That is a HUGE if.

These places tend to be asset-less companies that do not care about being sued, they simply form another shell and fold.

Think about how much dirt the CIA has or can easily get on people. Would you rather have one story or years of them?

That is the problem your getting free "storage" from the grid. Traditional generation can not spool up and down as fast as wind/solar output changes. So in effect grid tied solar is getting a free ride as everybody else pays for that excess peeking capacity required. Better long distance transmission can help be balancing the system but it still requires a good amount of overbuilding to meet instant demands.

Now there is a good option for this. EV's have big batteries and plenty of computing and connectivity, making them a great fit to soak up baseline plant generation in the middle of the night and pump that back as needed. Go far enough down the line and hydro could be used to fill the gap since it's a fast responding clean base load generator.

Absolutely nothing and that leads to the desired effect of deliver as promised or go under.

And the solution is to do a chargeback for item not delivered. Suddenly kickstarter will feel the pain of the chargebacks and stop trying to foist the responsibility onto it's customers.

This is exactly the reason why micro investments are not legal in the US, VC capitol needs to be two things able to be lost and able to afford to sue. Yea it sucks to need a pile of cash in a bank to make what are very lucrative investments. People forget that VC is also adding contacts and business acumen besides cash.

Not throttling is part of the point of net neutrality. Requiring ISP's to build the capacity that's required to deliver what they paid for and requested by there users, not what they want them to offer. Sure sell 1mbps internet 1gbps comcast junk service but you better deliver that 1mbps of whatever your customers want and true in advertising better mean the 1mbps number is the big shiny one not the all you can eat comcast stuff.

Good ISP's are proactive and increase capacity using forward trending, it's not cheap but it's really not that expansive either. Most correct the issue quickly under 90 days. The bad leave connections saturated daily hoping it will go away and refusing to put anything into their product. Need to make the bad practices illegal for monopoly holders and the various corp constructs to separate monopoly and long haul carriers.

More of Cogent potentially having issues with the other tier 1's if this pushed them to be to asymmetric.

Cogent is a tier one Comcast is not. Cogent could drop the link forcing Comcast to pay for the traffic elsewhere vs getting it for the cost of peering (nearly free).

Having worked at a DOT the primary stumbling block to high speed rail is the NIMBLY's that have a house that backs up the the rail lines. The secondary issue is wanting to keep stations every town aka every few miles making the effective speed hard to get above 30mph with all the stops.

If Network A and B were of the same tier you have a point. Comcast thus be definition needs to increase the capacity of there peering or move the traffic to paid transit. They took option 3 use monopoly status to force netflix to pay, this is the broken part that needs to be stopped.

You forget Comcast is not a tier one they have paid transit. Cogent a teir one was nice enough to give comcast free peering, comcast failed to increase the capacity of that peering or get the traffic from paid transit. Thus they failed to acquire the bits there customers wanted.

The long and short comcast leveraged it's monopoly status to make netflix pay them.

Comcast not being a tier 1 is free to drop peering and then pay for the transit. They failed to upgrade the peering and failed to pick the traffic up via paid transit. So yes they are at fault they stopped delivering the traffic to the people that pay them to do so. And yes I am a network engineer in the public internet space. Hell they could have split the difference and threw some netflix vod servers into there network, this was a pure play to reach our customers eyeballs we do not care that they want your content.

This guy drank the koolaid.

If you come out with a new gen that makes less heat it means it can be more dense so the overall heat per racks stays at least similar (and often goes up). You would need something where the next gen produces less heat but is more sensitive to it to produce an optimal next gen that puts out less heat.

Oh I would be very happy to see fiber from a government run/sponsored co (completely passive no power needed) to every address.