At this week’s GigaOm Roadmap conference, Samsung SVP Curtis Sasaki made a plea for better uses cases in the device world. To paraphrase – it’s not about all the technology, it’s about the services. At the same time his company was suggesting a future more familiar to Samsung watchers – more technological prowess.
Samsung, never one to be left behind, is in fact converging with Netflix in the next generation of devices and services. Netflix announced 4K streaming video plans last week. Samsung is headed the same way.
To put some context on this a 4k signal requires a minimum 36Mbps bandwidth to run in any sort of credible fashion. And that's a minimum and assumes high compression. 1080p, the current BluRay standard, has a maximum 40Mbps data rate now and Netflix's "HD" service cannot even approach that quality today.
Netflix claims it is going to "deliver" 4k signals while consuming 15Mbps, which is laughable for actual 4k content, particularly where there's a lot of motion on the screen. What's even more laughable is that there are virtually no consumer-grade connections available that can deliver even that throughput on a constant-drain basis with reasonably-low jitter.
And that's a problem, because it is not just burst rates when you're talking about video. You have to be able to maintain transfer rates end-to-end for an hour or two at a crack, or the video "stutters."
I have run a lot of long-term data flows between places in the last few years for various purposes, including keeping systems in-sync between disparate locations. It ain't cheap to buy service that can deliver continual delivery of data on a high-rate basis. Oh sure, you can buy so-called "20Mbps" service, but that's a burst rate and will never be sustained without drops or problems over an hour or two. That's just not going to happen, and even if it did -- it would hold one user on Netflix and nothing else in the house at the same time, with their crappy compression model that displays highly-degraded "4k" content.
Never mind on mobile -- you can just flat forget it. Not that it has any value on a 5" screen, mind you -- your eyes can't resolve that and neither can current screen technology.
In short these guys are pumping 1999-style hype all over again and you're the sucker who is supposed to go out and buy the stock of these companies.
Anyone who actually believes you're going to have this claimed service delivered for $9/month and a $20/month cable internet bill (or anything like it) has rocks in their head. Those who "invest" on this sort of crap salesjob are going to find out exactly how it plays out when the collision between bandwidth demanded and consumer wallets occurs, and that collision is going to be highly inelastic.
/Long popcorn with my feet kicked up on the ottoman.
Johannesburg - A Pretoria orphanage says it is no longer getting financial support from large companies as 70% of the children in its care are white.
Elzane van der Merwe of the Jacaranda children’s home said: “The only answer that the children’s home is getting is: ‘Sorry, you don’t meet the criteria for 100% black economic empowerment (BEE),” reported Beeld.
You can only have "empowerment" if you help black children.
But I thought the principle of apartheid was that you could only have economic empowerment (or any other sort) if you were white, yes?
So let's see..... it's very bad to have racism against black people, but when the situation is reversed the man who led to that happening should be canonized, our flags should fly at half-mast and we should revere him.
Did I miss something here or did that go down the same memory hole with the other "minor little issues" with Mandela's history?
The problem with exponential cost growth (that is, extraction from the economy) is that you eventually run into a solid granite wall in the form of what the economy can actually deliver.
This is where the US medical "industry" has found themselves -- by exercising monopoly controls of various sorts they have managed to drive the cost of care up 500% or more over where it would be in a free market. Doubt me? Take a routine birth's price from 1963 and inflate it by the CPI -- it's under $1,000 complete including three nights in the hospital.
Try to find the ability to match that for under 500% above that price -- you can't.
But our economy simply can't bear any more of this expansion in health care costs at a rate beyond that of real output, and with real output (as I've documented) falling the escalation of health care costs becomes an even larger problem. Over the last couple of decades this scheme has been almost-exclusively responsible for the huge budget deficits at the national level, along with virtually all of the state and local budget pressures and bankruptcy threats.
We as Americans have individually and collectively refused to put a stop to it; Obamacare is just the latest iteration of using government force, including violence, to extract ever higher percentages of the economy's output from you for the benefit of a particular industry.
Nor is this a singular event or procedure-based issue either. It's broad-based across the entire system and having hit the wall here in the United States the medical industry is now clamoring to apply the same scam to other nations.
There's only one problem -- sovereign nations don't have to listen to US corporations. They have every right to throw up the middle finger, and many other nations refuse to play, instead telling the companies involved that if they try this crap on their soil they'll break patents and tell the firms to pound sand.
The Obama administration is insisting on mandating new intellectual property rules in the treaty that would grant pharmaceutical companies long-term monopolies on new medications. As a result, companies can charge high prices without regard to competition from generic providers.
So what do you say to a man -- or a government -- that backs a corporation that first demands to bankrupt you and then proceeds to kill you outright?
Further, what's the proper response to such a demand by a foreign government? Exactly how does this differ from sending troops, occupying a foreign nation, asset-stripping it raw and shooting anyone who resists?
We've certainly put our fingers as Americans in places where they don't belong. But when we try to force another nation to void its own sovereignty we have gone too far, and we deserve as a nation whatever we get in response.
Let us not forget that the acts of our government that have happened and are continuing today in this regard can only happen with the consent of the governed, that being of course us -- and thus we have in the past and are today consenting.
Silence and inaction in the face of outrageous acts are -- at minimum -- consent.
The White House acknowledged Thursday that President Obama lived with his uncle for a brief period in the 1980s while he was a student at Harvard Law School -- despite previously saying there was no record of the two having met.
So let me see if I get this right.
The White House says that Obama never met Onyango "Omar" Obama for years.
Then, when he testifies under oath that Barry Soetero lived with him, which likely has left some indelible tracks that can actually be proved up, then and only then does Obama admit to it.
See the pattern here folks?
Oh yeah, you can keep your health plan -- and doctor -- if you want to.
Voice of Russia: Is Obamacare a Ponzi scheme?Karl Denninger: No, because a Ponzi scheme implies that the people who get in early make money and everybody else loses whatever they put in to this system. In this case it's just simply theft, just going to steal from everybody, because Obamacare is an attempt to take a monopoly system that has been built up in our medical environment over the last 20-30 years, and find some way to continue to extract the money that it has been taking out of the people's pockets, because the growth rate has exceeded the growth of income, so people are not able to pay anymore.
Read more at the link.
Ed: The interview itself was via skype; transcription was theirs.
Where We Are, Where We're Heading (2013) - The annual 2013 Ticker
The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions.
NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.
The author may have a position in any company or security mentioned herein. Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility.
Looking for "The Best of Market Ticker"? Check out Ticker Classics.
Market charts, when present, used with permission of TD Ameritrade/ThinkOrSwim Inc. Neither TD Ameritrade or ThinkOrSwim have reviewed, approved or disapproved any content herein.
The Market Ticker content may be reproduced or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media or for commercial use.
Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.