Live data from Hacker News

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

arstechnica.com

221–230 of 246 posts

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

#221
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…

The only option I have is Spectrum with an absolutely crappy upload speed (currently 6MB). Sadly this neighborhood never got any other option. Starlink might finally provide some competition.

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

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why starlink is so important. I can not wait to stop paying Comcast.

Why don’t you move to 5G now?

My neighborhood the Verizon 5G is pathetic, its slower than 4G and that is still slower than my terrible Spectrum wired internet. I only live in the middle of a 5M metro area.

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

#223
post #63

Lets try and suss out some of the multiple issues with US internet: -regulating ISPs as a free market is, to be hyperbolic, a disaster. there is effectively a monopoly in most parts of the country. -25/3 Mbps is a very reasonable speed for most people. the issue is that its provided on a best effort basis that is never maintained for long, if at all. netflix says thats enough to stream UHD[0] -FTA: "Those data points…

>-25/3 Mbps is a very reasonable speed for most people. Except most household have more than 1 person. A family of four sharing 100Mbps isn't a lot. I am not sure if 100Mbps upload is a realistic option in US. But I would at least expect 50Mbps to be minimum per household. DOSCIS 4.0 should be able to handle that.

I'm in the US and currently get 200/40 with DOCSIS 3. These speeds have been available for around 10 years here.

Although technically I was only upgraded from 100 to 200 for free a few years ago because a competitor came in since then with fiber who offers 200/200 at the same price. I haven't switched over because they cut me a deal and truthfully I don't upload enough for the extra amount to matter and I get single digit ping times out of my provider which I'm happy with.

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

#224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In fact the law requires access to telephone poles. In one state Google got into a fight with incumbents over a policy where Google’s installers would be allowed to move incumbent’s equipment already on the poles to make room for its own, instead of following an existing process for having the incumbents move their own equipment. That’s probably a good idea assuming indemnification is in place, but Google wasn’t being denied access to the poles.

On the other side of the scale, Google Fiber has had the carpet rolled out for it in many places, for example being given for example free leases to public property for installing fiber huts: https://techliberation.com/2012/08/07/what-google-fiber-says...

> Google received stunning regulatory concessions and incentives from local governments, including free access to virtually everything the city owns or controls: rights of way, central office space, power, interconnections with anchor institutions, marketing and direct mail, and office space for Google employees. City officials also expedited the permitting process and assigned staff specifically to help Google. One county even offered to allow Google to hang its wires on parts of utility poles – for free – that are usually off-limits to communications companies.

See also: https://hbr.org/2018/09/why-google-fiber-is-high-speed-inter...

> But we believe Google Fiber’s most significant impact was to change the nature of relations between infrastructure providers and local authorities. Even after substantial deregulation in the 1980’s and 1990’s, and even as separate networks and technologies converged on a single internet-based standard, local governments continued to treat network providers as quasi-governmental public utilities, regulating their construction efforts and access to public rights of way with cumbersome procedures developed decades earlier.

One of the biggest examples of special treatment Google has negotiated in almost every Fiber city is exemption from build-out requirements: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/how-google-fiber-launch...

> Google Fiber has started with three neighborhoods in Louisville--Portland, Newburg, and Strathmoor (better known as the Highlands, where all the young professionals hang out). Residents of those neighborhoods can start ordering the service today by going to google.com/fiber/louisville. There are two packages to choose from:

While focusing on higher income neighborhoods where more people are likely to sign up for service seems like a no brainer in fact it’s an explosive political in most cities. That was the exact reason Verizon wasn’t allowed to deploy FiOS to Baltimore, and was a major reason for delays in FiOS deployment for NYC.

Looking at the details of how Google approached Fiber in various cities is a roadmap for what’s holding back deployment across the country. The problem was not incumbent lobbying—cities like Baltimore were falling over themselves to get Google to build Fiber. But what Google demanded in every fiber city was the sort of thing it got in Kansas City: elimination of the red tape that drives up costs. It’s no surprise that Google ended up mainly building Fiber in a bunch of red state cities.

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

#225
Would people saturate their connection for a long duration of time streaming 4K or whatever? I know for me I am what's called 'extremely online', but I use the web intermittently, and don't saturate my connection streaming NSFW content for 12 hour intervals. When I need it, my 100Mbps connection is there for me, when I need to download an ISO or whatever, but that's the only time I use the fast connection. The rest is all low-bandwidth activity (surfing twitter, checking email etc).

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

#226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The only option I have is Spectrum with an absolutely crappy upload speed (currently 6MB). Sadly this neighborhood never got any other option. Starlink might finally provide some competition.

I’m in the same boat with spectrum, 9Mbps up, which works out to 1.44MB up in real world example. It takes me upwards of a full day to upload a 30 minute 4K YouTube video! It’s shockingly bad. I called to upgrade and the only option is business class for $200 per month offering 35Mbps up.

StarLink beta welcome email just arrived and I’m counting the days till I cancel Spectrum completely

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

#227
post #188

I live in Poland and I am BAFFLED at how bad internet in US, supposedly one of the most developed countries on Earth, is. I have commercial (ie high priority), 600Mbit/120Mbit broadband with extremely stable (under 15ms, over 99% of th time) round trip to most of the Poland, for equivalent of 20 USD per month. I know its not the same everywhere in Poland, but consider I also have three mobile internet plans. One of t…

How bad is it really? I get that there are rural and outlier areas but the average bandwidth is higher in the US than Poland. Maybe I just find it hard to relate, but I and most of the heavily populated areas of the North East have had symmetrical FTTH for 15 years now. We have Gigabit up and down for about $90 USD a month.

Average bandwidth isn't a good metric of internet access.

A community that has 1 home with 1Gb/s and 10 homes with 5Mb/s would have an average speed of about (1000 + (10*5))/11 = 95 Mb/s, which is accurate but misleading

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

#228

Imagine how good our network technology policy would be if the Senate weren't run by septagenarians and octogenarian. I fear that data caps for home internet will become standard. There is no technological reason for these caps. For wireless, they could be defended by arguing that companies only get to use so much spectrum because of FCC laws. But the only limit for home internet is the ISP's willingness to deploy eq…

I dunno there's a handful of millennial politicians in congress and they're hit-or-miss. I would focus less on the age of the Senators and more on the fact that your median voter is 50 years old. And your median primary voter is 58 years old. They also consume significantly more television (and less Internet) than people under 40 (Millennials and Gen-Z).

Most people under 65 in our rural area are dropping ATT u-verse ($200+ per month) and keeping only DSL + Roku + a few select channels because of cost. Cable television is too expensive.

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

#229
post #25
post #18

Yes they should, but what will happen is websites and apps will get fatter and sloppier until the end result is slow, laggy performance. It's a bit like doubling your salary and increasing your spending by more than double. That seems to be how website and app development behaves. Imagine if bandwidth increased, latency decreased (approaching theoritical minimums), and websites/apps were built with a strict (but appr…

In my experience most of those slow sites are wordpress.

You may as well say most of those websites are HML. Or Apache. Misused software results in slow websites.

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

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I checked Comcast's 10k report and their margin for the segment including broadband is over 40%, which is crazy but about what you would expect from a de facto monopoly. I don't think forcing them to invest in capex to benefit customers is asking so much when they are making those kinds of margins.

Those margins are misleading because they're _multi_ service operators, and accounting standards require that you can only list direct costs. Revenue is easy: how much did you take in for video? phone? Internet access? Costs are harder because you can only include business line direct costs. Since the cable plant is used by voice, video and data services it's not a direct cost of any of them. Same thing with the serv…

That was margin derived from operating revenue, it includes SG&A for the entire division.

Do you have a source stating otherwise?

Post reply on HN