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

371–380 of 432 posts

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

#371

Post by hn_acker »

warner25 wrote: post #250
Workaccount2 wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In an extreme ironic twist, me, the techie nerd guy, has the slowest internet of the regular-folk friend group of mine. Everyone has got 1Gbps and here I am with 300Mbps.

Me too. I tell everyone who will listen that they should look at their actual bandwidth usage. I've looked at the detailed statistics on my Google Nest WiFi router, and my family's peak usage never exceeded about 30 Mbps. That's with me working from home as a CS PhD student and my wife homeschooling our kids during the day. I have 300 Mbps (down) because that's the lowest, cheapest tier that my ISP offers. Maybe peop…

> Me too. I tell everyone who will listen that they should look at their actual bandwidth usage.

I shouldn't have to look at my actual bandwidth usage. As I wrote in a different comment [1]:

> You are unknowingly accepting being ripped off. It's not reasonable for big ISPs like Comcast to offer me 300 megabits download 15 megabits upload for $70 a month (might've been $90, but assume $70) while EPB of Chattanooga [1] offers 1 gigabit symmetrical for $67.99 a month. What speed any individual actually needs doesn't have to come into the picture. In matters of consumer protection, the principle of the thing matters just as much as actual consumer needs.

> Today's internet technology (particularly optical fiber [2], paired with hardware implementing DOCSIS 3.1 or 4 [3]) is fully capable of providing 1 gigabit symmetrical for "the majority of people", even in rural areas. Moreover, in the long term, transitioning to fiber would be less expensive to the big ISPs like Comcast [4], but Comcast keeps raising prices on broadband over decades-old copper wires and committing subsidy fraud [5]. Don't let big ISPs define "good enough" to be much lower than technology and the price of the technology allow.

(The [] citations within my quotes refer to links in my other comment. I'm leaving them in for Ctrl-F purposes.)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38105873

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

#372

Post by NoPicklez »

vel0city wrote: post #368
portpecos wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The FCC determined that Comcast’s Xfinity Internet broadband Internet access services deliver, on average, over 100 percent of their advertised downstream and upstream speeds during the busiest periods of the day, known as "peak" times, during sustained testing. Peak times are Monday through Friday from 7:00pm to 11:00pm local time. >Latency is typically measured in milliseconds, and generally has no significant imp…

People getting their contracted speeds from a company they generally despise probably aren't going to come out of the woodwork to write supporting comments. Note they're not saying 100% of customers got their rated speeds, but the average customer got over 100% of their rated speeds. So, say the 50th percentile customer pays for 100M, they actually got 102M, boom, that metric is met. However easily 25%+ of customers…

Most people that need any less are likely gaming, heck even I'd like less for gaming but 30ms is more then enough to be able to play FPS games well.

I appreciate there is more to latency than just gaming, but I hear more people wanting less ping for those reasons than anything else.

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

#373

Post by tzs »

josh_carterPDX wrote: post #315
gnicholas wrote: post #162

I started with Comcast with 12Mbps service. Over time, they increased the base speed they offer to 20, 25, 50, and now 75. They have done this because they want to have x% of their customers on "broadband", per the federal definition. This is all well and good, but they keep increasing the price, and refuse to offer lower-tier service. I probably wouldn't want 12Mbps anymore, but 20 or 25 would suffice. I wish I coul…

I'm a Comcast customer and bundle my services. Every two years, once the introductory rate expires, I call to get a new "promo" rate or just say they can cancel me right then and there. They've never taken me up on the cancellation. As a result I have a full 1GIG service at my house and feel like I pay a reasonable amount. I'm just not a big fan of their "security" features. Other than that, I haven't had many issues…

When I had Comcast bundles I did similar, except instead of calling I went to their nearest office. I liked doing this in person because I sometimes have trouble understanding call center accents.

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

#374

Post by vondur »

nicoburns wrote: post #318
vondur wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to wikipedia the average monthly salary in Peru is $502 US. $37 per month doesn't seem that cheap to me.

As another point of comparison, a new ISP in my area of London is offering symmetric gigabit fiber for £25/month or around $30/month (USD).

$30/month USD compared to the average salary in London is pretty good. We unfortunately don't have much competition among ISP's here in the US.

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

#375

Post by anonymouskimmer »

warner25 wrote: post #349
pests wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have 3 days left in my billing cycle on phone and I've used 8.5GB of data. I have WiFi everywhere I go too. 500 for $5 would cost me about $50 - unlimited makes perfect sense.

What do you do with all that, especially with WiFi everywhere? Are you continuously streaming video while on-the-go between WiFi networks? That's fine, it's just stunning. I'm admittedly a minimal user of my phone. I average about 10 unlocks per day. Especially when I'm on-the-go, it's just calls and text messages, some driving directions, and maybe looking up a phone number or business hours. If I use it to listen t…

> I'm admittedly a minimal user of my phone. I average about 10 unlocks per day.

That's about 5 - 10 times the amount of unlocks I do. Not what I'd consider minimal, at all. :D

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

#376

Post by freedomben »

olyjohn wrote: post #294
freedomben wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yep, my average is about 88 Mbps down and 7.4 Mbps up on Starlink. The frustrating thing is it fluctuates a lot. At one point I could get about 160/10.

It's a bummer, but considering that all I had before Starlink was 768down/128kup, this is a godsend. It will never be as good as an actual good wire-line connection, but whatever, that's not really it's point. Anybody who has cable or fiber, or even a fast tier of DSL should not really bother with Starlink.

Yep, agreed. I am extremely glad that starlink exists, and I'm willing to pay double for starlink that I would pay for a connection limited to 12 Mbps down

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

#377

Post by freedomben »

Yiin wrote: post #271
bawolff wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I barely even got it back when my kid stole my credit card and gave it to a scammer selling "minecraft accounts." Nor should you quite frankly. Kids buying stupid things is not the same as fraud.

I'd assume in this case the fraud is not getting the minecraft account for advertised price and/or abusing the credit card info afterwards.

Exactly. If I had run the card myself in this case, it would not have changed. The dude took the money and ran, never delivered anything

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

#378

Post by hn_acker »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #346
m463 wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upload speed is just a cash grab. It is a way to segregate price-sensitive residential vs price-insensitive business customers who can then be charged enormous amounts.

> Upload speed is just a cash grab. No. This lacks all historical and practical understanding of why upload speeds are limited. Back in the 70s/80s when coax was being planned and rolled out for cable, they needed to figure out what frequencies they would use. Cable providers knew they needs a ton in one direction and only a tiny bit for things like buying pay per view in the other. This has been fine traditionally b…

> It isn’t a “cash grab” at all. If you need more upload you need a new line that isn’t divided so asymmetrically, which means fiber. And once you fiber, there is zero reason to go go symmetric, as you have two lines with the same equipment on either side, to a point where the ISP will charge differently if you cut into their bandwidth too much.

Everything else you said could be true, yet not the part about a cash grab. Anything worse than $10 for 100 Mbps down and 100 Mbps up from a large ISP is a cash grab now that fiber exists [1], DOCSIS 3.1 can offer up to 1 Gbps (to say nothing of DOCSIS 4) [2], and large ISPs like Comcast keep committing subsidy fraud [3].

I wrote more about pricing in a different comment [4].

[1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/why-fiber-vastly-super...

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS#Comparison

[3] Pick any one of these links. https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/06/mississippi-says-att-too... https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/report-shows-comcast-con... https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/16/verizon-t-mobile-oversta...

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38105873

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

#379

Post by userinanother »

aidenn0 wrote: post #117
userinanother wrote: post #98

Does everyone really need that much bandwidth though? Usally 20mbps is enough for most things. 50 is plenty and after that it’s mostly bragging rights.

You clearly don't play video games. Waiting on downloads in the mid 10s of GB is common.

I buy physical media for the most part because it retains resale value. But also the inconvenience of someone downloading for an extra hour or two shouldn’t drive us to build billions in infrastructure

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

#380

Post by freedomben »

bawolff wrote: post #246
freedomben wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hasn't worked for me. Chargebacks are pretty much non-existent. The bank will just contact the vendor, ask them if they delivered "the product" and if they just say "yes" (no proof needed, and they always say yes) they deny my claim. I barely even got it back when my kid stole my credit card and gave it to a scammer selling "minecraft accounts." Maybe I need to find a different bank?

> I barely even got it back when my kid stole my credit card and gave it to a scammer selling "minecraft accounts." Nor should you quite frankly. Kids buying stupid things is not the same as fraud.

Perhaps you missed the word "scammer" in my comment? I'm glad you weren't the person deciding on my case. It has nothing to do with the fact that my kid stole my card. The scammer who made the charge was committing text book fraud[1]

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fraud

Post reply on HN