FCC: BROADBAND HAS TO BE 10MBPS/1MBPS

[The_Evenger]

this sounds awesome! compared to 2.8Mb/s down .3Mb/s up

[Jade]

And? It needs to be the standard lol

 

Because: why the hell not?

Because: It's incredibly costly. If it wasn't, Google, or otherwise, would just crush and roll out fiber in all the cities they're looking out on a whim.

[Trik'Stari]

Because: It's incredibly costly. If it wasn't, Google, or otherwise, would just crush and roll out fiber in all the cities they're looking out on a whim.

Meh, I'd rather pay $110 a month for 1gbps (just picked a number, not sure of actual price) than the current $70+ I pay for century links constantly throttling "10Mbps"

[dalekphalm]

Because: It's incredibly costly. If it wasn't, Google, or otherwise, would just crush and roll out fiber in all the cities they're looking out on a whim.

Why do people think this? Google doesn't want to be an ISP. They don't want to roll out Fibre anywhere. They only rolled out Google Fibre to show ISP's that it wasn't really that expensive to do.

 

Granted, I'm not sure what speeds you two are talking about, but rolling out 10/1 Mbps to even rural areas is doable.

[Jade]

Meh, I'd rather pay $110 a month for 1gbps (just picked a number, not sure of actual price) than the current $70+ I pay for century links constantly throttling "10Mbps"

You might, but the people around you probably don't agree. That $40 won't pay off in the short term for them, and they have absolutely no guarantees that you're going to stick around on their service. I know someone who's getting a fiber line laid to CenturyLink (in Salt Lake City; which has an exchange & three major backbones) and it's costing them $6000 just to bury it for 200 feet. If I recall from a thread yesterday, you live in a field; $40 additional dollars would take you 150 months (12.5 years) to pay them back simply for burying the fiber to your house, not to mention other costs.

 

 

Why do people think this? Google doesn't want to be an ISP. They don't want to roll out Fibre anywhere. They only rolled out Google Fibre to show ISP's that it wasn't really that expensive to do.

 

Granted, I'm not sure what speeds you two are talking about, but rolling out 10/1 Mbps to even rural areas is doable.

I'm speaking simply of fiber, nor am I saying that Google wants to. I said that if it was cheap to do on a large scale--to the extent of becoming a standard, Google would have it in more places (specifically the ones they've shown interest in on their Fiber site. They would't continue researching potential places to roll it out and whatnot if they weren't interested at all.) Semi-relevant, but I do enjoy reading your debates with others, you seem to have a pretty good idea and actually use common sense, unlike most people I see arguing/debating.

[sqwidee]

At school I get this:

 

And at home I have Comcast and it's 50down 10up with like 10-20 ping wtf.

I should be getting 50up and down with the Comcast service but it's so bad... SO BAD

[Trik'Stari]

You might, but the people around you probably don't agree. That $40 won't pay off in the short term for them, and they have absolutely no guarantees that you're going to stick around on their service. I know someone who's getting a fiber line laid to CenturyLink (in Salt Lake City; which has an exchange & three major backbones) and it's costing them $6000 just to bury it for 200 feet. If I recall from a thread yesterday, you live in a field; $40 additional dollars would take you 150 months (12.5 years) to pay them back simply for burying the fiber to your house, not to mention other costs.

Fair enough. I just want them to stop throttling me and upgrade my speed to more than what it is now.

[patrickjp93]

At school I get this:

And at home I have Comcast and it's 50down 10up with like 10-20 ping wtf.

I should be getting 50up and down with the Comcast service but it's so bad... SO BAD

That's universally true for post secondary schools. They have the money for a business line. It costs them multiple hundreds of thosands per year to have it too.

[Darkman]

Pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeease. I'm sick of 3/1Mbps internet and they classifiy it as broadband.  Pathetic 54Kbps speeds.

^ This... We both have the same speeds... 3Mb/s down is so fucking slow and .8Mb/s up is JUST barely able to handle 480p streaming...

[dalekphalm]

That's universally true for post secondary schools. They have the money for a business line. It costs them multiple hundreds of thosands per year to have it too.

That ping though, 2 ms, damn son.

 

Agreed though, a University practically has to have a connection like that. When you potentially have 10,000+ students (Of course depending on university size) all trying to access the net at once... dayum. Even if it's say, a conservative number like 2000 students, that 500 Mbps synchronous will still get eaten up super quick.

[Alfie_Assassin]

BT infinity, alto I should be getting 20Mbps/s up.

 

[IdortMasterRace]

Download isn't the issue you goons, its upload. I can have 100 down and if I can only send 1 up, its still a shitty connection. 

 

Well, it depends on what you're using it for.

 

100Mbps down for downloading and torrenting is pretty top tier, no matter what the upload is. But if I'm streaming, 1Mbps upload would be shit yeah.

[dalekphalm]

Well, it depends on what you're using it for.

 

100Mbps down for downloading and torrenting is pretty top tier, no matter what the upload is. But if I'm streaming, 1Mbps upload would be shit yeah.

Not necessarily true. If your upload is maxed out, no matter what you are doing, it will affect your download speed. This is because of the nature of how internet protocol works, and packet receipts and so on. I won't go into the technical details (partially because I'm not a network engineer, so I'm sure I'd get the finer points wrong), but it's not that hard to max out a 1Mbps upload. In fact, torrenting itself can easily do this, unless the user manually limits the upload speed. And yes, a torrent user should manually limit their upload speed, many don't or won't because they simply do not know any better.

[Techhog]

I don't live in america so in theory this doesn't affect me but if the bullshit american telecoms are pulling is being tolerated then that might give telecoms in other countrys ''ideas'' so you guys better not let those greedy monopolistic fuckers win. YOU HEAR ME?

We don't have any power. ISPs have local monopolies, so for most people the choice is reward them for their bullshit or live without internet.

[Mooshi]

Does this mean that the lowest tier of something like ATT's DSL must be 10/1 by law vs the pathetic 1.5/1?

[EarthboundHero]

Yay I don't even have 1 up, but I have 15 down.

[Tonylu1595]

Snip

Well my home internet is around 25/5, but I usually get an extra 3mb/s from comcast.

And my school's internet is ridiculous.

[Sky Daddy]

Meh, I don't think upload speeds needs to improve that much more, maybe just 2 up... If you need crazy upload speeds, you should be paying for a business line. If you don't want to pay for the crazy upload speeds, then you just don't need it. I really don't want to make it easier for people to upload crazy amounts of videos/pictures on sites about their pets and whatever else that is pointless. There's a lot of content that gets uploaded that really just don't matter...

imagine what games could do if they had more data they could send now, not to mention how much smoother it could be

 

but everyone's upload speed should be the same, or relatively close, to their download speed

[dalekphalm]

Well my home internet is around 25/5, but I usually get an extra 3mb/s from comcast.

And my school's internet is ridiculous.

I like how you cropped and hid your location... you DO realize that's a map, right?

[TheGosuStandard]

Sigh... the minimum should be 25/15 (or 25/10) by now according to their original planned scaling. 

[bcredeur97]

this is almost 2015... we have files and programs that are literally 50GB in size. We shouldnt have to wait for days for this stuff to download. We need this. ISP's who disagree can go die.

[terrytek]

this is almost 2015... we have files and programs that are literally 50GB in size. We shouldnt have to wait for days for this stuff to download. We need this. ISP's who disagree can go die.

God, trying to dowload CoD AW free for 2 days, it will take two days to finish downloading, but I have to fucking purchase it after 2 days.

[Blade of Grass]

imagine what games could do if they had more data they could send now, not to mention how much smoother it could be

 

but everyone's upload speed should be the same, or relatively close, to their download speed

Well, yes and no. The technology that is used by ISPs have a direct effect on this, technology like ADSL (Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line) is called that for a reason, it's upload and download is different.

There are only so many channels that a ADSL modem can contact the DSLAM (Digital Subscriber Line Access Multiplexer) on, and each channel can only have a finite bandwidth. If there's X channels, the question is how many do you want for upload how many for download?

Cable internet also faces this same issue, the cable modem only has a finite number of channels with a finite bandwidth that they can use to connect to the CMTS (Cable Modem Termination System).

But, when you get into fiber, you see that there is the possibility of symmetrical speeds. ISPs also have to look at the wants of most consumers, which is fast download speeds, but sadly they seem to forget that there are people out there that want/need fast download.

tl;dr alot of network technologies don't allow for symmetrical speeds, most consumers only really care about download, fiber is the future (hopefully).

[h3ll0]

How does 10/1 mbps exceed the typical american requirements when that is 1.25 MBs down and 125 KBps up. I bet most americans would be appalled to find out that their internet is slower than a 1990's hard drive. :huh:

 

I mean most people think that mbps is equal to MBps  :blink:

[xXxYOLOxSWAGxXx_420BlazeIt]

South Korea has wifi pretty much anywhere you walk.

 

Here's my high school:

 

Here's my home:

Pretty much the whole of England has wifi whereever you walk (Obviously excluding rural areas).