871–880 of 986 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> just some dude at the event with his phone Antonio Brown is not “just some dude”. He’s a national treasure.
Its a good thing he's rich and famous otherwise there might actually be consequences for him illegally broadcasting this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it doesn't. India has landed on Mars for a fraction of the cost it took other nations, and the ESA has never been able to pull it off. Not every cost is fungible and money isn't always the limiting factor.
>India has landed on Mars for a fraction of the cost it took other nations, and the ESA has never been able to pull it off. This further confirms my assertion, btw.
If I have to spell it out you're clearly debating in bad faith and we're done here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it doesn't. India has landed on Mars for a fraction of the cost it took other nations, and the ESA has never been able to pull it off. Not every cost is fungible and money isn't always the limiting factor.
> Not every cost is fungible and money isn't always the limiting factor Sure. This isn’t relevant to Netflix.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>India has landed on Mars for a fraction of the cost it took other nations, and the ESA has never been able to pull it off. This further confirms my assertion, btw.
If it is just a matter of paying up, why hasn't ESA pulled it off? I'm pointing out and offering examples that "solved problem" has no bearing on the ease or organization capacity of any one group to do it. It is merely a statement that no unknown, new solution needs be invented. If I have to spell it out you're clearly debating in bad faith and we're done here.
Who cares if a thousand guys are incapable? (like Netflix, lmao)
What matters are the ones that can do it, and you even said they've done it at "a fraction of the cost".
Paraphrasing, your argument says more about the incompetence of the ESA than the impossibility of doing such thing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that “very likely”? I’m genuinely curious about the reasoning behind that statement. It’s very possible that you are using a different set of assumptions or definitions than I am.
I say that because, for performance reasons, you’d never want to wait on potentially several hops to stream media and because the act of streaming could very well be a good enough domain boundary.
Every time a big company screws up, there are two highly informed sets of people who are guaranteed to be lurking, but rarely post, in a thread like this: 1) those directly involved with the incident, or employees of the same company. They have too much to lose by circumventing the PR machine. 2) people at similar companies who operate similar systems with similar scale and risks. Those people know how hard this is a…
I've noticed this amongst the newer "careerist" sort of software developer who is stumbling into the field for money, as opposed to the obsessive computer geek of yesteryear, who practiced it as a hobby. This character archetype is a transplant, say, less than five years ago from another, often non-technical discipline, and was taught or learned from overly simplistic materials that decry systems programming, or netw…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> they want to be associated with "Faang" and yet their product is not really technology based. You lost me. Netflix built a massive CDN, a recommendation engine, did dynamic transcoding of video, and a bunch of other things, at scale, quite some years before everyone else. They may have enshittified in the last five years, but I dont see any reason why they dont have a genuinely legitimate claim to being a founder m…
Pornhub has better, more reliable technology than Netflix, yet you don't see their tech blog very often do you?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can explain these problems with simple business metrics that technologists like to ignore. Right before the recent Twitter acquisition, the various bits of info that came to the limelight included the "minor detail" that they had more than doubled their headcount and associated expenses, but had not doubled either their revenue or profits. Technology complexity went up, the business went backwards. Thousands of p…
> Right before the recent Twitter acquisition, the various bits of info that came to the limelight included the "minor detail" that they had more than doubled their headcount and associated expenses, but had not doubled either their revenue or profits. Every tech company massively inflated their headcount during the leadup to the Twitter acquisition because money was free. I interviewed at Meta in 2021 and asked an E…
Assuming Netflix used its extensive edge cache network to distribute the streams to the ISPs. The software on the caching servers would have been updated to be capable of dealing with receiving and distributing live streamed content, even if maybe the hardware was not optimal for that (throughput vs latency is a classic networking tradeoff).
Now inside the ISPs network again everyting would probably be optimized for the 99.99% usecase of the Netflix infra: delivering large bulk data that is not time sensitive. This means very large buffers to shift big gobs of packets in bulk.
As everything along the path is trying to fill up those buffers before shipping to the next router on the path, some endpoints aware this is a live stream start cancelling and asking for more recent frames ...
Hilarity ensues
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are basically saying, everybody who criticizes Netflix now has no clue. That’s a bold claim given that people with inside knowledge could post here without disclosing they are insiders. Is that some kind of No True Scotsman?
At the scale that Netflix just dealt with? Yeah I honestly think this is a case where less than 5000 people in the world are really qualified to comment.
It’s a very different problem to distributing video on demand which is Netflix’s core business.