Hacker News Reader

I didn't say anything about "quitting".

Just a significant number deciding it is time to back up their content.

And at the backbone level it is all charged by the Mbps for example http://www.level3.com/en/legal/ip-traffic-exchange-policy/ http://blog.streamingmedia.com/2014/02/transit-works-costs-i... So a jump in a significant portion of the user base from a few MB per user per day to several GB will be several thousand times more expensive for that day.

View on HN

That information, while factually correct, isn't applicable to Google in the same way it is to say [insert most other websites].

Google is not a tier 1 provider, there are only 6 of them.

Putting traffic into a tier 1 network costs, taking it pays.

A massive surge from Googles hardware onto the tier 1 networks will be very, very expensive.

Last time it came up was as the BitTorrent protocol started blowing up ISPs that couldn't pay the bills.

Google peers with many national and regional ISPs at exchange points. I don't know the exact numbers, but I'm guessing a fairly significant portion of their traffic does not go over traditional "tier 1" networks and rather is handed off directly to ISPs.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com