5 ms·

... he said, while his comment posted correctly, in the moment he wanted, because the tech behind the posting ability was Right.

Varriount 7y ago
Not that I agree 100% with the parent poster, but your argument is flawed. ISPs are only part of the enormous tech stack that is required for the internet to work. The fact that things do work doesn't mean that ISPs are doing everything correctly, not that there isn't reason for complaint or improvement. Just look at the state of the related infrastructure, both technological and political, in the US and elsewhere.
allovernow 7y ago
Statistically most likely from a ≈25-100mb US connection while developed countries the world over have had gigabit for a decade... Our internet is quite a bit behind because telcos in this country don't have to meaningfully compete. Plenty of legislation has cemented their market dominance through artificial (and unnecessary) barriers to entry with practically no accountability for shoddy service and infrastructure. Remember when Verizon received billions in subsidies to bring fiber to NY in the late 00s and ran off with the money with no penalty? https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/ https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/
- orf 7y ago
  I’m paying the equivalent of $40 p/m for 600mbit download and 100mbit upload in Europe. I don’t think it’s even the best deal I could be getting.
  - james_white 7y ago
    I'm so jealous. I pay $55/mo for 12 down and 1 up. It's the best deal I can get.
  - Lukas_Skywalker 7y ago
    In Switzerland you can get 10Gbps down/1 Gbps up for $50 and you get an Apple TV, a TV subscription and a landline phone number.
- grandmczeb 7y ago
  The US is 10th in the fixed broadband ranking on speedtest.net[1], ahead of counties like Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, UK, etc. [1] https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#fixed https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#fixed
- tialaramex 7y ago
  Gigabit is not important, remember when you could finally buy a 10MW electrical feed for your home and how much it improved your quality of life... Right that didn't happen because it is not important at all. Running 100W to homes means people can have electric light, 1kW means they can have motorised appliances, and 10kW makes cooking and heating practical... But 10MW? You had no need for it, so it didn't happen. Likewise more bandwidth enabled applications only up to a point, 40Mbps DSL is perfectly good for watching TV and so on. I had Gigabit on someone else's dime back at the turn of the century and when I bought service for my current home I not only didn't enquire what it would cost to run Gigabit here, I didn't even choose the expensive 80Mbps option, I already know 40Mbps is fine. What mattered most even going from dial-up to 1Mbps DSL wasn't bandwidth, it was Always On. The Network's omnipresence is what matters. Fibre matters to some extent for infrastructure, same way it matters what a bridge is built from. Fibre coms doesn't attract thieves, not subject to RF interference, lots of benefits for infrastructure projects, but Gigabit Internet for the home? Not important.
  - npo9 7y ago
    Receiving two 4K streams is ~50mbps. This is a pretty common modern use case for home internet. At 1000mbps downloading any file takes roughly the same time, regardless of size. Offsite storage becomes practical for multimedia files. Not every home benefits from 1000mbps, but it’s very possible to be a home that does. I don’t have a lot of data stored on disks in my home, because I know I can always download it quickly, even if the filesize is 100gb.
    - mantap 7y ago
      Also most people in the west don't worry about overloading their home's electrical supply by connecting too many devices. That is equivalent to a gigabit connection. A 100Mbit connection would be equivent to maybe a 4kW home supply in a temperate climate - probably enough for the average user but only just you'd still have to watch your usage. Additionally the real benefit to FTTH is not bandwidth but ping which is noticeable. And no sane operator is installing FTTH with sub-gigabit capacity because it's a complete waste of time and money.
  - 7y ago
- joering2 7y ago
  Its on par with banking. On my trip to Europe in 2009 major cards were contacless cards (VISA). Just when I got my USA Visa chip card year ago I visit Europe again and most merchants were concerned why I still have a chip (“it wont work your card probably already expired. Oh wow chip card still working, amazing”). By 2010 you were able to wire money between banks at zero or close to zero fee inly using app on your phone and someone email. Just recently I was able to withdraw money from European AMT by using my email address (I had phone, no cards). I put my email in, verify when I got it and then in my email i I selected card and amount and replied. 15 seconds later ATM spit out $50. Altho I paid 3.2% transaction fee which I gladly did considering I didnt have my wallet w me and really needed cash.
  - beojan 7y ago
    Contactless is capped if you're not using Apple / Google Pay. You need the chip for anything over the cap.
    - joering2 7y ago
      Withdrew $1,500 from Bank of Millenium ATM using contactless card and BLIK in Europe. If by Cap we define I could not withdrew it all then that's correct.
      - beojan 7y ago
        I mean this cap: https://merchantmachine.co.uk/contactless-limits/ https://merchantmachine.co.uk/contactless-limits/
- perl4ever 7y ago
  I am currently not using it, but it appears my local cable company offers a purported "940+ Mbps" for $110/month. But I couldn't care less - what I want is something as cheap as possible, irrespective of speed. They seem to have an option right now for 30 Mbps for $15, but I'm assuming there's some catch. I did think the low cost option was only available for people on public assistance or something. I used to have a cable connection, and it seemed slightly faster than cellular, but it didn't really make a difference to me, and since I can't do without the cellular, it made more sense to get unlimited data for that, than paying more for limited data and cable service. More bandwidth only encourages websites to add more advertising, anyway.
a1369209993 7y ago
> because the tech behind the posting ability was Right. Yep - TCP can paper over a lot of incompetence.
- antonvs 7y ago
  Not just TCP, but the ability to throw (tax) money at problems.
BLanen 7y ago
https://i.imgur.com/4KZe4UO.png https://i.imgur.com/4KZe4UO.png Your comment is the worst kind of comment. EDIT: Yea, the comment which basically boils down to "eh, by commenting on this post you showed that telecom companies provide you with the minimal amount of service they promise so you can't complain about the state of the industry". Because that's totally an argument that's worth debating.

Varriount 7y ago

Not that I agree 100% with the parent poster, but your argument is flawed. ISPs are only part of the enormous tech stack that is required for the internet to work. The fact that things do work doesn't mean that ISPs are doing everything correctly, not that there isn't reason for complaint or improvement. Just look at the state of the related infrastructure, both technological and political, in the US and elsewhere.

allovernow 7y ago

Statistically most likely from a ≈25-100mb US connection while developed countries the world over have had gigabit for a decade... Our internet is quite a bit behind because telcos in this country don't have to meaningfully compete. Plenty of legislation has cemented their market dominance through artificial (and unnecessary) barriers to entry with practically no accountability for shoddy service and infrastructure. Remember when Verizon received billions in subsidies to bring fiber to NY in the late 00s and ran off with the money with no penalty? https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/ https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/

orf 7y ago
I’m paying the equivalent of $40 p/m for 600mbit download and 100mbit upload in Europe. I don’t think it’s even the best deal I could be getting.
- james_white 7y ago
  I'm so jealous. I pay $55/mo for 12 down and 1 up. It's the best deal I can get.
- Lukas_Skywalker 7y ago
  In Switzerland you can get 10Gbps down/1 Gbps up for $50 and you get an Apple TV, a TV subscription and a landline phone number.
grandmczeb 7y ago
The US is 10th in the fixed broadband ranking on speedtest.net[1], ahead of counties like Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, UK, etc. [1] https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#fixed https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#fixed
tialaramex 7y ago
Gigabit is not important, remember when you could finally buy a 10MW electrical feed for your home and how much it improved your quality of life... Right that didn't happen because it is not important at all. Running 100W to homes means people can have electric light, 1kW means they can have motorised appliances, and 10kW makes cooking and heating practical... But 10MW? You had no need for it, so it didn't happen. Likewise more bandwidth enabled applications only up to a point, 40Mbps DSL is perfectly good for watching TV and so on. I had Gigabit on someone else's dime back at the turn of the century and when I bought service for my current home I not only didn't enquire what it would cost to run Gigabit here, I didn't even choose the expensive 80Mbps option, I already know 40Mbps is fine. What mattered most even going from dial-up to 1Mbps DSL wasn't bandwidth, it was Always On. The Network's omnipresence is what matters. Fibre matters to some extent for infrastructure, same way it matters what a bridge is built from. Fibre coms doesn't attract thieves, not subject to RF interference, lots of benefits for infrastructure projects, but Gigabit Internet for the home? Not important.
- npo9 7y ago
  Receiving two 4K streams is ~50mbps. This is a pretty common modern use case for home internet. At 1000mbps downloading any file takes roughly the same time, regardless of size. Offsite storage becomes practical for multimedia files. Not every home benefits from 1000mbps, but it’s very possible to be a home that does. I don’t have a lot of data stored on disks in my home, because I know I can always download it quickly, even if the filesize is 100gb.
  - mantap 7y ago
    Also most people in the west don't worry about overloading their home's electrical supply by connecting too many devices. That is equivalent to a gigabit connection. A 100Mbit connection would be equivent to maybe a 4kW home supply in a temperate climate - probably enough for the average user but only just you'd still have to watch your usage. Additionally the real benefit to FTTH is not bandwidth but ping which is noticeable. And no sane operator is installing FTTH with sub-gigabit capacity because it's a complete waste of time and money.
- 7y ago
joering2 7y ago
Its on par with banking. On my trip to Europe in 2009 major cards were contacless cards (VISA). Just when I got my USA Visa chip card year ago I visit Europe again and most merchants were concerned why I still have a chip (“it wont work your card probably already expired. Oh wow chip card still working, amazing”). By 2010 you were able to wire money between banks at zero or close to zero fee inly using app on your phone and someone email. Just recently I was able to withdraw money from European AMT by using my email address (I had phone, no cards). I put my email in, verify when I got it and then in my email i I selected card and amount and replied. 15 seconds later ATM spit out $50. Altho I paid 3.2% transaction fee which I gladly did considering I didnt have my wallet w me and really needed cash.
- beojan 7y ago
  Contactless is capped if you're not using Apple / Google Pay. You need the chip for anything over the cap.
  - joering2 7y ago
    Withdrew $1,500 from Bank of Millenium ATM using contactless card and BLIK in Europe. If by Cap we define I could not withdrew it all then that's correct.
    - beojan 7y ago
      I mean this cap: https://merchantmachine.co.uk/contactless-limits/ https://merchantmachine.co.uk/contactless-limits/
perl4ever 7y ago
I am currently not using it, but it appears my local cable company offers a purported "940+ Mbps" for $110/month. But I couldn't care less - what I want is something as cheap as possible, irrespective of speed. They seem to have an option right now for 30 Mbps for $15, but I'm assuming there's some catch. I did think the low cost option was only available for people on public assistance or something. I used to have a cable connection, and it seemed slightly faster than cellular, but it didn't really make a difference to me, and since I can't do without the cellular, it made more sense to get unlimited data for that, than paying more for limited data and cable service. More bandwidth only encourages websites to add more advertising, anyway.

a1369209993 7y ago

> because the tech behind the posting ability was Right. Yep - TCP can paper over a lot of incompetence.

antonvs 7y ago
Not just TCP, but the ability to throw (tax) money at problems.

BLanen 7y ago

https://i.imgur.com/4KZe4UO.png https://i.imgur.com/4KZe4UO.png Your comment is the worst kind of comment. EDIT: Yea, the comment which basically boils down to "eh, by commenting on this post you showed that telecom companies provide you with the minimal amount of service they promise so you can't complain about the state of the industry". Because that's totally an argument that's worth debating.