<html><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br><div><div>On Feb 21, 2009, at 7:43 AM, Pekka Nikander wrote:</div><blockquote type="cite"><div>Or, when in 2018 I will drive to Fry's to buy my 100TB disk at $100, should I pick it pre-filled with a web cache, my favourite movies, or what? Or will still I wait for it the three months it takes to be filled at constant 100 Mb/s, my upstream Tier-2 apparently still paying maybe $1/Mb/month to its Tier-1 for transit (instead of the present $20/Mb/month)?</div></blockquote><br></div><div>I'm not sure that is a purely technical question, but rather one directed at <a href="https://www.isc.org/files/9layer.thumb.png%0A">layers 8 and 9.</a></div><div><br></div><div>The MPAA will see 100TB of movies as being worth rather more than a fraction of $100. They will see a disc filled with ~2000 HD movies as being worth more like $40000. And unless they can be convinced that they will see that revenue later as you spend the $$ to unlock the content stored on the disc they will likely make it (legally) impossible to do anything but dribble them onto the disc in a pay-as-you-fill model. </div><div><br></div><div>My picking the MPAA was simply the most convenient example, the same idea would hold, perhaps with different constants for just about any content on that disc drive - what guarantee would be in place that those advertising on the pages in the web cache will see their (collective) much, Much, MUCH more than $100 in advertising revenue as you browse the disc, etc etc etc</div><div><br></div><div>rick jones</div><div apple-content-edited="true"> <div><div><a href="http://www.cafepress.com/mysonthewit.51075506">there is no rest for the wicked, yet the virtuous have no pillows</a></div> </div> </div><br></body></html>