YouTube Quietly, But Publicly, Shaming ISPs That Make Your Video Streams Stutter
from the good-for-them dept
For years, people have wondered if one of the best tools to prevent ISPs from behaving too badly in breaking net neutrality would just be public shaming. Netflix has long released data on ISP performance, and then got into some hot water last month when it started directly blaming ISPs for network congestion, leading Verizon to send a cease-and-desist letter. Quartz is reporting that YouTube has been doing something similar, though it's not quite as in-your-face as the Netflix example. If the connection is weak, YouTube displays a blue bar beneath the video, with the words "Experiencing Interruptions?" in white:Of course, all the public shaming in the world isn't going to matter much if ISPs are free to clog up interconnection points and you have no real competition to go to.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: congested networks, isps, net neutrality, public shaming, youtube
Companies: google, youtube
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Try it; Let the video fully buffer, meaning the entire bar is gray, then click slightly ahead in the video. The slider will jump to that position, the gray bar from that point to the end will disappear and then it will re-download from there to the end of the video.
It's an incredibly inefficient system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
For the license holders to 'allow' them to play some videos they want them to only allow the part you are watching to be available.
It does not matter that this makes zero fucking technical sense its all about the DRM feels.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Once it was downloaded, it was done. This was also true of prebuffering in general.
Lately I've noticed most videos won't prebuffer the entire amount anymore. Only about 30-60 seconds or so, no matter how long you leave it to buffer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
That have absolutely nothing to do with what the **AAs demand. The DRM can be unworkable, actively prevent legal customers from purchasing or using the content and still not prevent a single instance of piracy. But they'll still insist upon it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They changed it about a year ago, but there are ways to disable it:
http://www.cnet.com/how-to/return-to-youtubes-old-way-of-buffering-full-videos/
http://www.pcworld .com/article/2048105/force-youtube-to-buffer-your-entire-video.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about other bandwidth?
I will watch Youtube while someone else is either watching Netflix, or downloading.
I have on occasion seen that blue bar.
Will that negatively affect my ISP's ratings?
I actually have a decent local ISP. I don't want them to get unwarranted negative ratings due to my pipe being filled of my own accord.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about other bandwidth?
What I found kind of amusing was that Hughes Net in my area was relegated to "Low Definition", but the graphs actually showed a higher percentage of HD viewers than ISPs in the "Standard Definition" section. I did notice the graph had a lot of spikes on it though, so I'm guessing the number of users using Hughes Net was significantly lower than others with nicely smoothed curves in the graph, and that is penalizing them.
Satellite internet is terrible for lots of things, but streaming video (as long as you don't mind the initial latency), seems like it would be a good fit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wonderful!!!!
GOOD JOB GOOGLE/YOUTUBE and NETFLIX. KEEP IT UP!
I am tired of my 11mb down connection that I get for the bargain price of $80.00 a month going down to 500k and then having the ISP tell me "well, 500k is technically UP TO 11mbps"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
DSL, cable or other
One bit of information what would be useful is whether the provider's connection is DSL, cable or other.
From the methodology page, I think they are measuring download speed ("Response Size(R)/Response Time(R)").
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As if
Also, evidence for your claim about Mike Masnick would be interesting. (If not non-existent.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: As if
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: As if
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pre-Buffering
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
To the troll, this has nothing to do with copyright by any major label/studio as it was privately and independently filmed. It shows you spend no time reading to support your claims and therefore lowers your creditability to nil. It gives us all a good laugh at the idiocy put on display. You do your cause far more damage here by your thoughtless replies than anything we could say.
The ISPs have brought this on themselves, through their greed of wanting everyone to pay and then pay extra for nothing that should have already been included in the base price of the package bought. Overselling the resources and showing it can be eliminated also shows willful interference with network congestion.
I have nothing but respect for those companies attempting to show the users exactly where the issue is. The FCC appears to be corrupt enough that they can't really bite the bullet and do the right thing. This is the next best option to show the issue right out there where you can see it.
No wonder we are steadily going downhill in speed vs expense compared to the rest of the global internet access.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Youtube is the problem and they blame me... just like Netflix did.
How nice to see the fake transparency of the monolithic dinosaurs, blaming others for their shortcomings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha, Um What did He Say Doc?
Seems you have some copyright glitches of your own.
wtf happened to the X22 Report recently (ahem) we never did find out WHY you yanked that channel.
Who else had glitches recently?
Hagman and Hagman
WRH
Yeah, let's see the FACTS shall we?
(Non-abbreviated version please)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]