7 ms·

I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. US broadband is a joke compared to many other parts of the

I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. US broadband is a joke compared to many other parts of the world.

dangus 3y ago
Citation needed. The US is #8 in median speed for home broadband and #13 in mobile. Considering that anything above 15mbps is enough for 4K Ultra Netflix I think the US is doing just fine. https://www.speedtest.net/global-index/united-states https://www.speedtest.net/global-index/united-states
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- swarnie 3y ago
  Christ do you remember 15mbps? those were dark days.
  - devoutsalsa 3y ago
    I'm grateful for 5mbps when traveling.
    - anotherhue 3y ago
      * Weeps in 56k tones *
      - ben_w 3y ago
        I don't think I ever got more than 20kbit on my 56k modem. Usually more like 12.
h_tbob 3y ago
I wonder if that's because the USA is that stupid, or if it's just not as population dense as other countries with faster speeds? According to this statistic, it's not very dense, meaning it's super expensive to build broadband. Because it's pretty much a question of physical area covered, not number of people serviced. This stat says the USA is on the lower end of density https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.POP.DNST?locations=US&most_recent_value_desc=true https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.POP.DNST?locations=U...
- arcticbull 3y ago
  > This stat says the USA is on the lower end of density Yes, but America's population isn't evenly distributed across the entire dry surface area. The population is clustered tightly in cities like it is in many other countries, it's just that the cities are further apart from each other. [1] The better metric, IMO, is the percentage of people who live in urban vs rural areas. [2] The US is 85.8% urban, which is right in line with other developed countries. Spain is 81.5%. France is 88%. With this in mind, the expensive part would be the trunk line but America has that. [3] It's missing the last mile, especially in urban areas. [edit] For the record I don't think it's stupidity, I think deregulation, a lack of competition and a laissez-faire policy attitude allowed a few large players to chronically under-invest in infrastructure. And of course the perennial regulatory capture, with some 16 states literally banning municipal ISPs or making it difficult to set up. Good, cheap fiber to the home is available in Chattanooga, for example, thanks to a city-run utility. They sell city-wide 25Gbit FTTH (!!). [4] That model is illegal in states like Missouri, which itself ranks 43rd in broadband coverage. [1] https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2021/geo/population-distribution-2020.html https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2021/geo/popul... [2] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/urban-vs-rural-majority https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/urban-vs-rural-majority [3] https://www.technologyreview.com/2015/09/15/166239/first-detailed-public-map-of-us-internet-backbone-could-make-it-stronger/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2015/09/15/166239/first-det... [4] https://epb.com https://epb.com
  - phpisthebest 3y ago
    but connectivity is also not a problem in the denser areas. I live in a medium sized city in the midwest, I have access to 3 Wired Broadband Providers, including 1 Fiber, with a 2nd fiber provider rolling out in the area and could be accessible to me in the next 18-24 mos... hell even my former home, in a town of 1500 people, I had access to 1 wired Broadband, and 1 Fixed Wireless, and I just learned that a fiber provider has plans to complete wire most of the rural areas of the county by 2025... Deregulation is not the problem, government corruption is.
ImPleadThe5th 3y ago
On the other hand you have "cable is the future, I love copper" Germany
- sschueller 3y ago
  Helmut Kohl right? Germany seems to be a prime example of how privatization can't work for infrastructure. Having the road ripped up every time another provider wants to add fiber is insane.
sschueller 3y ago
At least every home that has copper should get fiber. The excuse that the US is too big or we can't do it is bull. You did it before for electricity and telephone. It just requires competency, money and an infrastructure that isn't for profit. Don't get me wrong, the services provided on the infrastructure can definitely be for profit but not the glass itself.
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  >>>You did it before for electricity I huge part of Rural America Electricity is run by Coop's today, often non-profit anyway. Various attempts have been tried for these Coop's to also provide internet services including using Internet Over Power Lines technology, they all fail for some reason. Also with Telephone and electric build out we did not have the levels of regulatory capture we do today. The US Tax Payer has spent BILLIONS on "broadband" roll out programs to pay for the infrastructure that should have bought fiber to every home including rural areas, the money was wasted on "Fixed Wireless broadband" and other schemes where by the ISP's more or less just pocket the money and there was no accountability by the federal agencies in charge of these programs, largely because they knew they had fat executive jobs at that ISP coming to them Your implication that government is the solution to this problem by paying for the infrastructure is not based in reality, as government is the problem. Government and government corruption is what stopped fiber from already being a reality.
  - rascul 3y ago
    > I huge part of Rural America Electricity is run by Coop's today, often non-profit anyway. Various attempts have been tried for these Coop's to also provide internet services including using Internet Over Power Lines technology, they all fail for some reason. They seem to be doing fine in Mississippi.
  - nfriedly 3y ago
    Where my wife used to live, there was a telephone cooperative. At the time, they offered DSL internet, but it now looks like they offer fiber also: https://www.mdtc.net/services/internet/ https://www.mdtc.net/services/internet/
speff 3y ago
[dead]
notwhereyouare 3y ago
> I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. that actually did happen with dad. He was working and off a sudden his internet stopped working, put up a screen saying he was on "vacation hold" and to call in and remove it. He called in, got it removed. Next day, he can a call from AT&T retention telling him he needed to upgrade to the fiber and they were discontinuing their copper plan
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  What is "hilarious" is that elsewhere, AT&T sells outdated DSL, still. But they lobby to have DSL speeds and customers removed from broadband surveys and requirements because they are "obsolete and outdated". They still sell them. In some cases, your only option. But they don't count for dragging down AT&T's broadband 'scores' and 'speeds' because ... it's inconvenient and reasons...
kyrra 3y ago
I wonder if it's the difficulty of laying wires. The number of permits that need to be pulled when wiring a city just makes it prohibitive.
crote 3y ago
The trick is to mandate "telephone service", not "analog landline". That'd allow them to transition to telephone-over-fiber, making new connections worth the effort.
- mxyztplk 3y ago
  AT&T is the Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) in various areas of California. They have applied to the CPUC to have "targeted relief" from that telephone service obligation. Currently, AT&T could provide telephone service via fiber, rather than copper, wherever they may choose to do so. So, currently, they can transition to fiber-to-the-premises wherever they want. Their COLR obligation does not require copper wires as the technology.

I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. US broadband is a joke compared to many other parts of the world.

dangus 3y ago

Citation needed. The US is #8 in median speed for home broadband and #13 in mobile. Considering that anything above 15mbps is enough for 4K Ultra Netflix I think the US is doing just fine. https://www.speedtest.net/global-index/united-states https://www.speedtest.net/global-index/united-states

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
swarnie 3y ago
Christ do you remember 15mbps? those were dark days.
- devoutsalsa 3y ago
  I'm grateful for 5mbps when traveling.
  - anotherhue 3y ago
    * Weeps in 56k tones *
    - ben_w 3y ago
      I don't think I ever got more than 20kbit on my 56k modem. Usually more like 12.

h_tbob 3y ago

I wonder if that's because the USA is that stupid, or if it's just not as population dense as other countries with faster speeds? According to this statistic, it's not very dense, meaning it's super expensive to build broadband. Because it's pretty much a question of physical area covered, not number of people serviced. This stat says the USA is on the lower end of density https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.POP.DNST?locations=US&most_recent_value_desc=true https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.POP.DNST?locations=U...

arcticbull 3y ago
> This stat says the USA is on the lower end of density Yes, but America's population isn't evenly distributed across the entire dry surface area. The population is clustered tightly in cities like it is in many other countries, it's just that the cities are further apart from each other. [1] The better metric, IMO, is the percentage of people who live in urban vs rural areas. [2] The US is 85.8% urban, which is right in line with other developed countries. Spain is 81.5%. France is 88%. With this in mind, the expensive part would be the trunk line but America has that. [3] It's missing the last mile, especially in urban areas. [edit] For the record I don't think it's stupidity, I think deregulation, a lack of competition and a laissez-faire policy attitude allowed a few large players to chronically under-invest in infrastructure. And of course the perennial regulatory capture, with some 16 states literally banning municipal ISPs or making it difficult to set up. Good, cheap fiber to the home is available in Chattanooga, for example, thanks to a city-run utility. They sell city-wide 25Gbit FTTH (!!). [4] That model is illegal in states like Missouri, which itself ranks 43rd in broadband coverage. [1] https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2021/geo/population-distribution-2020.html https://www.census.gov/library/visualizations/2021/geo/popul... [2] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/urban-vs-rural-majority https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/urban-vs-rural-majority [3] https://www.technologyreview.com/2015/09/15/166239/first-detailed-public-map-of-us-internet-backbone-could-make-it-stronger/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2015/09/15/166239/first-det... [4] https://epb.com https://epb.com
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  but connectivity is also not a problem in the denser areas. I live in a medium sized city in the midwest, I have access to 3 Wired Broadband Providers, including 1 Fiber, with a 2nd fiber provider rolling out in the area and could be accessible to me in the next 18-24 mos... hell even my former home, in a town of 1500 people, I had access to 1 wired Broadband, and 1 Fixed Wireless, and I just learned that a fiber provider has plans to complete wire most of the rural areas of the county by 2025... Deregulation is not the problem, government corruption is.

ImPleadThe5th 3y ago

On the other hand you have "cable is the future, I love copper" Germany

sschueller 3y ago
Helmut Kohl right? Germany seems to be a prime example of how privatization can't work for infrastructure. Having the road ripped up every time another provider wants to add fiber is insane.

sschueller 3y ago

At least every home that has copper should get fiber. The excuse that the US is too big or we can't do it is bull. You did it before for electricity and telephone. It just requires competency, money and an infrastructure that isn't for profit. Don't get me wrong, the services provided on the infrastructure can definitely be for profit but not the glass itself.

phpisthebest 3y ago
>>>You did it before for electricity I huge part of Rural America Electricity is run by Coop's today, often non-profit anyway. Various attempts have been tried for these Coop's to also provide internet services including using Internet Over Power Lines technology, they all fail for some reason. Also with Telephone and electric build out we did not have the levels of regulatory capture we do today. The US Tax Payer has spent BILLIONS on "broadband" roll out programs to pay for the infrastructure that should have bought fiber to every home including rural areas, the money was wasted on "Fixed Wireless broadband" and other schemes where by the ISP's more or less just pocket the money and there was no accountability by the federal agencies in charge of these programs, largely because they knew they had fat executive jobs at that ISP coming to them Your implication that government is the solution to this problem by paying for the infrastructure is not based in reality, as government is the problem. Government and government corruption is what stopped fiber from already being a reality.
- rascul 3y ago
  > I huge part of Rural America Electricity is run by Coop's today, often non-profit anyway. Various attempts have been tried for these Coop's to also provide internet services including using Internet Over Power Lines technology, they all fail for some reason. They seem to be doing fine in Mississippi.
- nfriedly 3y ago
  Where my wife used to live, there was a telephone cooperative. At the time, they offered DSL internet, but it now looks like they offer fiber also: https://www.mdtc.net/services/internet/ https://www.mdtc.net/services/internet/

speff 3y ago

[dead]

notwhereyouare 3y ago

> I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. that actually did happen with dad. He was working and off a sudden his internet stopped working, put up a screen saying he was on "vacation hold" and to call in and remove it. He called in, got it removed. Next day, he can a call from AT&T retention telling him he needed to upgrade to the fiber and they were discontinuing their copper plan

FireBeyond 3y ago
What is "hilarious" is that elsewhere, AT&T sells outdated DSL, still. But they lobby to have DSL speeds and customers removed from broadband surveys and requirements because they are "obsolete and outdated". They still sell them. In some cases, your only option. But they don't count for dragging down AT&T's broadband 'scores' and 'speeds' because ... it's inconvenient and reasons...

kyrra 3y ago

I wonder if it's the difficulty of laying wires. The number of permits that need to be pulled when wiring a city just makes it prohibitive.

crote 3y ago

The trick is to mandate "telephone service", not "analog landline". That'd allow them to transition to telephone-over-fiber, making new connections worth the effort.

mxyztplk 3y ago
AT&T is the Carrier of Last Resort (COLR) in various areas of California. They have applied to the CPUC to have "targeted relief" from that telephone service obligation. Currently, AT&T could provide telephone service via fiber, rather than copper, wherever they may choose to do so. So, currently, they can transition to fiber-to-the-premises wherever they want. Their COLR obligation does not require copper wires as the technology.