←back to thread

492 points storf45 | 1 comments | | HN request time: 1.526s | source
Show context
dylan604 ◴[] No.42157048[source]
People just do not appreciate how many gotchas can pop up doing anything live. Sure, Netflix might have a great CDN that works great for their canned content and I could see how they might have assumed that's the hardest part.

Live has changed over the years from large satellite dishes beaming to a geosat and back down to the broadcast center($$$$$), to microwave to a more local broadcast center($$$$), to running dedicated fiber long haul back to a broadcast center($$$), to having a kit with multiple cell providers pushing a signal back to a broadcast center($$), to having a direct internet connection to a server accepting a live http stream($).

I'd be curious to know what their live plan was and what their redundant plan was.

replies(6): >>42157110 #>>42157117 #>>42157164 #>>42159101 #>>42159285 #>>42159954 #
diggan ◴[] No.42157110[source]
> People just do not appreciate how many gotchas can pop up doing anything live.

Sure thing, but also, how much resources do you think Netflix threw on this event? If organizations like FOSSDEM and CCC can do live events (although with way smaller viewership) across the globe without major hiccups on (relatively) tiny budgets and smaller infrastructure overall, how could Netflix not?

replies(4): >>42157143 #>>42157462 #>>42157501 #>>42158967 #
1. dylan604 ◴[] No.42157462[source]
> how much resources do you think Netflix threw on this event?

Based on the results, I hope it was a small team working 20% time on the idea. If you tell me they threw everything they had at it to this result, then that's even more embarrassing for them.