71–80 of 340 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I disagree. The vast majority of people are never going to need or care about hosting a decentralized hoozywhatsit. Mandating technical decisions that cause waste is suboptimal. You get symmetrical speeds with fiber, but if ISPs could use the existing fiber infrastructure and allocate 75% of the bandwidth as download instead of 50%, that would be a win.
In what way does it cause waste?
I wish that countries would mandate symmetrical connections as well. This would open up so much more opportunity for self hosting web apps and allow for decentralized sites, such as peertube, to function better.
Wonderful, let's make new homes even more expensive! And to those who are downvoting this, every building code requirement like this jacks up the price further. Not everyone is a SWE with a TC of $250k+ you over privileged ninnies.
UK house prices in no way reflect the build cost. The developers do the least they can get away with, which generally means the shittiest fabric with some polish that lasts until the end of the warranty period, just about satisfying the building regs (which are not really checked properly), then they flog the result at whatever the market will bear and pocket the difference. What the market will bear is entirely dict…
UK legislators are really something out of this world. In October I will have 10Gbps for 2 years, I can't even remember when I got 1gbps. The reason you get such services (and in my case for dirt cheap) is because of competition, not because you mandate it. Just a dumb idea to impose this thinking it will somehow improve the situation overnight. Sadly again I'm not surprised given the location in question.
I think this comes across as shocking to Americans but the thing is the rest of the world treats internet as a utility so most governments try to get cheap and fast internet for as large a portion of the population as possible. Where as US cities and towns are stuck under its isp corporate monopolies.
Though UK median speed is well below US according to speedtest. https://www.speedtest.net/global-index
Another one is that speeds are always expressed in bullshit terms such as "superfast", "ultrafast", etc and raw numbers are avoided, making shopping around difficult.
Specifically section 1.5.e.
> Requirement R1 does not apply to the following types of building or building work:
[...]
> e. buildings in isolated areas where the prospect of a high-speed connection is considered too remote to justify equipping the building with high-speed-ready in-building physical infrastructure or an access point [...]
I wish that countries would mandate symmetrical connections as well. This would open up so much more opportunity for self hosting web apps and allow for decentralized sites, such as peertube, to function better.
I disagree. The vast majority of people are never going to need or care about hosting a decentralized hoozywhatsit. Mandating technical decisions that cause waste is suboptimal. You get symmetrical speeds with fiber, but if ISPs could use the existing fiber infrastructure and allocate 75% of the bandwidth as download instead of 50%, that would be a win.
I agree that it shouldn't be a mandate though. It would be enough to mandate that the Up/down speeds both appear on the promotional material in the same font size.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In what way does it cause waste?
You are mandating infra that will never be used and isn't needed.
But also I'm interested in if/whether this builds infrastructure resilience as well.
Would be interesting to see a well-thought cost/benefit analysis there. In America at least given that every ISP without exception is a giant piece of crap, mandating them to do things I'm going to generally approve of, especially if ISPs would be against it since I don't trust them whatsoever.