Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Net Neutrality 2017


Recommended Posts

Larry, there can be no agreement if you continue to insist that data sent/received from/to your cell phone via a 3G/4G connection is no different than data you sent/received from/to your laptop via WiFi/Ethernet. 3G/4G data is classified differently than WiFi/Ethernet data. Whether it should be classified differently is something I'm pretty sure everyone in the debate is in agreement (no).

 

It is a fact that NN did not apply to cell data caps.  That's why AT&T can stream DirecTV without counting it against data caps and T-Mobile can do the same with Netflix.  If NN applied, the carriers would be in violation because they would be "throttling" other traffic but not the data they prefer.

 

I did tell PB that. I'm pretty sure PB can handle a random dude on the Internet telling him he didn't have to do any unbillable research. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 11 months later...
  • 1 year later...

Pai's time at FCC turned out to be not so bad. The worst doom over NN repeal didn't come to pass, broadband speeds increased nationwide and costs didn't go up.

 

Still think public broadband as a counter to Verizon/Comcast is necessary. Starlink is also going to be rolled out over the next few years and it's going to give existing ISP's a lot of necessary competition.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, No Excuses said:

Pai's time at FCC turned out to be not so bad. The worst doom over NN repeal didn't come to pass, broadband speeds increased nationwide and costs didn't go up.

have you not heard about Comcast data-capping their "customers"?

 

8 hours ago, No Excuses said:

Still think public broadband as a counter to Verizon/Comcast is necessary. Starlink is also going to be rolled out over the next few years and it's going to give existing ISP's a lot of necessary competition.

Before we entertain a public option, the first order of business is to get rid of the state-enforced monopolies.  The free market wasn't even given a chance.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

So starllimk is advertising 100$/month with a 500$ equipment/install price

so they’re not much cheaper on the monthly cost and they’re more expensive in equipment and installation fees compared to current options. 
 

and they’re hoping for grant funding for providing internet access to areas without but the FCC has publicly stated they don’t believe they can meet the 100ms latency requirement for the grant. 
 

i can’t find info on a data cap

 

so I sounds like the only new thing about it is their advertising low latency, while others are skeptical of that claim (satellite internet latency is hampered by the speed of radio waves and the distance they have to cover...)

 

I’m skeptical this is as awesome as being advertised. 
 

at least their website is somewhat honest in dubbing their system “Better Than Nothing Internet”

Edited by tshile
Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparing to other plans they’re actually cheaper than starlink’s beta program. Other plans also offer contract buyouts for new customers. so I’m not even sure they’re better there. 

their only leg up is they’re advertising latency no one else can meet (despite the claims others are making). And experts are skeptical starling can even meet their claim. 
 

still cannot find info on data caps with starlink. 
 

The problem with satellite internet is it sucks. I’ve had my fair share of dealing with them over the years but with covid that’s gone up a lot Recently. 
 

yeah you may get 70-150 Mbps download but your upload blows and your latency also sucks. Any technology that is hampered by high latency will suffer. VoIP isn’t an option at all. Working from home is at best “unreliable” - vpn doesn’t work well, Remote Desktop or other virtual terminal services don’t work well, video conferencing is a no go (and even if it was it’d crush your monthly data allowance). When I say it doesn’t work well I mean when it works it’s unusably slow and often it just doesn’t even work. 
 

ive seen multiple cases over the years where devices that aren’t designed, tested, and certified with sat internet in mind getting in transmission loops. Basically the latency causes it to constantly send/receive the same data because it thinks something is “wrong.” Think: your Netflix movie has to keep buffering. Now you won’t see it, it happens in the background. But you will see it when it chews through your monthly data allowance and your speeds are throttled to a crawl or your bill blows up for the overage.

 

what makes more sense? Spacex has somehow found a way to overcome to physics of radio wave speeds and the distance to and from LEO satellites?

or spacex is simply expanding their business model cause they’re already going into space regularly as a business?

 

people that provide microwave internet from towers on mountains struggle to overcome their latency and reliability issues, as well as their costs and data allowance limitations. 
 

I’m skeptical. 

Edited by tshile
Link to post
Share on other sites

A note on Starlink and latency: Other satellite internet providers do not have their satellites in Low Earth Orbit.  They're in Geosynchronous orbit which is much further out and that's where their latency comes from.  It's not that Starlink overcame the physics of broadcasting to Low Earth Orbit, it's that using Low Earth Orbit is the solution to the issue of broadcasting to Geosynchronous Orbit.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, PokerPacker said:

it's that using Low Earth Orbit is the solution to the issue of broadcasting to Geosynchronous Orbit.

If that works out then the only remaining question is data cap

 

for some reason i thought the others were leo too 🤷‍♂️
 

I still think the fcc saying they have doubts they can get under 100ms is worth considering. 
 

though I think somewhere in the 100-300ms range would be better for things like remote work. It’s not uncommon to find latency in the 1000ms ranges with other providers. I honestly don’t know the latency breakpoint for vpn, rdp, and other solutions. It’s probably vendor/implementation specific. 
 

(playing video games would suck but again they advertise it as “better than nothing internet” so that’s not really on the priority list for it...)

 

add: and again I’ve seen people providing microwave from towers on earth struggle with the latency issue. They have a lot less to overcome - but I’m not well versed enough in the microwave industry to know how the talent pool and tech differences would make change it all. I have no doubts spacex is hiring “better” people than the ones running the microwave systems I’ve seen over the years (about 6 of them in the nova/dc area)

Edited by tshile
Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure how reliable this is, but the data Starlink submitted to the FCC said that the latency was ~30 ms. In forums, people who got in the beta program have reported anywhere between 30-150 ms (seems location dependent). 
 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pcmag.com/news/spacexs-satellite-internet-service-latency-comes-in-under-20-milliseconds%3famp=true


At least in its early form, Starlink isn’t meant to compete with the existing ISPs in urban/suburban areas. But once their constellations are up to thousands of satellites and delivering gigabit speeds, and if the latency challenges are resolved, then Comcast/Verizon should hopefully see real competition. 


Honestly, I’m just waiting for something, anything, that gives me the option to tell both companies to get ****ed.

Edited by No Excuses
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, tshile said:

If that works out then the only remaining question is data cap

 

for some reason i thought the others were leo too 🤷‍♂️
 

I still think the fcc saying they have doubts they can get under 100ms is worth considering. 
 

though I think somewhere in the 100-300ms range would be better for things like remote work. It’s not uncommon to find latency in the 1000ms ranges with other providers. I honestly don’t know the latency breakpoint for vpn, rdp, and other solutions. It’s probably vendor/implementation specific. 
 

(playing video games would suck but again they advertise it as “better than nothing internet” so that’s not really on the priority list for it...)

 

add: and again I’ve seen people providing microwave from towers on earth struggle with the latency issue. They have a lot less to overcome - but I’m not well versed enough in the microwave industry to know how the talent pool and tech differences would make change it all. I have no doubts spacex is hiring “better” people than the ones running the microwave systems I’ve seen over the years (about 6 of them in the nova/dc area)

I understand why people would have doubts.  I also understand the FCC is headed by Verizon Super Star Ajit Pai who's been working hard to help his old colleagues, so any doubts coming from there leave me to wonder the real source of the doubts.  But the physics, at least, puts 30 ms latency squarely in the plausible category, and I recall seeing early Beta users getting results that backed it up.

Edited by PokerPacker
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

GEORGIA’S RUNOFF MAY HAVE SAVED NET NEUTRALITY

 

TuesdayTuesday night was a good night for Democrats.

 

Votes are still being tallied and no one has conceded, but it seems all but certain that Democratic candidates Raphael Warnock and Jon Ossoff have won election to the US Senate, putting the chamber under 50-50 Democratic control. It’s a huge shift in what’s possible for Democrats and policymakers are already discussing policies that seemed impossible on Monday, like $2,000 direct stimulus payments or a new voting rights act.

 

But while the wins will have impacts across the Democratic platform, they may have particularly strong effects on net neutrality. Before Georgia, net neutrality advocates were facing a gridlock in Congress and the frightening possibility that the incoming president wouldn’t be able to appoint his own FCC commissioners. But as the Senate falls back under Democratic control, the possibilities for net neutrality have expanded dramatically. Now, Democrats can push for more progressive FCC nominees that will reinstate the net neutrality rules from 2015, or even push for legislation that would write net neutrality into law. Flipping these two Senate seats could make the difference between keeping net neutrality in a permanent legal limbo and making it the law of the land.

 

Click on the link for the full article

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...