4 ms·

It's a bit disingenuous to think they're just aligning their offering to competitors. This is the usual trick to impede p2p protocols like torrent on their netw

It's a bit disingenuous to think they're just aligning their offering to competitors. This is the usual trick to impede p2p protocols like torrent on their network, without outright saying so. A friend of mine runs an internet provider (in Europe though) and he's flooded by all the takedown requests of warez content on his network. Luckily he's not in Germany, so people don't get fined or sent threatening lawyers letters so he just notifies customers. Other providers just swallow them. TL;DR Most providers do limit uploads for various reasons, reading it as a monopolistic measure is far fetched. The problem with internet in the USA is the same as most problems in the USA: a huge population scattered across a huge country. Good luck with serving fast internet to everyone, it's not Europe. As a proof of this, metropolitan hubs in the USA are fine internet wise. Looking at how well public services are run in general, I doubt a public monopoly would be better than this "private" monopoly: last mile providers in the USA have a hard job.

doikor 5y ago
> The problem with internet in the USA is the same as most problems in the USA: a huge population scattered across a huge country. Good luck with serving fast internet to everyone, it's not Europe. The population density here in Finland is half of USA and we still got 1gbit fiber available in pretty much any city. Nobody is expecting to have fiber into every farm but any city/town with more than 10k people can have fiber installed in a profitable way just fine. This is possible due to rules/laws that encourage competition not stifle it. (Mainly centered around forcing renting out the last mile infrastructure to your competition at reasonable rates)
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  >The population density here in Finland is half of USA and we still got 1gbit fiber available in pretty much any city. In the US any new development has 1gbit fiber as well. Older developments are starting to get it rolled out as well but it is a bit slow. >Nobody is expecting to have fiber into every farm but any city/town with more than 10k people can have fiber installed in a profitable way just fine. This is a major problem in the US. A lot of towns are very small. In fact the vast majority are under 10k people (16,410 out of 19,502) https://www.statista.com/statistics/241695/number-of-us-cities-towns-villages-by-population-size/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/241695/number-of-us-citi...
  - doikor 5y ago
    But in reality those 16k hold a very small part of the population. Them existing is not a reason you could not have fiber available for the majority of the population (and for cheap like 100mbit unlimited for $20 per month) Here in Finland only 97 towns have over 10k population (out of 310). And this number has gotten “better” over the last couple decades as we joined a bunch of small/dying places together. Basically for any argument about population density Finland just has a really low density. From western countries only Canada, Iceland and Australia beat us in that. (Finland is 216 out of 250 worldwide with our 16 per km^2)
Supermancho 5y ago
> It's a bit disingenuous to think they're just aligning their offering to competitors. https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/altice-plans-to-cut-upload-speeds-for-its-optimum-and-suddenlink-cable-internet-plans/ https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/altice-plans-to-cut-uploa... An Altice spokesperson said that the new upload speeds "are in-line with other ISPs and aligned with the industry."

doikor 5y ago

> The problem with internet in the USA is the same as most problems in the USA: a huge population scattered across a huge country. Good luck with serving fast internet to everyone, it's not Europe. The population density here in Finland is half of USA and we still got 1gbit fiber available in pretty much any city. Nobody is expecting to have fiber into every farm but any city/town with more than 10k people can have fiber installed in a profitable way just fine. This is possible due to rules/laws that encourage competition not stifle it. (Mainly centered around forcing renting out the last mile infrastructure to your competition at reasonable rates)

_-david-_ 5y ago
>The population density here in Finland is half of USA and we still got 1gbit fiber available in pretty much any city. In the US any new development has 1gbit fiber as well. Older developments are starting to get it rolled out as well but it is a bit slow. >Nobody is expecting to have fiber into every farm but any city/town with more than 10k people can have fiber installed in a profitable way just fine. This is a major problem in the US. A lot of towns are very small. In fact the vast majority are under 10k people (16,410 out of 19,502) https://www.statista.com/statistics/241695/number-of-us-cities-towns-villages-by-population-size/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/241695/number-of-us-citi...
- doikor 5y ago
  But in reality those 16k hold a very small part of the population. Them existing is not a reason you could not have fiber available for the majority of the population (and for cheap like 100mbit unlimited for $20 per month) Here in Finland only 97 towns have over 10k population (out of 310). And this number has gotten “better” over the last couple decades as we joined a bunch of small/dying places together. Basically for any argument about population density Finland just has a really low density. From western countries only Canada, Iceland and Australia beat us in that. (Finland is 216 out of 250 worldwide with our 16 per km^2)

Supermancho 5y ago

> It's a bit disingenuous to think they're just aligning their offering to competitors. https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/altice-plans-to-cut-upload-speeds-for-its-optimum-and-suddenlink-cable-internet-plans/ https://www.cnet.com/home/internet/altice-plans-to-cut-uploa... An Altice spokesperson said that the new upload speeds "are in-line with other ISPs and aligned with the industry."