This map shows the 4G LTE mobile coverage areas of the nation’s four largest mobile wireless carriers: AT&T Mobility, T-Mobile, UScellular, and Verizon. Specifically, it shows where customers can expect to receive 4G LTE broadband service at a minimum user download speed of five megabits per second (5 Mbps) and a user upload speed of one megabit per second (1 Mbps) based on propagation modeling.
The map includes separate layers for each carrier’s broadband and voice coverage. Voice coverage areas represent where customers should expect to make and receive mobile voice calls and send and receive texts over the 4G LTE network, without regard to throughput speed. 4G LTE data service meeting a 5/1 Mbps minimum speed may not be available in areas where only voice coverage is shown on the map.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake. http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
When in doubt, skewer it out...I don't know.
Three companies accused of falsifying millions of public comments to support the contentious 2017 federal repeal of net neutrality rules have agreed to pay $615,000 in penalties to New York and other states, New York's attorney general said Wednesday.
The penalties come after an investigation by the New York state Office of the Attorney General found the fake comments used the identities of millions of consumers, including thousands of New Yorkers, without their knowledge.
“No one should have their identity co-opted by manipulative companies and used to falsely promote a private agenda," said New York Attorney General Letitia James in an announcement Wednesday.
Two of the California-based companies, LCX Digital Media and digital marketing company Lead ID, LLC., were hired by the broadband industry to enroll consumers in a campaign to support repeals to Obama-era net neutrality rules. Instead, they each independently fabricated responses for 1.5 million consumers. The third, marketing company Ifficient Inc., supplied more than 840,000 fake responses.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
Five major trade groups representing US broadband providers petitioned the FCC in January to scrap the requirement before it takes effect. In June, Comcast told the FCC that the listing-every-fee rule "impose[ s ] significant administrative burdens and unnecessary complexity in complying with the broadband label requirements."
The five trade groups kept up the pressure earlier this month in a meeting with FCC officials and in a filing that complained that listing every fee is too hard. The FCC refused to bend, announcing yesterday that the rules will take effect without major changes.
"Every consumer needs transparent information when making decisions about what Internet service offering makes the most sense for their family or household. No one wants to be hit with charges they didn't ask for or they did not expect," FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said.
It's because they have consumers over a barrel and they know it. Tons of people don't have a choice of ISP.
When I canceled Spectrum to go to AT&T I actually had a Spectrum manager ask me why I was switching. I told him because I could get a year for about 70% cheaper than what he was charging. He said, "Well they're just going to keep going up on you at the end of your promotional period. We all do it."
I think about that "we all do it" line a lot. So you admit you're a crooked piece of shit that exploits loyal customers by having them subsidize new customers. Thanks for the confirmation.
Comcast's "fees and taxes" add almost 50% to the actual "bundle price" of my cable + internet. Over 50% if you count the price for renting the TV box and remote. Pretty crazy when you think about it.
YellowKing wrote: Fri Sep 01, 2023 4:23 pm
It's because they have consumers over a barrel and they know it. Tons of people don't have a choice of ISP.
When I canceled Spectrum to go to AT&T I actually had a Spectrum manager ask me why I was switching. I told him because I could get a year for about 70% cheaper than what he was charging. He said, "Well they're just going to keep going up on you at the end of your promotional period. We all do it."
I think about that "we all do it" line a lot. So you admit you're a crooked piece of shit that exploits loyal customers by having them subsidize new customers. Thanks for the confirmation.
Yes, and then you switch back when they have a promo going. If it weren't for "new" customers there would only be price increases.
There is no question that telecoms are not behaving ethically and there is no competition. Sometimes there's a duopoly.
I got really lucky I think? 5 years ago I signed up for gig fiber online with "price for life" through century link. No TV or phone, just internet.
And so far its been really solid connection, and no changes to the price. In the beginning I paid in full to "buy" the modem, so that was that. I suppose eventually the price will change, but I am riding this high as long as I can.
Netflix weighed in on the network neutrality debate this week, holding that new FCC rules are necessary in order to keep a watchful eye on broadband operators that have affiliated pay-TV or content services that compete directly with "independent" streamers.
A prime example that Netflix cited in reply comments filed Wednesday (January 17) was Peacock's exclusive stream (outside of the local Miami and Kansas City TV markets) of the AFC Wild Card game between the Miami Dolphins and Kansas City Chiefs on January 13.
Black Lives definitely Matter Lorini!
Also: There are three ways to not tell the truth: lies, damned lies, and statistics.
According to FCC data from December 2022, an estimated 45 million Americans “lack access to both 100/20Mbps fixed service and 35/3Mbps mobile 5G-NR service.”
As part of Thursday’s vote, the FCC also adopted a long-term goal of raising its broadband metric to 1,000Mbps for downloads and 500Mbps for uploads. Rosenworcel added: “Millions of people in rural, urban and Tribal communities still do not have the broadband they need to fully participate in modern life. We are working on it."
However, the two Republican Commissioners dissented in Thursday’s vote. Commissioner Brendan Carr noted that satellite internet services, such as SpaceX’s Starlink, don’t qualify for the speed benchmarks, which only considers ground-based internet.
Commissioner Nathan Simington added that it makes sense to disregard older satellite internet services, but not Starlink, which already provides high-speed internet across the country.
--------------------------------------------
I am Dyslexic of Borg, prepare to have your ass laminated.
I guess Ray Butts has ate his last pancake. http://steamcommunity.com/id/daehawk
"Has high IQ. Refuses to apply it"
When in doubt, skewer it out...I don't know.
Daehawk wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 11:20 am
Bout time. Should have been 100 years ago.
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." — P. J. O'Rourke
I agree with the FCC's new definitions and forward looking plan (because by the time they actually get there, it will likely be needed), but many people likely over-estimate just how fast their internet needs to be.
stessier wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 2:06 pm
I agree with the FCC's new definitions and forward looking plan (because by the time they actually get there, it will likely be needed), but many people likely over-estimate just how fast their internet needs to be.
I find that with excellent latency and a good DNS, I need about 50 down 10 up, only because of streaming, windows updates, and because downloading a new game is sometimes upwards of 20 gigs. The problem is that 50 down 10 up service also has crappy latency, so I took the upgrade to 200 down, which is still essentially throttled by latency and DNS. I'm most definitely not pulling down 200 (or a gigabyte every 40 or so seconds) but I am completely fine with the results for the $40 a month I am paying.
Got an email from Comcast yesterday that they are increasing our internet speeds. The package that I'm paying for was originally listed as 400/35, and they upped it to 500/100. For my use, there's no discernible difference between 400 and 500 mbps download. I'd rather they get rid (or at least increase) the monthly data cap. /fml
gilraen wrote:Got an email from Comcast yesterday that they are increasing our internet speeds. The package that I'm paying for was originally listed as 400/35, and they upped it to 500/100. For my use, there's no discernible difference between 400 and 500 mbps download. I'd rather they get rid (or at least increase) the monthly data cap. /fml
Same...plan that was 250/10 when I selected it is now 500/100 at the same cost ($95/month). There was a time when I would have killed for that kind of upload speed, but my torrenting days are behind me and it's not that useful now.
Data caps totally suck though. Fortunately, I'm in CT where Comcast/Xfinity faced a huge backlash when they tried to implement caps a few years ago and put the plan "on hold." Despite limits existing in many (most?) states, I think they'll hear from the state government if they try again. At least I hope we continue to win that battle...
According to FCC data from December 2022, an estimated 45 million Americans “lack access to both 100/20Mbps fixed service and 35/3Mbps mobile 5G-NR service.”
As part of Thursday’s vote, the FCC also adopted a long-term goal of raising its broadband metric to 1,000Mbps for downloads and 500Mbps for uploads. Rosenworcel added: “Millions of people in rural, urban and Tribal communities still do not have the broadband they need to fully participate in modern life. We are working on it."
However, the two Republican Commissioners dissented in Thursday’s vote. Commissioner Brendan Carr noted that satellite internet services, such as SpaceX’s Starlink, don’t qualify for the speed benchmarks, which only considers ground-based internet.
Commissioner Nathan Simington added that it makes sense to disregard older satellite internet services, but not Starlink, which already provides high-speed internet across the country.
The people who live in the kinds of places that would need Starlink in order to meet the minimums can't afford Starlink. To get Starlink that meets their minimum (100/20) would cost $140/month with decreased speed after only 40GB of data, and would require $2,500+ in equipment fees.
disarm wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 3:01 pm
Same...plan that was 250/10 when I selected it is now 500/100 at the same cost ($95/month). There was a time when I would have killed for that kind of upload speed, but my torrenting days are behind me and it's not that useful now.
$95 for 250/10??? I think that plan was barely around $55 in the Mountain West region (before any discounts). If I had to guess, I'd say Comcast has built their unlimited data fee ($30) into the price of all their internet plans in states where they aren't allowed to outright charge for it.
Blackhawk wrote: Fri Mar 15, 2024 3:04 pm
The people who live in the kinds of places that would need Starlink in order to meet the minimums can't afford Starlink. To get Starlink that meets their minimum (100/20) would cost $140/month with decreased speed after only 40GB of data, and would require $2,500+ in equipment fees.
Starlink's "standard" $120/mo plan ($600 for equipment) has a speed variance that's so high (24-200mbps), it would probably qualify for the minimum (since they'll claim that "network congestion" is a temporary condition that can affect any ISP).
I'd almost have no problem with the FCC counting it IF Starlink actually provided assistance to low-income families (like most major ISPs do). As it stands, you are right. There are obviously outliers (people living in the mountains or other remote areas who may have plenty of money but there's literally no other internet coverage aside from satellite); but they are the minority of those affected.
I'm still paying $141 for 900/20, including unlimited data. Now that Michelle isn't streaming HD/4k every day, I don't need the down speed anymore, but the last time I checked, it would cost me more to downgrade, and any lesser plan drops me to 10 up, which is a pain in the ass. How Comcast gets away with their upload speeds is beyond me.
Huh, just checked the router (which keeps daily logs). I was at 950/50 consistently until the end of Feb and it dropped to a consistent 35/25 past few weeks. Should be a gig.
Low priority annoyance, but annoyance nonetheless.
" Hey OP, listen to my advice alright." -Tha General "“I like taking the guns early...to go to court would have taken a long time. So you could do exactly what you’re saying, but take the guns first, go through due process second.” -President Donald Trump. "...To guard, protect, and maintain his liberty, the freedman should have the ballot; that the liberties of the American people were dependent upon the Ballot-box, the Jury-box, and the Cartridge-box, that without these no class of people could live and flourish in this country." - Frederick Douglass MYT
A U.S. appeals court on Thursday blocked the Federal Communications Commission's reinstatement of landmark net neutrality rules, saying broadband providers are likely to succeed in a legal challenge.
The FCC voted in April along party lines to reassume regulatory oversight of broadband internet and reinstate open internet rules adopted in 2015 that were rescinded under then-President Donald Trump.
The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which had temporarily delayed the rules, said on Thursday it would temporarily block net neutrality rules and scheduled oral arguments for late October or early November on the issue, dealing a serious blow to President Joe Biden's effort to reinstate the rules.
A US court has rejected the Biden administration's bid to restore "net neutrality" rules, finding that the federal government does not have the authority to regulate internet providers like utilities.
It marks a major defeat for so-called open internet advocates, who have long fought for protections that would require internet providers such as AT&T to treat all legal content equally.
Such rules were first introduced by the Federal Communications Commission under former Democratic president Barack Obama but later repealed during Republican Donald Trump's first term.
The decision, just as Trump is poised to enter the White House for a second term, likely puts an end to the long-running legal battle over the issue.
