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

FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

docs.fcc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 432 posts

Re: FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

#91

Post by andersa »

paxys wrote: post #63
AussieWog93 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what gets me. Is there a technical reason why symmetrical connections would be more expensive than asymm?

The technical reason is that by restricting upload speed they can offer a higher download speed, and that is what most users care about.

This is nonsense. Fiber cables are always capable of the same speed in both directions at once. The actual reason is so they can sell you an overpriced "business" plan if you need upload speeds from the current decade.

Re: FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

#92

Post by vasachi »

paxys wrote: post #57
542458 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The costs for your ISP are fixed whether they serve you 1MB or 1TB. That's only true in a very abstract sense. If everybody went from using 1MB/day to 1TB/day there would be massive congestion issues and costs would increase as ISPs rush to install higher-bandwidth equipment. Put a different way: It is cheaper to construct a network where all subscribers consume only 1MB/day than a network where all subscribers con…

Well it should be true in the concrete sense. If they can't consistently serve you at 100mpbs or whatever else then they shouldn't advertise it. "But everyone else is using it at the same time so too bad" wouldn't work as an excuse in any other industry.

Yes it would work in any other industry. Users can overload a power grid. Users can overload a telephone network. Users can overload a grocery store. NO industry can deal with critical overload without problems.

Re: FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

#93

Post by kulahan »

paxys wrote: post #49
voakbasda wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, for the same reason that roads used by daily drivers are subsidized by remote workers.

Bad analogy, because it actually costs more to maintain roads that are used more. ISPs don't have to pay extra if I consume more data packets than my neighbor. Overage charges are just a money grab on their part, nothing more.

Also a bad analogy because the roads are paid for with gas taxes, which WFH workers typically purchase less of

Re: FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

#94

Post by arcticbull »

Willamin wrote: post #62
voakbasda wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, for the same reason that roads used by daily drivers are subsidized by remote workers.

In the US, we tax roads by usage via fuel (gasoline and diesel) tax [^1]. It's a simple solution: the more miles you drive, the more fuel you use; the more fuel you use, the more tax you pay. Vehicles that use more fuel per mile driven tend to be larger and thus cause more wear on the roads. It's not without its faults though. Fuel usage isn't directly related to cost of road maintenance, it's just a very rough appro…

A lot more wear on the roads in a lot of cases, as it's exponential (~fourth power) with respect to weight and EVs weigh a lot (~30% more than a comparable ICE car).

Re: FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

#95

Post by aidenn0 »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #55
notyourwork wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that speed should be symmetrical. We are continuing to push the boundaries are content going out.

That's what gets me. Is there a technical reason why symmetrical connections would be more expensive than asymm?

Assuming we are talking about Cable internet: If they were starting from scratch all possibilities are equally expensive, but they have installed equipment in your neighborhood which assumes a specific channel allocation.

They have increased the channel allocation for upstream in recent years and DOCSIS 4.0 allows symmetric connections, but the demand is for downstream, and the fewer channels they allocate to upstream the bigger number they can advertise.

Re: FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

#96

Post by xyst »

FCC should fix the collusion that happens under the table between ISPs. ISPs tend to avoid entering an area where there is already established service.

So for a majority of people, the ISPs have a de facto monopoly. No need to improve service or customer support.

Also need to overturn legislation at state level which forbids municipal ISPs from being created. This would help break the mini monopolies that ISPs.

Defining standards is fine. But the real issue needs to be fixed.

Re: FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

#97

Post by ceejayoz »

kulahan wrote: post #90
notyourwork wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that speed should be symmetrical. We are continuing to push the boundaries are content going out.

A huge portion of people don't need a massive upstream. This sounds more expensive for basically no benefit (for most)

A lot of people need enough for at least a steady Zoom/FaceTime call, and that's only going to increase over time.

Re: FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

#99

Post by paxys »

andersa wrote: post #91
paxys wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The technical reason is that by restricting upload speed they can offer a higher download speed, and that is what most users care about.

This is nonsense. Fiber cables are always capable of the same speed in both directions at once. The actual reason is so they can sell you an overpriced "business" plan if you need upload speeds from the current decade.

A very small part of the country is connected by fiber, and fiber connections are always symmetrical. The vast majority of consumers still get internet via coax cables, and bandwidth is very much an issue on those.

Re: FCC launches inquiry to increase minimum broadband speed [pdf]

#100

Post by Astronaut3315 »

yadaeno wrote: post #73
notyourwork wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that speed should be symmetrical. We are continuing to push the boundaries are content going out.

And throw in an availability requirement so my gigabit connection doesn't drop to 10kbps every Friday night when everyone is using the internet.

Add in some moderate packet loss and you’ve got CenturyLink fiber.
Post reply on HN