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

FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 221 posts

Re: FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

#141

Post by glanzwulf »

cenamus wrote: post #126
dsab wrote: post #123

In Poland I have 1000/300 fiber in my family house village with ~500 people population and same 1000/300 fiber in city I currently live both for 30 USD / month.

It just seems like the later a country got on the internet, the better their infrastructure is, Poland, Bulgaria, etc. all have way better internet than Austria or Germany

Germany is a special case actually because they just refused to go on the fiber train and instead kept doubling down on DSL. Goes all the way back to the administration from the 80s and onwards, it's finally changing tho.

Re: FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

#142

Post by dclowd9901 »

ivape wrote: post #42
xeonmc wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any similar requirements for the Supreme Court?

When it’s all said and done, Americans will have to find the courage to admit the Judicial branch was an utter failure. That whole thing was supposed to be immune to political coercion. I say it will take courage because it got rammed into our heads that God made the constitution, and that it’s infallible. It’s a massive failure through and through. The founding fathers did not protect the branches from each other ne…

There's a lot that went wrong with the American experiment.

1. The electoral college, which removes voting power from people who live in populated areas in favor of people who don't.

2. A system of governance that doesn't require coalitions and thus also stimulates a 2 party system.

3. No mechanism for federal legislation to occur through solely the actions of the voters. There should be a way for American voters to check the government through a legislative process that allows items to be put on the national ballots outside of congress and the president.

4. If every branch is meant to check every other branch, each branch should have an enforcement arm, so that if they're ignored, physical action can be taken.

5. citizens united

6. The first amendment protecting disinformation

There's probably more.

Re: FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

#143

Post by intermerda »

bubblethink wrote: post #109

To be the devil's advocate, the previous admin also squandered a lot of broadband money away in a pattern that seems common to all Democratic infra projects. See https://reason.com/2024/06/27/why-has-joe-bidens-42-billion-... . Neither party is good at this. The FCC broadband map and the b/w labels (previous admin) are nice though.

Kind of bizarre to point to an article that takes a quote from a Republican FCC commissioner at its face value when these people like as easily as you breathe.

Infrastructure projects take time and the project was coming along just fine within its timeline. It's not a coincidence that several red states were the furthest along in the process - https://broadbandnow.com/research/bead-grants. The "delays" in the process were because it prioritized needs rather than grant political favors. Ironically the new rules will set these states back and harm them. It's a recurring pattern.

Re: FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

#144

Post by tzs »

dlcarrier wrote: post #80
yxhuvud wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not certain I buy this argument - higher throughput tend to require more modern hardware throughout the whole chain, and modern hardware also tends to have better latency than old. So for most people, they will get improvement in both latency and throughput if they would get a gigabit fiber connection. But sure, if you are comparing chains of the same hardware generation, go for latency in most cases.

You're all using the same equipment, regardless of the tier you sign up for. The firmware in your modem or their router limits the maximum packet rate, but individual packets and small groups of packets are always traveling at gigabit speeds, regardless of the speed cap. That difference in latency isn't even what matters; it's the latency from the various types of modems. With the direct connection of fiber providers…

> With cable providers, DOCSIS adds ten to twenty milliseconds of latency

Are you sure? I'm on cable (Xfinity) and ping to 1.1 is varies from 11 to 13 ms, and I see as low as 7.2 ms to some random Xfinity thing that is not at my home but on their network.

I've got an ancient DOCSIS modem, a Motorola MB7621, and my understanding is that newer modems have lower latency than mine.

Re: FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

#145

Post by anal_reactor »

burnt-resistor wrote: post #127
dsab wrote: post #123

In Poland I have 1000/300 fiber in my family house village with ~500 people population and same 1000/300 fiber in city I currently live both for 30 USD / month.

Data caps? Does it really offer that speed at peak times though? Are oversubscription of backhaul infrastructure disclosed? In semi-rural hill country TX, 2.5 Gbps symmetric from an internet co-op is $90 USD/month without data caps.

> Data caps?

I'm sorry, is this some American problem I'm too European to understand?

Re: FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

#147

Post by AngryData »

giantg2 wrote: post #14

I think this isn't as bad as people make of out to be. The 100/20 goal is perfectly fine for the vast majority of users. The only thing really supporting the old goal of gigabit connections was fiber. I would rather see the expansion of traditional cable or even satellite to rural areas. Fiber plans tend to be expensive and mostly available in the areas that already have usable high speed options. If we really want t…

Fiber should be the goal for everyone. Fiber is cheaper and lighter than copper which is why rural areas that haven't had any internet options except 56k on old degraded lines or satellite are finally now getting high speed internet the last few years, usually through co-op fiber startups. It can be hung on power poles, it can be installed with a trencher, and now that horizontal boring machines are incredibly common it can be put under existing infrastructure very easily.

Re: FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

#148

Post by tossandthrow »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #140
tzs wrote: post #87

Wow. The article notes: > Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act requires the FCC to determine whether broadband is being deployed "on a reasonable and timely basis" to all Americans. Carr says that when looking into whether that is being satisfied the FCC should not consider affordability because section 706 does not contain the word "affordability". But it also does not contain any words for any of the things he…

Of course the angle is disingenuous. "Reasonable" here implies that it's reasonably attainable for customers. This is merely choosing interpretation arbitrarily. Like me saying the sky is green because green is partly comprised of the color blue.

Reasonably attainable must also mean affordable. If it is not affordable most people cannot attain it.

Note: affordable and cheap is not the same

Re: FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

#149

Post by mvdtnz »

lenerdenator wrote: post #103
mvdtnz wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Come on. There was plenty of media attention around Project 2025 before the election. This is exactly what people voted for.

And a lot of it surrounded how Trump denied it.

And not a single soul believed him.

Re: FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

#150

Post by penguin_booze »

vjvjvjvjghv wrote: post #2

Seems they really want to revert everything that made the US a world leader. - Reduce science - Reduce collected data - Reduce immigration - Reduce infrastructure - Reduce adoption of EVs

> Seems they really want to revert everything that made the US a world leader.

Conservatives takes different names in different places. Calling the spade a spade, a more truthful name is 'Reggressives', no matter what the colour on the banner is. The signatures of regressivism is , among others, the yearning for the past, to bring back the old ways of life, the predisposition for worship (idolatry)--be that of imaginary creatures or very wealthy people.

Some of us would find it really hard to imagine why some others would say, "yes please, more oil. I really would love to inhale more toxic fumes". Yet, such people exist. I can't explain why.

Post reply on HN