Tech News Today 284: Bandwidth Is Not A Bucket

Microsoft to ditch Windows? Does Spotify suck? The Internet makes it hard to remember…. something, and more.

Guest: Scott Johnson

Download or subscribe to this show at

Submit and vote on story coverage at

We invite you to read, add to, and amend our show notes at

Thanks to Cachefly for the bandwidth for this show.

Video URL:

Video URL (low quality):

Running time: 


2 Responses to “Tech News Today 284: Bandwidth Is Not A Bucket”

  1. Hi Tom and crew,

    I just wanted to weigh in on the bandwidth cap debate. I LOVE this show btw. Please keep up the good work. I listen to this show and Windows Weekly every week. Don’t change a thing.

    Anyway, IMO bandwidth is finite. Bandwidth is predicated on infrastructure. No infrastructure = no bandwidth. Crappy infrastructure = crappy bandwidth. It’s very expensive and time consuming to improve infrastructure. So due to the laws of economics bandwidth is finite. Example: oil, let’s assume oil in the ground replenishes itself and will never run out. However, we cannot use that oil until we get it out of the ground. It is very, very expensive and time consuming to get that oil. As oil demand increases the price goes up until infrastructure is added/improved. Bandwidth is exactly the same. Yes, there is plenty of bandwidth to be had, in theory, but we have to go get it.

    I do believe the fair route is bandwidth caps, in general. It’s hard to argue against a common sense solution. However it needs to be fair, and since they are evil I would prefer they leave us alone. But that’s not realistic. They will cap bandwidth.

    Our only real weapon against these id10t’s is ISP competition which they will fight against with all their considerable might.

    Street cred: 15 years Systems Admin. BSIS, MCSE 2000, 2003 CCNA, Security +.

  2. David C

    Hi Tom,

    Re the “transactive memory” story: shouldn’t it also be taken into account that there is more information to know than there ever has been in history? And that the information is growing exponentially?

    With the state of knowledge as it is it doesn’t make sense to remember facts; it’s much more efficient to remember the location of information. It’s not just because “we don’t have to” as Sarah suggested, as much as that it’s impossible to know everything, and this is the most efficient way to “know” as much as possible.

    Just something more to consider.