I would chock it up to coincidence since ThioJoe does humorous videos.

Examples...

.

.

Hmm, looks like you're right, He did correctly write Maxwell's magnetic-induction equations in another video, but not hard if he's a computer-science guy.

Pretty funny about the computer oil change....

Big mess here in the room ... my brain exploded.

At 2mbps I'd be waiting an hour to post this.

Brushworks, that's interesting, because I'm able to view almost all videos (vimeo videos are kinda slow) with no skipping, delays, etc. Webpages load in seconds, large multi-megabyte images also. No "slow" issues whatsoever.

So, I dunno. Maybe it's a relative thing -- ie, what you're used to. Of course, downloading things like OS images (gigabytes) takes a while.

My ping is fast -- usually around 20-30ms (fair bit higher in the evenings), so that helps.

Ping is travel time for the information traveling from A to B. For highly interactive activities like intense gaming, it's a rough indication of the rate of responsiveness and reaction time the connection provides for commands and changes back and forth.

For normal web activity, it's not important. The farther away (geographically) the connection, the longer it takes. Once a packet stream starts without interruption, a user can't discern whether the arriving data's trip took 20ms, 200ms, or 2 seconds. It's not an indication of bandwidth. However, the difference between 2 vs 5 vs 10 MB in an internet connection is usually quite apparent.

(as already stated, that Youtube video is nonsense)

I was exaggerating, a bit. My service is 30 mbps. It's fast. When I visit my brother who uses AT&T 6 mbps, watching a netflix movie is quite annoying since it's choppy..lags, drops out..you name it.

6 MB service should be borderline adequate to avoid Netflix choppiness. Normally Netflix's equipment will automatically turn down image quality when it senses a problem, to avoid chops and halts and to keep the stream moving. This problem can arise from NUMEROUS causes, including but not limited to:

1-. Not getting the spec'd speed on the internet connection- check with a speed test

2- Wifi interference from neighbors - check, maybe change WIFI channel

3 - Weak signal to TV or device

4- Home network equip needs to be rebooted - modem and router

5- Other users in house

6- Faulty equipment in the signal path - age of home router, modem, TV equipment?

7- Bad connection wires

8- etc

He's a widower. It's a new setup, less than week old, TV hardwired to router. Still has lousy performance. According to yelp reviews in his city, the majority report <4 mbps with AT&T.

I can stream Netflix on my 3mbps service without lags or drops. The 'quality' graph on my Samsung DVD player through which the streaming is done indicates 11 of 13 bars.

I have DSL at the fastest offered speed -- nothing else is available other than satellite (and dialup). The reviews I see on satellite service like HughesNet, are not encouraging (& it's expensive), tho you'd think satellite would gradually improve.

Here's what Netflix says,

Below are the Internet download speed recommendations per stream for playing movies and TV shows through Netflix.

• 0.5 Megabits per second - Required broadband connection speed.
• 1.5 Megabits per second - Recommended broadband connection speed.
• 3.0 Megabits per second - Recommended for SD quality.

zep, Netflix does have "HD" content (at 720p) that they say requires 5 Mb. Someone whose 6 Mb service does deliver close to that is really only receiving packets at a 5 to 5.5 Mb rate because (as I've been told) there is "overhead" and administrative traffic that uses up something like 10-15 percent of the available pipe.

Brushworks, I'm not sure Yelp reviews are that useful unless this neighborhood has system wide problems. DSL speed is directly affected by distance. The signal travels over fiber-optic lines to neighborhood nodes, and then over the copper wire for the remainder. Available speed drops off as the distance of each installation increases from the fiber-optic distribution box, so that each house's experience can and will be different. Those closest to the distribution box will have a fast, steady, strong signal and those farther away (I think the limit is about 16000 feet from the node) will have a slower and less reliable signal.

A solicitation call from my cable ISP pushing for a higher speed package, the girlie insisted I couldn't possibly stream Netflix on 3mpbs. She had no response when I advised I'd already been doing it for a few years.

Elmer sez:

The signal travels over fiber-optic lines to neighborhood nodes, and then over the copper wire for the remainder.

Interesting -- I didn't imagine a fiber-optic line even went to my local telco (Verizon) station about 2.5 miles away. Certainly no fiber-optic lines to my house -- never will be.

Any opinions on satellite internet? The reviews I've read are usually scathing -- poor, unreliable connections, far-lower-than-advertised speed, no support, etc. Odd because satellite television service (Directv) is perfectly reliable, unless there's a thunderstorm blocking the signal. One would guess that even cable is receiving its signal originally from a satellite, then boosted.

A bit of trivia - traditional landlines, also known as POTS (plain old telephone service), USED TO use exclusively analog technology end to end. Folks who are old enough will remember poor quality long distance phone calls. Since several decades ago, POTS calls have changed, they do most of their traveling though the telco systems over digital links, including the Internet. That's why a cross country call or even an international call can sound like someone next door, the signal doesn't degrade with distance. But the so-called "last mile" of POTS service is analog over copper wire. Digital signals (like DSL) traveling over analog circuits have distance limitations. Those who have cable-supplied phone service or other VOIP have an entire digital path on their end for voice calls.

Internet service is digital. When DSL service was first "released", only customers located within 12,000- 15,000 feet (measured by the length of the wire) of a telco office could get it. That's because distance limit of digital signals over copper wire intended for analog phone calls and that the analog to digital conversion equipment was only housed in the central offices. The telcos had large build-out projects to string fiber lines out in hub and spoke configurations (with an office as the hub) to broaden the areas where DSL could be offered. In my area (telco formerly called Pacific Bell), there was a web page that listed their construction schedule and showed the dates for when particular neighborhood work would be done and where the sites were located. I remember when it was started for my area, I went to visit the guys at the local neighborhood drop as they added the needed equipment.

PS - satellite internet is for areas where no other internet service is available. Most will not offer service to a customer having an alternative. Satellite service tends to be very limited (only a few GB per month), expensive and has high latency (delays) because of the distance the signal has to travel.

TV service of all kinds is distributed by satellite. Whether the ultimate signal a user gets comes from a cable, from the phone company, or the obvious satellite providers, satellite transmission is used. If you pass by a regional office of a cable provider, for instance, you'll usually see large satellite dishes. I don't know all the details.

Elmer, I saw something interesting on the internet about DSL (can't remember where). It said there was broad-band over regular telephone lines long before it was offered to internet users. If you recall the old, coarse video of Lee Harvey Oswald being shot by Jack Ruby in Dallas (1963), that video was actually transmitted live to TV stations over standard telephone lines w/the electronics to do it cobbled together by electronics jockies.

I don't know anything about how TV content was transmitted then, that's before my time. I wasn't yet a teenager in 1963.

Elmer, below is the video that was transmitted live to local Dallas TV stations over telephone lines. I'd reckon the electronics guys had to cobble equipment together at the sending and receiving ends:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pv_viK8qOfw

I remember that particular scene, also the iconic photo with Oswald grimacing that was taken from another angle. I think video segments like that were typically shown on the network news programs, and indeed there were daily live national news programs at that time. There must have been various existing systems in place to move TV content from one place to another. It doesn't seem likely that something had to be cobbled together for the event.