Preventing fast lanes will likely hamper the development of novel applications that we cannot even conceive of today. Banning throttling while keeping speedups open (subject to review) seems like a good balance.
The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
211–220 of 337 posts
Re: The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
I immigrated from China to Canada and I'm not sure if monopoly is the root cause. In China, ISP is state-controlled and 100% monopoly, yet the plans are dirt cheap compared to those in Canada. I just looked up the price in my hometown in China: 1000 Mbps fibre internet + 3 mobile phone lines (105 GB data) + IPTV = 249 CNY tax included (30 USD / 42 CAD / 28 EUR) The 1000 Mbps fibre Internet plan alone (no phones no TV…
I lived in China for 9 years and always found the internet, even for going just to Chinese sites, to be really slow. Like sure you have 5G, but the overall internet trunks are just saturated and not built out enough. Maybe it has gotten better since I left Beijing in 2016? It was definitely cheap and affordable. But I always felt a huge speed bump (along with easy access to foreign web sites) when I went to Thailand…
> always found the internet, even for going just to Chinese sites, to be really slow
A lot of that is because of the GFW.
MITM/TLS decryption/DPI has a massive performance overhead (and why the first question any agent based security product is ask is whether it is "in the path of traffic").
It's basically a giant version of Zscaler Private Access (ZPA)
The performance hit is a major reason why a lot of edge computing development has happened in the Chinese ecosystem (you can't guarantee stuff works with latency, so how do you solve that)
This is an older investigation (2017) by ThousandEyes about this - https://www.thousandeyes.com/blog/benchmarking-network-perfo...
Note that the infra has changed drastically since 2017.
Re: The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
#213The thing that is actually missing from this entire essay is competition. The biggest single reason why the USA's (and to a lesser extent Canada's) internet is shite is because of the monopolies that exist. In the EU there are similar offers for "enhanced" access, but its not speeding up/slowing down apps, but giving "free" access, as in not counting to your data cap. Instead of making the FCC stop fast lanes, the FC…
Actually, the empirical record on this shows that we see more net neutrality violations by ISPs in marketplaces with high competition.[1] This is counter-intuitive but here's how it works: In a competitive marketplace ISPs have tighter margins and look for every opportunity for cost savings, so if throttling a high-bandwidth application only affects a small percentage of customers, and only a tiny tech-savvy minority…
[deleted]
Re: The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
#214ISPs are desperate to be part of the monetary exchange of services over their infrastructure, they've been trying to become more than "dumb pipes" for decades and virtually no one wants that. Imagine if the water company could charge you more for a glass of water than a toilet flush.
I find it interesting how nobody blinks an eyelid at the massive profits raked in by companies like Google, Facebook etc. but as soon as the ISPs that create the infrastructure that makes all this happen (and innovate massively in the process) want some piece of the cake everyone cries foul. Now I actually strongly support net neutrality and maybe ISPs don't really need a piece of the cake, but it is still interestin…
Infrastructure like that is a natural monopoly - I certainly would have an easier time switching from Google than I would Comcast, the latter would require me to move or put up with 90's era internet over copper lines.
Re: The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
#215Sunnyvale, CA has the worst service ever (Verizon)
Re: The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
#216Earlier quoted context omitted.
A free market is not a lawless market but instead free within regulations. However, the amount of regulation should not make it impossible for competitors to join the market either. With the amount of subsidies in the US for ISPs, I think the services they render might be event called a public service, more than a utility.
We don't disagree. I just thought it was obvious enough that an over regulated market isn't free that it need not be stated explicitly. Especially since this is the general belief.
Sorry for not clarifying. I do agree with your initial statement and wanted to add something to it, not criticize it.
Re: The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
#217ISPs are desperate to be part of the monetary exchange of services over their infrastructure, they've been trying to become more than "dumb pipes" for decades and virtually no one wants that. Imagine if the water company could charge you more for a glass of water than a toilet flush.
Well they sort of do already — typically you pay less for water for irrigation (usually because sewerage is metered by water usage and obv if it goes on the lawn it’s not going down the drain). In places like Florida however irrigation water is reclaimed and not treated the same was as drinking water and has totally separate plumbing and metering (and pricing).
The number of places in Florida that do that is tiny.
Re: The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
#218Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why doesn't the monopoly employ the same cost-saving measures for even bigger margins? They would. The issue is that competition alone wouldn't fix it, because there is an information deficit. Some people will pick the lowest price and not realize that the ISP offering it is taking kickbacks from incumbent services to degrade their own competitors. And since this is always bad -- it's anti-competitive in the market…
So the solution there is transparency. I'd be much happier if the government regulations gave me information to make an informed decision rather than forced a decision on me.
I’d say the exact opposite. It’s clear the majority of customers here cannot make an informed decision either by way of incompetence about the technical aspects that would enable them to detect bad faith behavior on the part of ISPs, or lack of transparency, or outright lack of competition in their market. Competition does not work to increase quality if the customer cannot judge it. The entire benefits of markets and competition break down and become irrelevant.
Instead: make it a utility, subject to regulation and codes as any other. I don’t need to be a plumber to ensure I get adequate sewer service, I don’t need to be an electrician to ensure that I get adequate electrical service, why should I need to be sysadmin to make sure I get adequate network service? It makes no sense. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that it makes even less sense because those examples require less education overall than you would to detect bad faith behavior on the part of your ISP. if you don’t have enough water pressure for your shower to function, you don’t need to be a plumber to diagnose that. If your homes electrical service is so bad that you can’t run your appliances you don’t need to be an electrician to judge that. But how do you know if your given ISP is throttling Netflix without substantial IT in your background?
I don’t think it’s an outrageous opinion that any Tom, Dick, or Harry, who is participating in this market should be able to get the service to a reasonable standard of quality that they are paying for without needing to verify it independently.
Re: The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
#219Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or, or, hear me out. The companies that need such high speed networks, should pay the infrastructure companies and get their own communication lines built, instead of buying QoS access on publicly funded projects.
I don't think any company should be able to buy QoS access. They should simply qualify for it on the basis of their use case. E.g. "video streaming" or "real-time telecom"
I agree. What do you think about fair use policies? Things like having 250GB/Month kind of limits.
The internet infrastructure was built with certain utilization and speed in mind. Instead of owning up to the fact that it’s not as good as it used to be, these companies are selling quality of service products. Otherwise it’s too much of a publicity hit if they admit it.
Re: The FCC needs to stop 5G fast lanes
#220Earlier quoted context omitted.
Canada isn't so bad off when it comes to wired service. Several ISPs are owned by the government: Sasktel, Bruce Telecom, Tbaytel, CityWest. And many more are co-operatives owned by the customers. The mobile space is more challenging. A number of those co-ops and government ISPs were running mobile service back in the mid 2000s, but they never found the customer base and most of them eventually shut it down, Tbaytel…
Those are completely irrelevant in 95% of Canada. There's bell, Rogers, and Telus. I guess Videotron in Quebec too. That's pretty much it and even then, here in Quebec it's either Videotron or bell, or their resellers. At least in Montreal.
> Those are completely irrelevant in 95% of Canada.
But quite relevant as they provide a proven, working model that can be used anywhere in Canada. That's the beauty of public/cooperative ownership – all people have to do is do it.
> here in Quebec it's either Videotron or bell
What about CoopTel, Sogetel, and Téléphone de Courcelles?