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

100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 246 posts

Re: 100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

#211

Post by aksss »

TLightful wrote: post #65
ed25519FUUU wrote: post #55

While we're at it, let's prevent ISPs from disallowing us to run a business on our home internet. Why should it matter to them how we use our bits? Sell us on a support plan and higher uptime, sure, but there's no reason we should be disallowed from private enterprise because we're not "paying for a business account".

Wow, is that a thing in the US? Home of capitalism! Sorry to hear that.

My ISP doesn’t prohibit doing business over the connection or hosting services for commercial gain, with the exception of reselling internet access - like using your broadband connection as a paid hotspot for anonymous customers is disallowed in ToS.

Re: 100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

#213

Post by lazide »

drewg123 wrote: post #47
penagwin wrote: post #4

100Mbps up as a standard? One can only dream. Comcast's highest residential offer is 1Gbps down (yeah right) and 35 mbps up. My other option is DSL with Att, a max of like 30Mbps down...

It seems to have become less common for providers to advertise upload speeds. I was helping a friend pick a plan from a non-comcast cable provider, and she had to call to ask about the upload speeds, as the information was not on the web.

It’s because they’re universally terrible, and don’t help sell the product.

If it’s slow uploading photos, support can sell them on upgrading to the next highest plan to ‘go faster’ - congrats your uplink speed is now 5mbs instead of 3mbs isn’t as impressive as ‘we upgraded you to 1gig!’.

The only folks who know to ask and care about upload speeds already know Comcast is terrible, and are going to try to figure any way to avoid them.

Re: 100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

#214

Post by lazide »

morpheos137 wrote: post #147

I would say very few residential customers need more than 10Mbps upload. For 100Mbps you could run about 50 Zooms simultaneously. Who does that? Unless you are massively uploading (likely illegal content) who needs greater than 10Mbps upstream at home?

Yeah, why would I try to do an online backup of my data in less than a day? Or transfer high res video files somewhere? Or (gasp) host something?

The current ISP setup is based on a consumer only model of the internet which benefits the big corps and stifles anyone trying to actually DO anything but consume.

Re: 100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

#215

Post by martinald »

gonehome wrote: post #182
Panino wrote: post #3

> The funding is going to a mix of cable, fiber, and fixed wireless providers, plus SpaceX's Starlink satellite network. I think cable providers should be left out. They were already gifted many billions of dollars in the past for this same basic purpose but they pocketed the money. They can just use the free money they've already been given. Instead, the funding should go to existing munipical fiber ISPs to expand t…

With Starlink I think the competition will get more real for them. In the rare markets with actual competition the shitty cable companies provide at least okay service. In Palo Alto I can get 1gbps down/35mbps up on Comcast for $89 (with 1TB data cap I have to pay $50 extra to remove). That's not too bad. They also offer a 2gbps down and up service called gigabit pro, but it requires installation and it's pretty expe…

This. I think the really confusing thing is why so few new entrants have joined the US telecom market. There is masses of cheap capital to build these networks out.

Most of Europe seems to be moving to this kind of model:

A cable TV provider using DOCSIS or FTTH (and expanding their footprint)

Existing incumbent telco providing service via VDSL/FTTH (rapidly rolling out FTTH)

New "altnets" (as they are called here) doing new build FTTH (like webpass in the US, but they are not just aimed at apartment buildings).

This has led to really significant competition. In portugal I have access to at least 1 FTTH and DOCSIS3.1. In London the same, my last flat actually had the option of 2 seperate FTTH providers (not sharing infrastructure) plus DOCSIS based cable.

I think the altnets are the key to forcing investment by the otherwise duopolistic incumbent telcos and cable companies.

I think what the FCC should be looking at is how to allow altnets to roll out service quicker. There is so much state/municipal legislation that I imagine that is the main blocker of doing this at scale.

Re: 100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

#216

Post by sofixa »

gabereiser wrote: post #127
technofiend wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>They were already gifted many billions of dollars in the past for this same basic purpose but they pocketed the money. They can just use the free money they've already been given. I mean they could but they wont, and there was no reason to with Ajit Pai running the place. I daresay they'll have to be sued into compliance to do it now. Not that I object to that: they need to refund the taxpayers' money or do what the…

They’ll just claim something something 5G and will be back in the feds good graces. Honestly the cable industry is a monopoly and has grown beyond government oversight. This needs to change but we don’t have any other option than nullifying anti-municipal fiber laws and start laying down new lines.

> Honestly the cable industry is a monopoly and has grown beyond government oversight

I think you mean an oligopoly.

Re: 100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

#217

Post by Scandiravian »

pottertheotter wrote: post #111
martin_bech wrote: post #91

Hi from the developed world.. just checked, the slowest available broadband here is 200Mpbs/20Mpbs. Default is 200/200, I and most people I know went with 1000/1000Mpbs.

It is that way in some areas that have competition, but not many. I'm curious where you are at? And how much is 1000/1000 per month?

Also from DK. I have a 1000/1000 connection for approximately 20$ per month

There was talks about upgrading to 10gbit/10gbit for 30$, since the infrastructure can deliver that, but since consumer hardware is still stuck at 1gbit it was postponed until there's actually a market for it

Re: 100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

#218

Post by rcxdude »

gonehome wrote: post #182
Panino wrote: post #3

> The funding is going to a mix of cable, fiber, and fixed wireless providers, plus SpaceX's Starlink satellite network. I think cable providers should be left out. They were already gifted many billions of dollars in the past for this same basic purpose but they pocketed the money. They can just use the free money they've already been given. Instead, the funding should go to existing munipical fiber ISPs to expand t…

With Starlink I think the competition will get more real for them. In the rare markets with actual competition the shitty cable companies provide at least okay service. In Palo Alto I can get 1gbps down/35mbps up on Comcast for $89 (with 1TB data cap I have to pay $50 extra to remove). That's not too bad. They also offer a 2gbps down and up service called gigabit pro, but it requires installation and it's pretty expe…

> With Starlink I think the competition will get more real for them.

It's entirely possible for them to just ignore starlink. Due to the nature of satellite internet there's only so high a density of customers that they can have. At maximum theoretical efficiency and distribution this is maybe 1% of US households. In cities it will be irrelevant (starlink will either raise prices or turn away customers), in rural areas it may serve as some competition, but infrastruture investment in those areas is naturally lower return than in cities, so they're not likely to have a strong incentive to improve their service there. Elon Musk has specifically said Starlink is not competition for the big telcos.

Re: 100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

#219

Post by Nextgrid »

tptacek wrote: post #132
stainforth wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So why is the experience still a monopoly all the same?

Because wireline Internet is a high-capital low-margin business, and because you often need mass adoption in order to make it economical.

How do you explain that even Google Fiber (with near-unlimited capital) has failed to make any progress? If I remember correctly they were denied access to telephone poles that incumbents were using.

Re: 100Mbps uploads and downloads should be US broadband standard, senators say

#220

Post by gigatexal »

This legislation is dead if it doesn't prevent local munis from kowtowing to incumbant ISPs and thwarting municipal fiber. That's what we need: a ton more competition from the municipalities in this space given that I think broadband should be a public good like the highway system is.
Post reply on HN