New minimum speed for US broadband connections
andy at andyring.com
Mon May 31 14:17:17 UTC 2021
As much as I enjoy the generally cordial nature of this list, I’m going to go out on a limb and say that Mr. Hammett’s mentality on this topic is precisely the problem. Arguing against every reasonable proposition we are making to increase home broadband speeds.
I’m assuming he’ll disagree. And that’s OK. He’s still wrong.
“People want X. Why?” - Doesn’t matter. I don’t need a reason for what I want. I probably have one, but that reason is my business, not yours.
The big ISPs are, historically and factually, greedy, stingy, and in many cases flat-out liars on all this. Taking USF money for DECADES and squandering it, for instance. Advertising speeds (I’m looking at you, Frontier) they knew full well they couldn’t provide. Charging $40 for service on one street and $80 for IDENTICAL service one block away. Promising to state governments they would upgrade and then not doing it (Charter in New York, anyone?).
Blah blah blah shareholders blah blah blah. DGAF.
Where there is a will, there is a way. The big boys don’t have the will to do it. Case after case after case after case after case demonstrates that fiber to the home can be done and can be done for a very reasonable cost. We read about smaller companies or municipalities every day doing it. And then the Big Boys come along and do EVERYTHING they can to stifle competition (getting all snarky about pole access, or pouring billions into lobbying against muni broadband that could be spent on, oh, I dunno, INSTALLING FIBER instead).
“When making policy changes and spending hundreds of billions of dollars, you need to have a good reason.” Apply that same thinking to all the reasons the Big Boys give for NOT installing fiber or upgrading their networks. How many billions have they spent on lobbying and lawsuits to stop competition and not install fiber that could have been better spent?
I will go so far as to directly ask:
Mike - who is paying you to lobby so hard against better/faster/more reliable home internet?
5609 Harding Drive
Lincoln, NE 68521-5831
andy at andyring.com
“Better even die free, than to live slaves.” - Frederick Douglas, 1863
> On May 31, 2021, at 8:01 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog at ics-il.net> wrote:
> Why is any of that a reasonable position to have? What you're proposing is reckless without real, compelling evidence.
> People want X. Why?
> When making policy changes and spending hundreds of billions of dollars, you need to have a good reason.
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> From: "Baldur Norddahl" <baldur.norddahl at gmail.com>
> To: "NANOG" <nanog at nanog.org>
> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2021 12:53:25 PM
> Subject: Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections
> søn. 30. maj 2021 15.29 skrev Mike Hammett <nanog at ics-il.net>:
> What can you do with 100 megs that you can't do with 25 megs and why should anyone care?
> That is really the wrong question. People want 100 Mbps over 25 Mbps and therefore it becomes a need for rural communities. Doesn't matter that someone believes these people could do with less.
> The year is 2021 and perceived good internet is minimum 100 Mbps.
More information about the NANOG