21–30 of 42 posts
This is every telco evil empire's ultimate dream. Charge all customers twice! Let the second charge be pure profit which you can direct to the critically important expenditure of executive bonuses!
The second charge being “pure profit” is just, not how accounting works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of Korea's homegrown Twitch alternatives, AfreecaTV, uses AWS Cloudfront to serve video to users. Amazon wins either way.
That can't be cheap. How are they making that work, from a financial perspective, when Twitch couldn't?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I think that people that talk like this need to get a sense of perspective and perhaps reserve such vitriolic and dramatic language for actual problems instead of conversations about video resolution.
I'm aware that's a bit of a leap to get from "lowering quality" to "drm sucks and is a terrible idea", but as I see things, drm defeats the purpose of having an internet
and it is an even bigger jump (at least 16-bits? ahaha) to understand the connection between twich and south korea (who pays for the bits?)
it's remarkable how you critizice my 'lack of perspective', because your comment requires that I narrow my perspective enought that I can fill in the gaps in my own opinion such a way that you get what I'm trying to say
I don't agree with SK "Internet tax" concept but isn't it sweet that an Amazon-owned company suffers this end? Yeah, I'm looking at you, AWS egress prices and NAT-gw.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One of Korea's homegrown Twitch alternatives, AfreecaTV, uses AWS Cloudfront to serve video to users. Amazon wins either way.
That can't be cheap. How are they making that work, from a financial perspective, when Twitch couldn't?
I don't agree with SK "Internet tax" concept but isn't it sweet that an Amazon-owned company suffers this end? Yeah, I'm looking at you, AWS egress prices and NAT-gw.
For the uninformed: AWS has pricing on NAT gateways that can only really be described as predatory. I personally saw a massive bill this year for sending data to and from a bucket in the same data center . In other words. I have a service. It’s in us-west-2. I have it sending a bunch of data back and forth between it and a S3 bucket, in the exact same data center. Unless you have some arbitrary checkbox checked in AW…
Apparently most of the AWS services are things that Amazon teams needed and built, which is why the UX and options for them are all over the place.
I’d attribute that checkbox to that rather than AWS evil.
They also just have 0 incentive it make it better. Third parties like vercel do it for them at a premium.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That can't be cheap. How are they making that work, from a financial perspective, when Twitch couldn't?
Because Amazon has no reason to risk Twitch profitablity. Twitch is not a profit maker it's a profit guarantee. Twitch doesn't need to compete with Kick or Afreekas. Amazon makes money.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the uninformed: AWS has pricing on NAT gateways that can only really be described as predatory. I personally saw a massive bill this year for sending data to and from a bucket in the same data center . In other words. I have a service. It’s in us-west-2. I have it sending a bunch of data back and forth between it and a S3 bucket, in the exact same data center. Unless you have some arbitrary checkbox checked in AW…
I was speaking with an AWA engineer recently. Apparently most of the AWS services are things that Amazon teams needed and built, which is why the UX and options for them are all over the place. I’d attribute that checkbox to that rather than AWS evil. They also just have 0 incentive it make it better. Third parties like vercel do it for them at a premium.
0: https://www.lastweekinaws.com/blog/the-aws-managed-nat-gatew...
Basically all about having a homegrown solutions for South Korea, so the money flows there rather than an international corporation. What will be interesting is if that homegrown solution is also used overseas, as then other countries will have to consider whether to retaliate with a similar "tax".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because Amazon has no reason to risk Twitch profitablity. Twitch is not a profit maker it's a profit guarantee. Twitch doesn't need to compete with Kick or Afreekas. Amazon makes money.
You misunderstood the question
AWS isn't closing down their Seoul data center, it's just letting AfreecaTV take the risk of streaming while still getting profits from said streaming.