3 ms·

> Upload speed is just a cash grab. No. This lacks all historical and practical understanding of why upload speeds are limited. Back in the 70s/80s when coax

> Upload speed is just a cash grab. No. This lacks all historical and practical understanding of why upload speeds are limited. Back in the 70s/80s when coax was being planned and rolled out for cable, they needed to figure out what frequencies they would use. Cable providers knew they needs a ton in one direction and only a tiny bit for things like buying pay per view in the other. This has been fine traditionally because even up to Netflix and streaming we haven’t needed the upload at residential. No one complained. That may start to change a little. As far as I am aware, all DOCSIS (cable) providers in the USA that are using cable-tv coax are limited to a max of 35Mbps upto DOCSIS3.1. I am writing this on 1250/35 right now. The local tiers for me are 100/15, 400/25, 1000/35, 1250/35. It isn’t a “cash grab” at all. If you need more upload you need a new line that isn’t divided so asymmetrically, which means fiber. And once you fiber, there is zero reason to go go symmetric, as you have two lines with the same equipment on either side, to a point where the ISP will charge differently if you cut into their bandwidth too much.

hn_acker 3y ago
> It isn’t a “cash grab” at all. If you need more upload you need a new line that isn’t divided so asymmetrically, which means fiber. And once you fiber, there is zero reason to go go symmetric, as you have two lines with the same equipment on either side, to a point where the ISP will charge differently if you cut into their bandwidth too much. Everything else you said could be true, yet not the part about a cash grab. Anything worse than $10 for 100 Mbps down and 100 Mbps up from a large ISP is a cash grab now that fiber exists [1], DOCSIS 3.1 can offer up to 1 Gbps (to say nothing of DOCSIS 4) [2], and large ISPs like Comcast keep committing subsidy fraud [3]. I wrote more about pricing in a different comment [4]. [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/why-fiber-vastly-superior-cable-and-5g https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/why-fiber-vastly-super... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS#Comparison https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS#Comparison [3] Pick any one of these links. https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/06/mississippi-says-att-took-283-million-network-it-never-fully-deployed/ https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/06/mississippi-says-att-too... https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/report-shows-comcast-continues-to-lie-about-its-broadband-coverage/ https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/report-shows-comcast-con... https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/16/verizon-t-mobile-overstate-wireless-coverage-to-nab-billions-in-undeserved-subsidies/ https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/16/verizon-t-mobile-oversta... [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38105873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38105873
- SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
  >Anything worse than $10 for 100 Mbps down and 100 Mbps up from a large ISP is a cash grab now that fiber exists [1], I thought you were serious for a sec. You should open an ISP, it would be wildly successful with your background knowledge.
  - hn_acker 3y ago
    >> Anything worse than $10 for 100 Mbps down and 100 Mbps up from a large ISP is a cash grab now that fiber exists [1], > You should open an ISP, it would be wildly successful with your background knowledge. First of all, the keyword in my previous comment is "large". When I wrote "large ISP", I was thinking of ISPs like AT&T [1], Comcast [2], Verizon [3], and T-Mobile [3]. I was also thinking of ISPs that have been financially successful enough to have grown large. (I could tentatively define "large ISP" as an ISP that operates in at least the entirety of two states, or maybe instead as an ISP that serves at least half the states that Comcast does, but I digress.) I could understand if a new or small ISP needed to charge much higher than the $10 for 100 figure I gave. But a large ISP, which has been around for many years should be able to rely on smaller profit margins. Second, I did do a simple math calculation to reach my figure of $10. EPB of Chattanooga charges just under $70 dollars for 1 gigabit symmetrical (see my previous comment). Let's suppose that a large ISP like Comcast offers 100 megabits symmetrical. A tenth of the speed (100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps) should be about a tenth of the price ($7 vs $70), plus a bit of wiggle room to account for overhead and discretionary profit. I gave this hypothetical Comcast a 30% margin of error, so that means $10. Admittedly, I may have underestimated the overhead, so $15 to $20 for 100 mbps from Comcast might be more realistic than $10. So yeah, I made a mistake. But anything higher than $20 for 100 mbps symmetrical and $70 for 1000 mbps symmetrical is a cash grab if a large ISP like Comcast is the ISP in question. So let those be my revised figures. (The overhead is about the same for providing both 100 mbps and 1000 mbps because the equipment costs may differ but the marginal cost of transferring data is about the same for both speeds [4].) Once again, this price threshold is only for large ISPs. By the way, if you think that my pricing idea was unreasonable then I would've been pleased to hear your idea of more reasonable pricing. [1] https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/06/mississippi-says-att-took-283-million-network-it-never-fully-deployed/ https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/06/mississippi-says-att-too... [2] https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/report-shows-comcast-continues-to-lie-about-its-broadband-coverage/ https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/report-shows-comcast-con... [3] https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/16/verizon-t-mobile-overstate-wireless-coverage-to-nab-billions-in-undeserved-subsidies/ https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/16/verizon-t-mobile-oversta... [4] https://broadbandnow.com/report/much-data-really-cost-isps https://broadbandnow.com/report/much-data-really-cost-isps
nunez 3y ago
And for most folks 35Mbit up is perfectly fine. Okay, maybe bulk uploading photos and videos to Google Photos will be a slog, but most users aren't doing that with any regularity.
m463 3y ago
When I first got cable in the beginning, it was symmetrical.
- SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
  Upto 35, yea, ok. Over 35? You are remembering wrong.
  - m463 3y ago
    it was 8/8 (looong ago). Company was taken over, then they made it more expensive and 8/1 I believe.

hn_acker 3y ago

> It isn’t a “cash grab” at all. If you need more upload you need a new line that isn’t divided so asymmetrically, which means fiber. And once you fiber, there is zero reason to go go symmetric, as you have two lines with the same equipment on either side, to a point where the ISP will charge differently if you cut into their bandwidth too much. Everything else you said could be true, yet not the part about a cash grab. Anything worse than $10 for 100 Mbps down and 100 Mbps up from a large ISP is a cash grab now that fiber exists [1], DOCSIS 3.1 can offer up to 1 Gbps (to say nothing of DOCSIS 4) [2], and large ISPs like Comcast keep committing subsidy fraud [3]. I wrote more about pricing in a different comment [4]. [1] https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/why-fiber-vastly-superior-cable-and-5g https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/10/why-fiber-vastly-super... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS#Comparison https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS#Comparison [3] Pick any one of these links. https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/06/mississippi-says-att-took-283-million-network-it-never-fully-deployed/ https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/06/mississippi-says-att-too... https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/report-shows-comcast-continues-to-lie-about-its-broadband-coverage/ https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/report-shows-comcast-con... https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/16/verizon-t-mobile-overstate-wireless-coverage-to-nab-billions-in-undeserved-subsidies/ https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/16/verizon-t-mobile-oversta... [4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38105873 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38105873

SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
>Anything worse than $10 for 100 Mbps down and 100 Mbps up from a large ISP is a cash grab now that fiber exists [1], I thought you were serious for a sec. You should open an ISP, it would be wildly successful with your background knowledge.
- hn_acker 3y ago
  >> Anything worse than $10 for 100 Mbps down and 100 Mbps up from a large ISP is a cash grab now that fiber exists [1], > You should open an ISP, it would be wildly successful with your background knowledge. First of all, the keyword in my previous comment is "large". When I wrote "large ISP", I was thinking of ISPs like AT&T [1], Comcast [2], Verizon [3], and T-Mobile [3]. I was also thinking of ISPs that have been financially successful enough to have grown large. (I could tentatively define "large ISP" as an ISP that operates in at least the entirety of two states, or maybe instead as an ISP that serves at least half the states that Comcast does, but I digress.) I could understand if a new or small ISP needed to charge much higher than the $10 for 100 figure I gave. But a large ISP, which has been around for many years should be able to rely on smaller profit margins. Second, I did do a simple math calculation to reach my figure of $10. EPB of Chattanooga charges just under $70 dollars for 1 gigabit symmetrical (see my previous comment). Let's suppose that a large ISP like Comcast offers 100 megabits symmetrical. A tenth of the speed (100 Mbps vs 1 Gbps) should be about a tenth of the price ($7 vs $70), plus a bit of wiggle room to account for overhead and discretionary profit. I gave this hypothetical Comcast a 30% margin of error, so that means $10. Admittedly, I may have underestimated the overhead, so $15 to $20 for 100 mbps from Comcast might be more realistic than $10. So yeah, I made a mistake. But anything higher than $20 for 100 mbps symmetrical and $70 for 1000 mbps symmetrical is a cash grab if a large ISP like Comcast is the ISP in question. So let those be my revised figures. (The overhead is about the same for providing both 100 mbps and 1000 mbps because the equipment costs may differ but the marginal cost of transferring data is about the same for both speeds [4].) Once again, this price threshold is only for large ISPs. By the way, if you think that my pricing idea was unreasonable then I would've been pleased to hear your idea of more reasonable pricing. [1] https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/06/mississippi-says-att-took-283-million-network-it-never-fully-deployed/ https://www.techdirt.com/2020/10/06/mississippi-says-att-too... [2] https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/report-shows-comcast-continues-to-lie-about-its-broadband-coverage/ https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/15/report-shows-comcast-con... [3] https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/16/verizon-t-mobile-overstate-wireless-coverage-to-nab-billions-in-undeserved-subsidies/ https://www.techdirt.com/2023/02/16/verizon-t-mobile-oversta... [4] https://broadbandnow.com/report/much-data-really-cost-isps https://broadbandnow.com/report/much-data-really-cost-isps

nunez 3y ago

And for most folks 35Mbit up is perfectly fine. Okay, maybe bulk uploading photos and videos to Google Photos will be a slog, but most users aren't doing that with any regularity.

m463 3y ago

When I first got cable in the beginning, it was symmetrical.

SV_BubbleTime 3y ago
Upto 35, yea, ok. Over 35? You are remembering wrong.
- m463 3y ago
  it was 8/8 (looong ago). Company was taken over, then they made it more expensive and 8/1 I believe.