The Internet will never satisfy its lust for Net Neutrality and Bandwidth

PatrThom

PatrThom

blotsfan

blotsfan

Obviously I'd prefer it back at the federal level, but the reason nothing has changed even after it got banned was because California passed a law requiring it, and the cable companies found it to be not worth it to have a seperate system for one state and not the rest (especially since likely every blue state would've followed suit if they had to)
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

www.techdirt.com

FCC Finally Updates America’s Pathetic Definition Of ‘Broadband’ To 100 Mbps

For decades, the FCC has maintained an arguably pathetic definition of “broadband,” allowing the telecom industry to under-deliver substandard access. After some industry lobbying to ensure it wasn…
www.techdirt.com www.techdirt.com
Previously, in order to advertise as "broadband," all that was required was 25/3. This means that the majority of DSL connections can no longer be classified as "broadband," since at-the-home DSL speeds higher than 25Mbps are not common in the USA.
More importantly, this might, MIGHT, affect coverage maps and surveys which seek to determine whether or not certain areas have more than one competing "broadband" provider, since anyone who can't provide BOTH a 100Mbps downstream speed and a 20Mbps upstream speed will not be allowed to call themselves "broadband."

--Patrick
 
Bones

Bones

PatrThom said:
www.techdirt.com

FCC Finally Updates America’s Pathetic Definition Of ‘Broadband’ To 100 Mbps

For decades, the FCC has maintained an arguably pathetic definition of “broadband,” allowing the telecom industry to under-deliver substandard access. After some industry lobbying to ensure it wasn…
www.techdirt.com www.techdirt.com
Previously, in order to advertise as "broadband," all that was required was 25/3. This means that the majority of DSL connections can no longer be classified as "broadband," since at-the-home DSL speeds higher than 25Mbps are not common in the USA.
More importantly, this might, MIGHT, affect coverage maps and surveys which seek to determine whether or not certain areas have more than one competing "broadband" provider, since anyone who can't provide BOTH a 100Mbps downstream speed and a 20Mbps upstream speed will not be allowed to call themselves "broadband."

--Patrick
Click to expand...
thus why i just got a free upgrade to my comcast fiber speeds! LOL
 
bhamv3

bhamv3

Sometimes I feel like a luddite when it comes to Internet speeds because I'm perfectly happy with my 30 down / 1 up connection. Just a couple of years ago I had something like a 12 Mbps download speed and I was still completely satisfied. I wouldn't know what to do with 100 Mbps.
 
Bubble181

Bubble181

bhamv3 said:
Sometimes I feel like a luddite when it comes to Internet speeds because I'm perfectly happy with my 30 down / 1 up connection. Just a couple of years ago I had something like a 12 Mbps download speed and I was still completely satisfied. I wouldn't know what to do with 100 Mbps.
Click to expand...
Like another forumite, you could set up a media server and grant us all access to your hoard. Of course we might all be horrified and traumatized, but that's a risk I'm willing to take.

More seriously, working from home through a VPN and then through another tunnel reduces my bandwidth by a factor ten or something, and having video meetings and conferences takes quite a bit of it.
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
Best update EVER! Only trouble is it happened during an election year so unless we get out & make sure Trump doesn't get back in to fuck things up again....Trump will get back in and fuck things up again.
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

Been following this all day. Along with all the people who are saying that the only thing this means is more governmental overreach and snooping into our online communications.

--Patrick
 
Bubble181

Bubble181

Ask of Cox' BS aside... So this is a law aimed at giving money to the first - and only the first - company providing decent internet to a location ? Was this law written specifically to help sustain regional monopolies?!
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

The state of Rhode Island surveyed Internet speeds.
The state of Rhode Island held hearings/meetings/comments of how to remedy areas that were lacking, all of which Cox ignored.
The state of Rhode Island requested and is getting ~$109mil from the federal BEAD program to improve its Internet speeds.
Cox suddenly wakes up and does a Little Red Hen, saying since it is the dominant ISP, it should be first choice to receive that money.
The state of Rhode Island pointed out that their surveys show areas served by Cox are not meeting whatever the standard for "Broadband" is.
Cox replies, "That's not what our numbers say."
Etc.

--Patrick
 
PatrThom

PatrThom

-The Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) was a federal program that offered American Internet subscribers a discount of anywhere from US$30 to $75 off their monthly Internet bill until it ran out of money in September of 2024.
-The State of New York thought ensuring Internet connectivity for households was a good thing, and so they passed a law requiring that ISPs operating in NY state with more than a certain minimum number of customers would be required to offer plans to low-income households at 25Mbps for $15/mo, or 200Mbps for $20/mo.
-Presumably unrelated, AT&T has announced that, effective January 15th, it will no longer offer its wireless 5G home Internet plans in the state of NY to new subscribers, and existing subscribers will have a 45 day wind-down period to transition to a different plan/different ISP before being cut off entirely. AT&T does not have wired Internet service in NY state, so there are no other options for AT&T home Internet within NY's borders. Mobile service will be unaffected, so phone customers can presumably tether if they want to, but no home Internet.

"Oh, we can't charge more than $20 for Internet service? Fine, we'll just cancel AN ENTIRE STATE."

--Patrick
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top