Podcast for 9 February 2015

Started by MrBogosity, February 08, 2015, 06:28:11 PM

Previous topic - Next topic
[mp3]http://podcast.bogosity.tv/mp3s/BogosityPodcast-2015-02-09.mp3[/mp3]


Check out our Patreon page: https://www.patreon.com/shanedk

Co-Host: Travis Retriever

News of the Bogus:
28:56 - Biggest Bogon Emitter: The News Media http://blog.erratasec.com/2015/02/a-lesson-in-corrupt-press.html

33:36 - Idiot Extraordinaire: Mike LaSusa http://www.salon.com/2015/01/29/nightmare_libertarian_project_turns_country_into_the_murder_capital_of_the_world/
This Week's Quote: "If anyone thinks they can get an accurate picture of anyplace on the planet by reading news reports, they're sadly mistaken." —Bruce Schneier

February 08, 2015, 06:34:54 PM #1 Last Edit: February 08, 2015, 06:44:08 PM by D
One idea for the Patreon offers you could do is to simply allow patrons to make requests for videos/bits for you to talk about in a podcast.

I know on my Patreon account, that's primarily the kind of stuff I offer for my Youtube channel and with The Superplex Bros.

Allowing people to pick what kind of video or project they want you to do as a reward would be a pretty neat idea. Maybe you can split it up based on price. A lower price option could be letting the patron pick a subject for you to cover in one video, and maybe a higher price option could be to pick a project that's two or more videos?

Obviously that's all up to you, but it's an idea.

EDIT: Also, I have Comcast for my internet.

It's a good idea, and if you could talk me through how to do that it'd be great. I find Patreon to be VERY unintuitive, and there's basically no help section in the website (just a FAQ that doesn't do squat).

Also, my condolences on the Comcast thing.

Quote from: MrBogosity on February 08, 2015, 07:23:46 PM
It's a good idea, and if you could talk me through how to do that it'd be great. I find Patreon to be VERY unintuitive, and there's basically no help section in the website (just a FAQ that doesn't do squat).

Also, my condolences on the Comcast thing.

Yeah, we could go over that certainly. I certainly have some ideas, that's for certain.

I thought Shane's estimate of 10 Mb/s as a technology limit on DSL speeds was wrong, so I did a little checking.

In the lab, the fastest DSL design reached 10 Gb/s, and 1 Gb/s over conventional copper phone lines.

There are several forms available to consumers with 100 Mb/s or more down and over 25 Mb/s up.

Quote from: evensgrey on February 09, 2015, 09:16:13 AM
I thought Shane's estimate of 10 Mb/s as a technology limit on DSL speeds was wrong, so I did a little checking.

In the lab, the fastest DSL design reached 10 Gb/s, and 1 Gb/s over conventional copper phone lines.

There are several forms available to consumers with 100 Mb/s or more down and over 25 Mb/s up.

How far from the DSLAM is that? Remember that the further you are away, the slower the speed.

Quote from: MrBogosity on February 09, 2015, 09:30:48 AM
How far from the DSLAM is that? Remember that the further you are away, the slower the speed.

The highest listed speed (200 Mb/s total) was limited to 100m, and the next one down (100 Mb/s down) to 500m.  The rest didn't have the range limits listed where I found the listing.

Quote from: evensgrey on February 09, 2015, 01:13:34 PM
The highest listed speed (200 Mb/s total) was limited to 100m, and the next one down (100 Mb/s down) to 500m.  The rest didn't have the range limits listed where I found the listing.

But really, too close to be of use to most people, especially in rural areas.

I'm a TWC customer and I have to pay for the full package just get their 100MB/s internet.  Which is the fastest available in my area.
Working every day to expose the terrible price we pay for government.

Quote from: MrBogosity on February 09, 2015, 01:17:36 PM
But really, too close to be of use to most people, especially in rural areas.

DSL's only real advantage is it being technically easier to provide upstream bandwidth compared to coax-based cable TV networks (the coax levels tend to accumulate interference upwards, which was completely unimportant when it was carrying just analog TV, but a major problem when trying to convert it to handle bidirectional digital signals).  The interference problem is alleviated by bringing the fiber level lower in the system, but fiber is more difficult to work with than coax so it costs more to build and maintain any given level in it.

Now, funny story about fiber installation and repair skills.  A good many years ago now, the whole Rogers cable network in Ontario lost internet connectivity.  Everything inside the network was operating normally, but the then-single optical line to the rest of the world was cut by copper thieves near Saint Catherines.  That fiber line was under the control of one of the big telcos, and they were taking forever to fix it.  Rogers eventually tried to get the telco to let one of Rogers crack fiber splicing crews go in and fix it rather faster.  (Rogers, being a cable TV company, had crews that spent literally all day every day splicing optical fibers while making repairs and upgrades to the cable system, while the telco's crews were not nearly so practiced.)  I think the telco did eventually relent and let Rogers fix it.  This also spurred Rogers to finish their own fiber backbone connections to other access points, since copper thieves were an ongoing problem.

The discussion between Shane and Evensgrey reminded me of what I wanted to say regarding internet during the podcast.
The few people I've talked to about my terribad internet say the reason is because of how it's a rural area, compared to places like Japan which are very densely populated.  While that no doubt could make a difference, I'm not convinced that it's the single biggest factor that they make it out to be...
"When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole world—'No. You move.'"
-Captain America, Amazing Spider-Man 537

Quote from: Travis Retriever on February 09, 2015, 10:36:33 PM
The discussion between Shane and Evensgrey reminded me of what I wanted to say regarding internet during the podcast.
The few people I've talked to about my terribad internet say the reason is because of how it's a rural area, compared to places like Japan which are very densely populated.  While that no doubt could make a difference, I'm not convinced that it's the single biggest factor that they make it out to be...

The backbone capacity matters a lot, too.  To get fast speeds, both local loop and backbone connections need to be fast and fat.

While a high population density makes it easier to spread the costs of infrastructure over more users, there's also a strong tendency (in North America, at least) for providers to skimp on backbone capacity and try to limit user's actual usage to below what users thought they were purchasing.

Quote from: evensgrey on February 10, 2015, 07:02:56 AM
The backbone capacity matters a lot, too.  To get fast speeds, both local loop and backbone connections need to be fast and fat.

While a high population density makes it easier to spread the costs of infrastructure over more users, there's also a strong tendency (in North America, at least) for providers to skimp on backbone capacity and try to limit user's actual usage to below what users thought they were purchasing.

And because of websites like speedtest.net, they'll actually give you the higher bandwidth in "burst mode," meaning just for a couple of minutes, and then drop you down to a slower speed.

I've basically caught Charter doing things like this with YouTube uploads. I'll start an upload and it'll be around 60 minutes, then 10 minutes later it'll go up to 400 minutes. I'll cancel the upload, connect to my VPN provider (so they can't do traffic-shaping), and upload it again, and this time it actually does upload in 60 minutes.