FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps • Hacker News Board

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#11

Post by eneumann » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:09 PM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #4

I'd rather have two providers that offers 25Mbps than one that offers 100Mbps. I don't need 100, or even 50. But Comcast has been jacking up their prices, along with increasing the minimum speed available, for years. They respond to government regulations like these. I'm now paying 2x what I used to (from $25 to $50/mo), and getting 2x the speed. But I don't want to be forced to buy 2x the speed (or even faster, as t…

Ideal world would be seeing the laws preventing municipally owned ISPs struck down. I'd also like the see the right of ways municipally owned as well, to better facilitate competition with new providers.

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#12

Post by rootusrootus » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:18 PM UTC

ZoomerCretin wrote: post #8

gnicholas wrote: post #4

I'd rather have two providers that offers 25Mbps than one that offers 100Mbps. I don't need 100, or even 50. But Comcast has been jacking up their prices, along with increasing the minimum speed available, for years. They respond to government regulations like these. I'm now paying 2x what I used to (from $25 to $50/mo), and getting 2x the speed. But I don't want to be forced to buy 2x the speed (or even faster, as t…

> I would much rather have the govt provide incentives for there to be more than one provider. In the UK, ISPs are forced to lease their last-mile lines to anyone who wants to provide internet service. This results in a decent amount of competition.

The US did that. But only with copper. And so the telcos just ripped out all the copper. There's not too much left.

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#13

Post by giantg2 » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:18 PM UTC

No. This is insanity.

Faster speed will mean that providers will charge more. I am perfectly fine with 25 Mbps. I was fine with 10 Mbps too until they eliminated that level and I was forced to pay more.

Edit: why disagree?

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#14

Post by hamandcheese » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:18 PM UTC

ZoomerCretin wrote: post #8

gnicholas wrote: post #4

I'd rather have two providers that offers 25Mbps than one that offers 100Mbps. I don't need 100, or even 50. But Comcast has been jacking up their prices, along with increasing the minimum speed available, for years. They respond to government regulations like these. I'm now paying 2x what I used to (from $25 to $50/mo), and getting 2x the speed. But I don't want to be forced to buy 2x the speed (or even faster, as t…

> I would much rather have the govt provide incentives for there to be more than one provider. In the UK, ISPs are forced to lease their last-mile lines to anyone who wants to provide internet service. This results in a decent amount of competition.

If, say, Comcast had to lease their last mile, why wouldn’t they charge an arm and a leg to whoever was trying to sell internet? I don’t see how this would bring prices down meaningfully.

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#15

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:18 PM UTC

gnicholas wrote: post #4

I'd rather have two providers that offers 25Mbps than one that offers 100Mbps. I don't need 100, or even 50. But Comcast has been jacking up their prices, along with increasing the minimum speed available, for years. They respond to government regulations like these. I'm now paying 2x what I used to (from $25 to $50/mo), and getting 2x the speed. But I don't want to be forced to buy 2x the speed (or even faster, as t…

[deleted]

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#16

Post by hamandcheese » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:19 PM UTC

rootusrootus wrote: post #12

ZoomerCretin wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would much rather have the govt provide incentives for there to be more than one provider. In the UK, ISPs are forced to lease their last-mile lines to anyone who wants to provide internet service. This results in a decent amount of competition.

The US did that. But only with copper. And so the telcos just ripped out all the copper. There's not too much left.

What is your definition of copper? Almost everywhere I’ve ever lived, the only broadband internet available was provided using coax cable.

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#17

Post by giantg2 » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:20 PM UTC

happyopossum wrote: post #2

100/20 is definitely an improvement, and is probably a reasonable minimum bar to set. I'm sure most of us have much higher speed connections, but I know I rarely take my 1Gb pipe over 10% of that... Heck, 2 TVs streaming 4k during a zoom call would be fine on 100Mb...

I don't think it's reasonable if it means my provider's offering start at 100 Mbps vs my current 25 Mbps, at what I'm sure will be at least double the cost to me.

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#18

Post by bufferoverflow » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:21 PM UTC

happyopossum wrote: post #2

100/20 is definitely an improvement, and is probably a reasonable minimum bar to set. I'm sure most of us have much higher speed connections, but I know I rarely take my 1Gb pipe over 10% of that... Heck, 2 TVs streaming 4k during a zoom call would be fine on 100Mb...

> 4k during a zoom call would be fine on 100Mb

Not sure what bit rate TV is at, but one 4K YouTube stream can take up to 68Mbps, and 8K even more.

We're on 400Mbps, and even then I manage to block internet for others when I download a large file at full speed.

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#19

Post by happyopossum » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:21 PM UTC

eternityforest wrote: post #7

The amount of bandwidth you need depends on the number of people. 50Mb or 25Mb is probably fine for 1 person. As long as it can do 4k, and zoom calls, it's fine for most people. 100Mb might not be enough for six people, who might need to download, zoom, game, and stream all at once.

I think you're somewhat overestimating the amount of bandwidth used by those services. TO watch Netflix in 4k, you only need 15Mbps, zoom uses about half of that for a decent connection and will downgrade nicely.

Re: FCC proposes to increase minimum broadband speeds to 100 Mbps

#20

Post by DrewADesign » Fri, Jul 15, 2022, 11:21 PM UTC

metadat wrote: post #5

gnicholas wrote: post #4

I'd rather have two providers that offers 25Mbps than one that offers 100Mbps. I don't need 100, or even 50. But Comcast has been jacking up their prices, along with increasing the minimum speed available, for years. They respond to government regulations like these. I'm now paying 2x what I used to (from $25 to $50/mo), and getting 2x the speed. But I don't want to be forced to buy 2x the speed (or even faster, as t…

You might be eligible for ATT [gigabit] fiber? Could be worth a shot. (Unless you're in far-east Menlo) IME the fiber service is faster more reliable than Comcast, but AT&T support is the absolute worst, super incompetent (across the entire company, not just U-verse internet). It's fine as long as you don't need any support and don't try to deactivate anything, but if your account gets messed up it can literally take…

> (Unless you're in far-east Menlo)

Unless they're in far-east Menlo or like 99.99999% of the rest of the world. While bay area folks are certainly heavily-represented here, the commenters come from all corners of the globe.