Chair proposes 100Mbps national standard and an evaluation of broadband prices.

  • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    11 months ago

    I’m pretty sure when they upped it to 25mbps a few years ago it was a wildly outdated figure at that time. 100mbps is more reasonable but still pretty bad for “high speed broadband.” Hopefully something good comes out of this but I won’t hold my breath.

    • Alto@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      11 months ago

      What would be ideal is forcing ISPs to lay fiber with the money they’ve already been given, or give back every cent they received for it. Their choice.

  • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    Sure isn’t! But I’m only getting 12M here in the boonies. I guess high-speed internet is one of those things you can’t try in a small town.

      • ArugulaZ@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        0.5M would be utter hell for streaming services. It would literally take 48 hours to watch 48 Hours.

    • Brkdncr@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      Starlink and soon Amazon. I get 100/10 regularly on starlink. It’s not great but it’s quite usable.

  • steebo_jack@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    11 months ago

    I got fiber in a my rural small town and funny enough i have more choices here compared to when i was living in a large city and only had one choice…

    • RocksForBrains
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      11 months ago

      It should be, but you underestimate how many communities have limited access still.

      We would have more line laid but telecoms pocketed the money since Congress didn’t put any performance requirements in the bill or contracts.

      • SpunkyBarnes@geddit.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        Oh, no, rural broadband and the telco money pit that was going to make it a reality are very real and I consider myself lucky to live where I actually have “choice” in my provider options.

        As for performance clauses, who’s to say whether they were there and stripped out in committee.

    • grahamsz@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yeah, i’ve reached the conclusion that gigabit is enough for now. I can get 1.2, 2.5, 6 and 10 at my house but i’m staying at 1 because it’s honestly plenty fast for a family of 3 - even with 2 of us working from home.

      • klyde@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Gigabit is plenty for years to come. Even with 3 of you there. I know people that had like 300MBps with 5 people in the house streaming, 2 people playing games, and tons of phones. Unless you got 10 people in your house, gigabit is plenty. You talking about ‘enough for now’ with only 3 people in the house lmao. Bruh

        • grahamsz@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          I suppose it’s strange to reach a point where I have 3 choices for gigabit and multiple much faster choices and not opt for the faster. This is literally the first time in my life that I’ve not had the fastest plan I can get. I can absolutely afford 10G service… But you are right, there’s really no reason for it right now

  • okbin@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    me, whose internet speed is 500 kbps - 5mbps: 👁️👄👁️

    (my vpn is slow as shit, but also my internet, without a vpn, is allegedly 25 mbps)