[EDIT] since i'm getting downvoted, maybe someone can tell me how a CDN is not a perfect tool for cross-domain tracking. and also how it's not convenient that Verizon can track the browsing habits of users coming from their competitors' IP address blocks
What incentive does Verizon have to spend money to track users across domains? Ultimately, Verizon exists to make money for their shareholders. ISPs do have to do things HN readers don't like to make the government happy (like comply with secret warrants), but they are not legally required to buy CDNs to make some sort of user tracking easier. The NSA can wiretap a CDN as easily as they can wiretap Verizon.
Perhaps Verizon thinks the business is underpriced for the value it offers, or they want to deliver a better user experience to their customers?
Given Verizon's high penetration of the ISP market in the US, they have much better sources of traffic patterns anyway, and can link that with direct billing information.
ISP cache stuff and can sell traffic, cross-domain tracking is nothing.
I think we worry too much. We should focus on making our cryoto stronger, not about some cross-domain tracking. If third-party cookie is already a mess, cross-domain tracking is always a mess. Let's focus on something more practical and more important. Half of the websites nowadays probably add Google analytic and Google knows a lot about users for you (even if Google only stores the statistics).
Could this have anything to do with the fact they partnered with Redbox to provide a streaming service? Seems like it would be a very useful thing if they wanted to make a bigger push.
I would have thought CDNs are a dead model today... being fundamentally more useful for static content, and with software service architecture moving fundamentally but steadily toward arbitrary infrastructure/cloud friendliness, they'd be a poor long term investment.
Heh, funny you mention that. Video has this wow factor that's undeserved: it's really nothing special, just some higher processing, storage and bandwidth requirements.
Funnily enough, three years ago I actually visited Edgecast's main office in LA on behalf of a former employer, a well known global video solutions provider. We discussed global partnership for them offering our streaming solutions but didn't wind up partnering with them as there was little commercial justification in handing them our technology, effectively commodifying our admittedly few but still important USPs.
As for Edgecast, I seem to recall that their delivery speed to Asia was particularly weak. US companies should think twice before trusting other US companies to deliver their content to the rest of the world. It's a strangely routed internet out there...
Sure, traditional static content CDNs are rapidly becoming commodified, but video CDNs are a big deal, and CDNs that can push API-related functionality closer to clients are becoming more useful.
15 comments
[ 4.0 ms ] story [ 42.6 ms ] thread[EDIT] since i'm getting downvoted, maybe someone can tell me how a CDN is not a perfect tool for cross-domain tracking. and also how it's not convenient that Verizon can track the browsing habits of users coming from their competitors' IP address blocks
Perhaps Verizon thinks the business is underpriced for the value it offers, or they want to deliver a better user experience to their customers?
Nahh... it must be some conspiracy!!!11!
I think we worry too much. We should focus on making our cryoto stronger, not about some cross-domain tracking. If third-party cookie is already a mess, cross-domain tracking is always a mess. Let's focus on something more practical and more important. Half of the websites nowadays probably add Google analytic and Google knows a lot about users for you (even if Google only stores the statistics).
http://thenextweb.com/media/2012/02/06/verizon-and-redbox-en...
[1] http://www.terremark.com/services/infrastructure-cloud-servi...
[2] acquired in 2011 http://www.terremark.com/about/news-events/news/2011/0127201...
Funnily enough, three years ago I actually visited Edgecast's main office in LA on behalf of a former employer, a well known global video solutions provider. We discussed global partnership for them offering our streaming solutions but didn't wind up partnering with them as there was little commercial justification in handing them our technology, effectively commodifying our admittedly few but still important USPs.
As for Edgecast, I seem to recall that their delivery speed to Asia was particularly weak. US companies should think twice before trusting other US companies to deliver their content to the rest of the world. It's a strangely routed internet out there...
Sure, traditional static content CDNs are rapidly becoming commodified, but video CDNs are a big deal, and CDNs that can push API-related functionality closer to clients are becoming more useful.