beginning in the 50ies, with fully automatic homes, and a user experience directly inspired by the narratives arround extraterrestial space colonialisation. let's take another look at the laws of internet traffic. today just the costs of streaming down a 90 minute divx video with 1000kbps at the side of the host (website) is at least as high than what one has to pay to rent out two VHS tapes at the local video shop. (6 euro) any royality payments have to be added to it. if the video content industry would be willing to compete with p2p services they would have to first find a way to pay prices for bandwidth which are not 'free market prices', it possibly means they would simply own those backbone infrastructure, which is available for a low price at the moment. once described heroically by neil stevenson, the big fibreoptic grid is "for sale" like a ghost town after the gold rush. another technology, called multicasting which would make internet broadcast economical, is not happening yet, because some smart companies are customizing old switching protocols to the max, developing 'smart routers' and therefore adding complexity on the backbone level, instead of upgrading to the next stage. legislation of standards is not taking place, because the 'out of control' ideology still supports in the market forces. (see above) it is obvious that the future of broadband is delayed as long digital rights management, supported by copyright laws which are written for and by the industry, plus all kinds of dirty tweaking of routing protocols, and caching traffic is basically *closing* the internet modeled after what is known from private sattelite tv. in the moment payment schemes will be in place and alternatives can be shut down technically and legaly, very likely broadband will be there immediatly. strange is that in germany, the royality collectors are claiming to get payed back for every piece of hardware, cd-burners, harddrives. the other option, that internet traffic itself, through some kind of copy-tax, a per gigabyte fee for using the internet like radio stations or public tv is not considered yet. it would possibly enable the smaller content holders and providers to run viable business models. it is again a mix of cultural backwardness and "mafia lobbyism" which supports models which are not innovative and do not support small business. the time in which filesharing is sponsored through DSL flatrates can be also over soon. there are plenty of projects which really need "public bandwidth" to contine to provide their cultural content for free, and i speak about many terabytes a month. there is plenty of interest on the side of the users. i'd be interested if nettimers are interested to discuss these practical issues on this list. it is one thing to make a "we want bandwidth" campaign sucessful, it is another to find 'open' ways to distribute and allocate available public bandwidth usefully once you got a lot of it from your local cultural authority... so far institutions of media culture do not see their role in the tradition of a project like www.archive.org maybe that can be changed? # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net