I'm worried about how this will effect civictech, edtech, govtech story coverage which has been great in recent years on HN and are important for helping the community to be informed of how it's contributing and how individuals can contribute to addressing societal issues.
That parable is misleading. If his window wasn't broken then the shopowner would've invested it in some improvement to the store or as a safety cushion which would also trickle through to the relevant suppliers. We'd actually all be better off if the window wasn't broken because we should have some other investment that was equally valuable without having to lose the asset of the window.
This would be pay for play(speed) though. Not efficiency for play(speed).
Efficiency should rightfully be encouraged, but pay for speed effectively means the first entrant is the winner for the rest of time no matter their improvements in efficiency (obviously depending on the nature and implementation of these rumoured policies).
Which is why I'm confused why you guys are advocating this form of consumption over streaming? Assuming most people watch a piece of content once wouldn't it be more bandwidth efficient to transfer them the data on demand when you know they're going to watch it instead of them speculatively guessing what they want to watch and maybe not watching it?
When people watch is highly time-sensitive and congestion is the problem. If a non-streaming approach meant downloading 3x as much data but doing it at night rather than in the evening that would be a win.
