[sldev] Cache politics: performance vs obfuscation

[Loom]

On 11/06/2008, Ann Otoole <missannotoole at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Let us ensure we have the priorities straight.
> With Time Warner and other cable modem service providers preparing to
> implement bytes transferred caps it is imperative that the cache operation
> overall be improved to ensure there is no repetitive downloading of bytes.
>
> It simply will not matter if the bytes are obfuscated if the population of
> Secondlife is gutted by a large scale *perceived inability* to afford to
> participate.
>
> Save SL first. Then worry about the rest.
> If SL dies because of consumers *not being aware of their choices in
> service providers* then nothing really matters does it?
>
I realise that you have used the word "perceived" in there but I would like
to suggest that usage caps are not going to kill secondlife.

Personally, I don't agree with the idea of usage caps, however in Australia
we have lived with them for quite a while.

>From the march 2008 economic stats, there were 12,245 active Australian
users or about 0.057% of the population, who clocked up an average of 47
hours each - using usage capped internet connections.

Compare that with the US where 194,899 active users (0.064% of the
population) clocked up an average of 59 hours each.

At worst, SL may take a hit in usage, but suggesting that it will die is
imho an extreme view which is more in the line of fearmongering than
rational analysis.

Loom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20080611/70d710a4/attachment.htm