top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 77 points 3 years ago (4 children)

👏 Make 👏 ALL 👏 connections 👏 Symmetrical 👏

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 17 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    If only it were easy to do. Technical limitations on copper is what causes low upload speeds. ISP’s prioritize the download speed, which is what people utilize the most. As fiber continues to be rolled out it should get better though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    Is there a legit reason they do not do this?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 3 years ago*

    Just to prioritize download in limited bandwidth cables. Like a neighborhood might get 2Gbps total, but instead of doing 1 down 1 up they instead do 1.8 down and .2 up, then split that amongst a bunch of houses.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago)

    In the old world of the internet, people didn’t upload much anyway.

    Nobody worked from home. Nobody had their phones constantly syncing photos and videos to 1 (or often more) clouds. And even then, the photos and videos that you could take digitally were very low resolution and not very large files. Game consoles weren’t online by default until Xbox Gen 1 (and as an add on for GC and PS2) and PC gamers were a minority (and rarely direct peer-to-peer).

    That has changed, and nobody forced ISPs to keep up. In a lot of markets, the Cable ISP is a monopoly and they don’t have to do shit about it.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Some service-provider level technology is not symmetrical at the access layer. An ISP serving exclusively fiber may have values like below:

    GPON (GIGAbit passive optical network): 1.24416 Gigabits/s up, 2.48832 Gigabits/s down

    XG-PON (10 gigabit passive optical network): 10G/2.5G

    xgS-pon (10g Symmetrical optical network): 10g/10g

    Note that on all of these technologies, you are also sharing bandwidth with neighbors on your PON. Sometimes up to 64 subs on one gpon. I think 128 on xgs-pon Until more providers make fiber available, as well as are willing to fork more up for the latest equipment, and reduce the over subscriptions of pons, symmetrical services for everyone just won’t happen.

    Will this ever happen at mega providers / baby-bells? Probably never unless a regional or startup pops up, and then they will only attempt compete in that market.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 42 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Quick! Give the ISPs a bunch of federal dollars to build out their networks so they can quietly pocket it and do stock buybacks!

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Why weren't those monetary subsidies just after the fact instead of just paying out on promises? "You'll get x billion dollars when y% of this area has access to z Mbps." But then again I've heard there's monopolies for that in the USA, instead of actual competition.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    But then again I’ve heard there’s monopolies for that in the USA, instead of actual competition.

    Government granted monopolies. It's the worst. City / county/ state signs deal with ISP X and give them exclusive rights. Then for some reason they don't spend a lot of time updating anything because they have no competition because of the fucking morons in the government.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 38 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Dude, 100Mbps isn't good enough anymore either

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    What? That’s plenty for the average person.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 30 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    I think person* is the keyword here. Many families have several people concurrently watching streaming video, listening to music, and playing games that are required to have an internet connection. 100Mbps is not enough.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Streaming music is a very negligible impact. We've had streaming music for 2 decades.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago*

    Yeah that one bothers me... The most demanding MP3s are what... 320kbps? That's 3.3GB per day. That is not really a hard demand on bandwidth at all. 100GB/month. And that's the max bitrate MP3 does... Most services are probably doing 128kbps...

    Spotify has an Audio quality table on their site... https://support.spotify.com/us/article/audio-quality/

    Low = 24kbps, 0.2471923828 GB/day
    Normal = 96 kbps, 0.9887695313 GB/day
    High = 160 kbps, 1.6479492188 GB/day
    Very High = 320 Kbps, 3.2958984375 GB/day

    These are very reasonable and easy numbers to obtain on just about any internet connection. The only way this is an "issue" is if you're running like a couple hundred streams at once.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Meh, it's good enough to be usable. I have 50/10 Mbps down/up and I can watch 1440p videos just fine. What do y'all use your internet for? Do you have like 5 family members watching stuff at the same time?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    The average US household has something like 2.5 people in it. It's safe to assume (statistically) that at least two of those people are old enough to consume web content unsupervised.

    Then there are edge cases that aren't quite so crazy, like 5 person households where everyone is over the age 14.

    So yeah, for one person 50/10 is likely just fine. But for the average household 100/15 is likely closer to baseline.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)

    50/10

    good enough to be usable

    On a post about how ISPs are literally fucking us all over, overcharging for the most basic connections that are far behind other countries and all you have to say is iT’s UsAbLe lmao

    Youre advocating for the SLOWEST avg speed in the nation

    Americans are getting nearly 200 Mbps in download speed, but are you?

    https://www.allconnect.com/blog/us-internet-speeds-globally

    As of May 2023, Ookla’s Speedtest.net shows Americans are getting over 200 Mbps of download speed and about 23 Mbps of upload speed through their fixed broadband connections — good for 6th in the world for median fixed broadband speeds. Considering “fast internet speeds” are generally defined as any download speed above 100 Mbps, Americans are doing quite well by this measure.

    In fact, according to a recent Allconnect data report, 9 in 10 households can access at least 100 Mbps speeds.

    That’s an incredible improvement from just under a decade ago when the U.S. had an average download speed of just 31 Mbps. In 2013, America ranked 25th among 39 nations for broadband speed.

    Sub-100 is not good enough by most standards these days around the world. 50 is not even double the fastest speeds from TEN years ago

    We as consumers and citizens deserve better, especially as working from home continues to be a popular and realistic option and our global culture continues to be directly tied to internet culture/media/content.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    One major AAA game update will likely break your connection for hours for all intents and purposes.

    Bitrate of a 1440p youtube video is going to be around 20mpbs (±4). Your 50 down connection couldn't handle more than 2 streams. The lowest reported bitrate is 16mbps on their support page (https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/1722171?hl=en#zippy=%2Cbitrate). 50/16 = 3.125, with network overhead you'd be VERY lucky to get 3 streams going without stuttering.

    It's entirely possible that a family of 5 would run into issues if they're all home and some want to watch videos.

    My family of 4 have been Plex trained... So I mitigate a lot of these problems personally.

    But it's more likely that the 10 up breaks things even more. One person in the house uploading anything (or participating in zoom/teams/etc calls) will cripple your ability to make ANY request to the internet.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • [–] 31 points 3 years ago (4 children)

    Here in Ukraine we got 1000 mbit even in small villages via optic. For 7.5$/month. For the last 10 years at least. Before that the standard was 100 mbit ethernet. 20 years ago the standard was 30 mbit via coaxial tv cable.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Here in the UK, I can get 1GB up/down for about £30 ($38, or ₴1,434.60).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 25 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Since it takes so long to change the “standard” it should be set to 1-2GB per second or have it set to increase by 10-20% per year or something.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    just like things like minimum wage?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 3 years ago (1 child)
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    Biden finally recently got the FCC back to protecting people, and not the damn phone and cable companies. Thank god.

    Still a lot of mess to clean up though.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [+] 20 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (2 children)
  • [–] 22 points 3 years ago

    You should start by asking them what they did with the $400 billion (as of 9 years ago) in taxes that we have paid them to build out fiber internet. And yes, you're probably STILL paying this tax.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 17 points 3 years ago

    It hasn’t been “good enough” for a while now.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 3 years ago

    You guys are getting 25/3? Damn. Must be nice.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    Man I really hope so. I'm in a 25/3 wasteland. My dad, a town over, is even lower. About 7/0.8.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Meanwhile in the Netherlands, I can choose between several gigabit providers. Symmetrical on fiber or asymmetrical on cable. I've been on gigabit fibre for a couple of years.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Beats the 1.5/0.25 centurylink provides us

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    I live in podunk nowhere, but if the amount of time since I've had that speed could buy things, I think it'd be old enough to buy cigarettes.

    Also I'm surprised CenturyLink is even still alive.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 3 years ago

    Ok but can we actually get 25/3 first? All raising it does is set low hanging fruit for newly "underserved" areas while there are still plenty of communities for whom 1Mbps terrestrial links would be a miracle.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›