pmetzger@lehman.com (Perry Metzger) writes:

Doug Merritt says:

...

I hate to disagree, considering that I prefer to agree with the philosophy here, but it *can't* work that way, regardless of what we wish.

The problem is that bandwidth is a highly limited resource, just like real estate is a limited resource. Eventually we will complete saturate network bandwidth no matter what technology is used.

I don't know about you, but I personally can't produce more than 750 simultaneous videos at once for network distribution, so I suppose I'm uninteresting, but even the people who can do more than that are likely going to be fine. If they aren't, well, I suppose they could get TWO fibers coming into their home, or maybe even TEN or ONE HUNDRED if necessary.

I suspect that we have a wee bit longer to go than that. When people start faxing themselves regularly we may have to go to slightly more exotic technologies.

Apparently, information-theoretically, there is a limit to the bandwidth available in any given area of space before overlapping of signal occurs. While I don't agree that it is likely to occur soon, eventually we will hit an information bottleneck; probably somewhere after we manage to use subquantal particles as signal-carriers. Our current system would, indeed, allow people to fax themselves regularly; in fact, I occasionally fax things to myself already. However, when people start doing genuinely exotic things, such as emailing their entire genome to their doctor; or emailing vast files on self-administered MRI tests to the hospital; or transmitting graphical images of components for something as simple as factory work; then we'll seriously have to think about theoretical bandwidth limitations. However, with any luck we'll be off the planet, and will have the infinite bandwidth we need by the time we need it. ---- Robert W. F. Clark PGP Key Available Upon Request rclark@nyx.cs.du.edu clark@metal.psu.edu