4 ms·

> Standard of 100Mbps down and 20Mbps up Still only 20 up? Moving from 300/10 on cable to 300/300 on fiber has been huge. You can’t realistically use offsite

> Standard of 100Mbps down and 20Mbps up Still only 20 up? Moving from 300/10 on cable to 300/300 on fiber has been huge. You can’t realistically use offsite backup on 10 or 20mbps up. Uploading a YouTube video can take an hour. I once sent a dataset to a coworker and it was embarrassing when they’re receiving at 10mbps. Being a tech worker with a stone-age connection…

_joel 3y ago
Most consumers don't do offsite backups (more than icloud syncs of a few photos or whatever, 20Mbps fine for that) and upload lots to youtube, I guess.
- sneak 3y ago
  Most consumers don’t read books but that doesn’t mean we should get rid of the libraries.
  - notquiteright 3y ago
    The point of this definition of broadband is to guide FCC subsidies. They’re saying 100/20 is goal for what everyone should have in every single home and business in the country, and that it’s so crucial that the taxpayer should pay for it if need be.
    - sneak 3y ago
      Taxpayers pay for libraries too, despite most not using them. What's the point of the state or taxes if not to push society in a better direction? 20Mbps isn't even a lot.
      - notquiteright 3y ago
        We’re talking about you saying the FCC should define broadband as requiring gigabit upload speeds minimum.
      - ufocia 3y ago
        I personally like libraries, but you have a point, maybe we should put the money that goes toward library taxes to better use.
      - cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
        Federal policy is not targeted at your personal use case. 20mbit up is an entirely satisfactory BASELINE for residential internet access in 2024. You’re so far into a bubble that you can’t even see it.
  - ufocia 3y ago
    Not analogous. The poster was talking about suggesting an improvement and you about removing an existing service altogether.
sneak 3y ago
I do offsite backup with 30Mbps up, it takes days to do the initial but incrementals are fine. Whenever I do an initial, I get a nastygram from my ISP (Cox Las Vegas) threatening me with disconnection for having the audacity to upload 3TB in a few days. This happens despite having paid an extra $50(!) line item addon (on top of a $120/mo bill, so a 42% upcharge) for “unlimited transfer” every month for something like four years. Criminal scum, the lot of them.
- bauruine 3y ago
  Hey 50$ for 3TB is 0.016 per GB. Still cheaper than the 0.02 AWS EC2 egress fees! Oh there is also the 120$ base price. 170$ for 3 TB is 0.055 per GB. Still cheaper than the 0.085 Cloudfront egress fee.
  - ufocia 3y ago
    Facts! Also, they threaten so that you reduce your utilization. Just ignore them. When they do cut you off, get back to us from your local library's public Internet access.
traceroute66 3y ago
> Still only 20 up? Its what happens when you get regulators who are clueless or allow themselves to be lobbied by telcos. Its the same shit that allows large telcos like BT in the UK to get away with product definitions that have more holes than a slice of swiss cheese. For example, in BT's world, as long as 50% of customers at peak time (8–10pm) are achieving "in-spec" average download speeds then everything is fine. Or another BT example, their "Stay Fast Guarantee for Full Fibre" which gets carefully reworded more often than the seasons and is also full of swiss cheese. What does their current table look like ? - Full Fibre 100 100Mpbs down/10Mbps up - Full Fibre 300 150Mbps down/10Mbps up - Full Fibre 500 250Mpbs down/10Mbps up - Full Fibre 900 700Mbps down/10Mbps up So, as long as you're getting 50% of your line speed on 300/500 or 70% of your line speed on 900 and 10Mb upload there's nothing wrong as far as BT are concerned. And that's assuming, of course, you don't fall into the other parts of BT's swiss cheese such as the "50% of customers" noted above.
- ufocia 3y ago
  I'm not sure that more regulation is the fix. There are users that want the higher speed and then there are users who are content with inexpensive access Even if "slow". Most of the time the two don't go hand in hand.
  - blitzar 3y ago
    > I'm not sure that more regulation is the fix. It worked for labels on stuff in the supermarket - you dont buy a pint of milk and get between a half pint and a full pint depending on what time of day it is.
    - ufocia 3y ago
      Your right, one day you buy a pint of milk for $1, the next day $3, and on a third day the store is out of milk. Would you be happy with not having Internet access at times because someone else bought out committed bandwidth or having your Internet bill fluctuate based on a market rate?
ufocia 3y ago
Uploading a 30-minute YouTube video in 30 minutes sounds reasonable. It may actually improve the quality of YouTube and give creators an opportunity to touch grass.

_joel 3y ago

Most consumers don't do offsite backups (more than icloud syncs of a few photos or whatever, 20Mbps fine for that) and upload lots to youtube, I guess.

sneak 3y ago
Most consumers don’t read books but that doesn’t mean we should get rid of the libraries.
- notquiteright 3y ago
  The point of this definition of broadband is to guide FCC subsidies. They’re saying 100/20 is goal for what everyone should have in every single home and business in the country, and that it’s so crucial that the taxpayer should pay for it if need be.
  - sneak 3y ago
    Taxpayers pay for libraries too, despite most not using them. What's the point of the state or taxes if not to push society in a better direction? 20Mbps isn't even a lot.
    - notquiteright 3y ago
      We’re talking about you saying the FCC should define broadband as requiring gigabit upload speeds minimum.
    - ufocia 3y ago
      I personally like libraries, but you have a point, maybe we should put the money that goes toward library taxes to better use.
    - cqqxo4zV46cp 3y ago
      Federal policy is not targeted at your personal use case. 20mbit up is an entirely satisfactory BASELINE for residential internet access in 2024. You’re so far into a bubble that you can’t even see it.
- ufocia 3y ago
  Not analogous. The poster was talking about suggesting an improvement and you about removing an existing service altogether.

sneak 3y ago

I do offsite backup with 30Mbps up, it takes days to do the initial but incrementals are fine. Whenever I do an initial, I get a nastygram from my ISP (Cox Las Vegas) threatening me with disconnection for having the audacity to upload 3TB in a few days. This happens despite having paid an extra $50(!) line item addon (on top of a $120/mo bill, so a 42% upcharge) for “unlimited transfer” every month for something like four years. Criminal scum, the lot of them.

bauruine 3y ago
Hey 50$ for 3TB is 0.016 per GB. Still cheaper than the 0.02 AWS EC2 egress fees! Oh there is also the 120$ base price. 170$ for 3 TB is 0.055 per GB. Still cheaper than the 0.085 Cloudfront egress fee.
- ufocia 3y ago
  Facts! Also, they threaten so that you reduce your utilization. Just ignore them. When they do cut you off, get back to us from your local library's public Internet access.

traceroute66 3y ago

> Still only 20 up? Its what happens when you get regulators who are clueless or allow themselves to be lobbied by telcos. Its the same shit that allows large telcos like BT in the UK to get away with product definitions that have more holes than a slice of swiss cheese. For example, in BT's world, as long as 50% of customers at peak time (8–10pm) are achieving "in-spec" average download speeds then everything is fine. Or another BT example, their "Stay Fast Guarantee for Full Fibre" which gets carefully reworded more often than the seasons and is also full of swiss cheese. What does their current table look like ? - Full Fibre 100 100Mpbs down/10Mbps up - Full Fibre 300 150Mbps down/10Mbps up - Full Fibre 500 250Mpbs down/10Mbps up - Full Fibre 900 700Mbps down/10Mbps up So, as long as you're getting 50% of your line speed on 300/500 or 70% of your line speed on 900 and 10Mb upload there's nothing wrong as far as BT are concerned. And that's assuming, of course, you don't fall into the other parts of BT's swiss cheese such as the "50% of customers" noted above.

ufocia 3y ago
I'm not sure that more regulation is the fix. There are users that want the higher speed and then there are users who are content with inexpensive access Even if "slow". Most of the time the two don't go hand in hand.
- blitzar 3y ago
  > I'm not sure that more regulation is the fix. It worked for labels on stuff in the supermarket - you dont buy a pint of milk and get between a half pint and a full pint depending on what time of day it is.
  - ufocia 3y ago
    Your right, one day you buy a pint of milk for $1, the next day $3, and on a third day the store is out of milk. Would you be happy with not having Internet access at times because someone else bought out committed bandwidth or having your Internet bill fluctuate based on a market rate?

ufocia 3y ago

Uploading a 30-minute YouTube video in 30 minutes sounds reasonable. It may actually improve the quality of YouTube and give creators an opportunity to touch grass.