Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 340 posts

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#331

Post by uxcolumbo »

donatj wrote: post #313
uxcolumbo wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What a waste. Did you mention it to her? Why not just put the radio on or at least don’t stream in 4k. I wonder how many are like her, just leaving it on all day for ambience and what the carbon footprint is.

Honestly, she was on really hard times already and I didn’t want to make it worse. I looked for options within the app to disable 4K but couldn’t find anything, I ended up lowering my Netflix subscription to not include 4K but that didn’t kick in until the following month.

Ah ok so it was mental health related. Hope your friend gets better.

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#332

Post by pvg »

pb7 wrote: post #330
dang wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I flagged https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34315771 because it broke the site guidelines*. The GP comment may have been wrong, but it didn't break the site guidelines. As we've just agreed, there isn't a rule against being wrong, nor can there be. > there’s no community punishment for intentionally saying something not true I've learned that this isn't a good way to think about internet comments, because it's vir…

I meant this one: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34321408

That one is flaggable under your own version of HN's rules because it's completely wrong about HN's guidelines. It's also flaggable under the actual guidelines because it's mostly non-responsive fulmination.

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#333

Post by __MatrixMan__ »

ChrisRR wrote: post #276
__MatrixMan__ wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the quality of the centralized hoozywhatsits continues to decline, I expect demand for decentralized hoozywhatsits will increase, given that they're harder to parasitize. I agree that it shouldn't be a mandate though. It would be enough to mandate that the Up/down speeds both appear on the promotional material in the same font size.

How much of the country is truly technical enough to install (and want to install) self-hosted solutions though. I'm an engineer by day, and even I can't be bothered when google does practically everything I want it to

If you mean setting up a server for each separate thing you want to host--pretty much none of us.

But I imagine it'll be more like bit torrent: Hosting just becomes part of using.

If you don't want to pay for a service, maybe you leave your computer on overnight while seeding and by the morning you've got enough cred to be a premium-tier user.

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#334

Post by cassianoleal »

avianlyric wrote: post #321
cassianoleal wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been using their IPv6 for years on my Turris Omnia (TurrisOS is based on OpenWRT and also open source) plugged directly to their switch. Everything works via DHCPv6 and RA. I get a /56 PD that I can use for my LAN subnets as I wish. The IPv6 Internet is fast and stable.

I also used their IPv6 setup for years. But then it got broken after they did maintenance, and I’ve never been able to get it fixed. I’ve talked to insiders about this stuff, and there’s a number of known long running misconfigurations issues. Which unfortunately I’ve probably been hit with. I’ve also been told the odds of it getting fix via support is zero at this point. In my case their switches refuse to assign an…

Ugh, that sounds painful. Absolutely agree with your last sentence.

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#335

Post by bobcattz »

In sweden you get a discount for drawing fiber to your house wherever this house might be on in the country side for a cost between 1500-2000 EUR. This has lead to all that all houses all over sweden now has high gigabit fiber or more to their houses because this increases the value of the property and no one can afford not to take the deal

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#336

Post by simonebrunozzi »

paxys wrote: post #116
simonebrunozzi wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try Monkeybrains.

Monkeybrains is great for the price, but if you want a more premium and reliable service then there are much better options. Google Fiber (Webpass) does symmetric gigabit. AT&T has 5 gigabit. Sonic 10 gigabit. Of course the real problem is that your building likely won't have any of them.

Not all places in that area can subscribe to Google Fiber or others.

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#337

Post by sidewndr46 »

komadori wrote: post #314
sidewndr46 wrote: post #311

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But how would they know what to add before service is brought to the residence? Maybe it is different, but even on new construction where I live the way service comes in is very simple: a technician takes a large drill and blindly drills through the outer wall of the house to bring a cable in. At that point the install is complete. In fact, even if you have existing cabling they generally will elect not to use it unl…

Sure, they're probably not going to lay any actual cable, but there's a lot of infrastructure needed to bring the cable from the head-end to the exterior wall of your house and some of that can be laid in advance. Ideally, if you're building a new housing development, you can relatively inexpensively put in: * Ducts to carry the cables under streets and driveways. * Pavement cabinets for junction boxes, distribution…

This seems like it has less to do with homes and more to do with public infrastructure.

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#338

Post by TheHappyOddish »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #207
habosa wrote: post #90

Some color about buying home internet in London vs San Francisco (in my experience). I recently moved back from London to San Francisco. In my 3 years in central London (N1) I had to use a 5g hotspot (thank you, Vodafone unlimited) to get anything close to fast internet in my flat. If I went with a wired "broadband" connection I could not get more than 10Mbps down. The street next to mine had gigabit fiber though. Th…

> So basically internet is a disaster in both countries Country-level generalizations about internet speeds are basically useless in 2023. A lot of us have easy access to 1G up and down and multiple providers to choose from. I have friends who live less than 15 minutes away who only have DSL or Starlink as options. Extrapolating city-level anecdotes to entire countries doesn't make any sense. We don't upgrade the who…

> Country-level generalizations about internet speeds are basically useless in 2023.

I'm not sure that's true. Nobody in Australia on a residential grade NBN connection (which most people are on, and those are aren't are being forced onto) has > 1gbps, and none of them have syncronous up.

This is absolutely run in lock step on a country level.

I'd imagine multiple countries are like this.

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#339

Post by TheHappyOddish »

lazide wrote: post #41
xbmcuser wrote: post #10

I think this comes across as shocking to Americans but the thing is the rest of the world treats internet as a utility so most governments try to get cheap and fast internet for as large a portion of the population as possible. Where as US cities and towns are stuck under its isp corporate monopolies.

It isn't shocking to Americans. It's frustrating. Keep in mind however, we're really talking about 50 different 'countries', when we're talking about laws like this so far. The EU for instance has no such Europe wide mandate. The populations are roughly equivalent.

> Keep in mind however, we're really talking about 50 different 'countries', when we're talking about laws like this so far.

You're not though. You know other countries also have states, provinces and territories, right? And these have their own laws? It's not an American only concept.

Re: England just made gigabit internet a legal requirement for new homes

#340

Post by komadori »

sidewndr46 wrote: post #337
komadori wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, they're probably not going to lay any actual cable, but there's a lot of infrastructure needed to bring the cable from the head-end to the exterior wall of your house and some of that can be laid in advance. Ideally, if you're building a new housing development, you can relatively inexpensively put in: * Ducts to carry the cables under streets and driveways. * Pavement cabinets for junction boxes, distribution…

This seems like it has less to do with homes and more to do with public infrastructure.

Some of it will lie within the bounds of individual houses, but, yes, a lot relates to the streets. However, in the UK, aside from smaller infill projects, property developers will construct both the houses and the streets together. The streets will then either remain private roads or be adopted into public ownership by the local authority. So, from the perspective of the property developers these rules address, there is little difference between the two.
Post reply on HN