a gigabit customer who was paying $50 extra per month for unlimited data was flagged by Cox because he was using 8TB to 12TB a month
"Unlimited data" should mean you can saturate the connection 24/7. Anything less is deceptive advertising. For a gigabit connection, that would mean around 300TB per month.
I don’t know why they don’t advertise their oversubscription rate. The FCC should probably require this to be disclosed in some standard location. So many people are mad because “I paid for a gigabit and I can’t use the whole thing”… but like you didn’t pay for a gigabit you paid for a gigabit shared among 100 other people, which means peak-of-sums you should usually get gigabit, but it’s not guaranteed.
The internet is a series of tubes! You can get a dedicated gigabit sized tube but it’ll cost 1-2 orders of magnitude more.
E: Even elsewhere on this thread people are like
> I dunno, I pay $70 a month for gigabit from Google Fiber and absolutely saturate that thing all day long up and down.
Yes! You are the noisy neighbor getting lucky that your neighbors aren’t also noisy!
I used to have an "unlimited bandwidth" account with Shaw Cable in Canada, back before Rogers bought them. "Unlimited" was very much front and centre in all the advertising, etc..
They started charging me overage fees. I called them up and asked them to explain why they were charging me overage fees on an unlimited bandwidth account.
Their explanation was that the bandwidth was unlimited in when I could use it, not in how much I could use.
Fortunately for me, there were other providers in the market that I could switch to. So I did.
A number of years ago one of the isps, might have been att dsl, argued that "unlimited" was a branding name for a tier. They had meant an affectation of limitless possibilities as a marketing term similar to "plus", "extreme" or "pro" and not that there was no cap on the data. I always ignore that word now and look for the actual terms
Hear hear! Furthermore any plans with "caps" should have to list the average bandwidth as the largest headline, with the peak bandwidth relegated to a subpoint. For example 1TB/month is 386 kB/sec. That's on par with a DSL connection, not 2024 broadband.
They can lie all they want; they are integrated with the government and they have no consequences for fraud.
I gave Cox over $2000 explicitly for unlimited data and still got nastygrams from them for uploading 4TB of my original digital photos to S3 for backup.
It’s effectively illegal to start new ISPs in America, that’s why this shit happens.
"Unlimited data" means that you can use as much as you want/can without being charged more based on usage. Otherwise there would be a cap and you are charged extra when you go over it.
It has nothing to do with speed/bandwidth.
Just like "unlimited text" plans don't charge per text message. But there is still a physical limit for how many texts you can send.
Cox advertised gigabit to me. I always wanted it so I took the upsell. After six truckrolls (alternately telling me my signal was too strong -- installing attenuator, then too weak and removing it) for which I had to take a day off work every time, they eventually told me it was a mistake and my neighborhood didn't have gigabit.
Then the cherry on top was they wouldn't even put me back on my old plan because it "wasn't offered any more". So they tried to charge me an extra $15/month for half the speed I was getting before. I switched to a local wireless ISP that ended up being even more expensive for even slower service -- but at least they weren't liars and when I had a problem I could talk directly with the owner if it wasn't sorted (and no data caps).
I can't but think this is the business practice of a dying technology, yet another example.
I won the fiber lottery where I live, and I will never go back to cable (I had a choice). Let's just call the rejected cable choice a "30 Rock episode".
And that same cable provider eventually was called out for advertising a "10G Plan!". Yeah.
Meanwhile my fiber provider advertises options based on symmetric upload/download speeds. And I think this is the key in these days when we send a lot of outbound data with video call and offline backups.
Put in place a rule that only the lowest speed can be advertised by providers.
Cox was terrible - they knew they were the only broadband provider in my neighborhood and they took full advantage of it. Then AT&T put in fiber (when they installed it they put the box on my property) and I had seven times the speed for a fraction of the cost. When I called to cancel, Cox tried to cut me a deal.
Story was reported on in 2020, during the peak of the lockdowns as well.
We truly fucked ourselves by giving these national ISPs so much power. In return, they abuse us, they collude to make sure other ISPs do not compete against each other to justify high prices and low bandwidth, and hire lobbyists to implement/push stupid laws in various states to prevent municipal ISPs (eg, Texas).
The root cause of the problem is that copper coaxial cable tv based (DOCSIS3.0, DOCSIS3.1, etc) last mile internet infrastructure is a shared/contended access medium for many modems connected to it.
It's built on a limited number of RF channels in a certain segment that have many modems all going to a single "port" on a DOCSIS CMTS (cablemodem termination system).
There is a great deal of absurdity in their claims to be selling a gigabit service product using coax-based technology, when the oversubscription ratio is INSANE. If you had more than a few customers on a segment trying to actually make use of gigabit speeds at one time (just 2 or 3 people downloading a torrent of a popular linux ISO at 980 Mbps will eat a huge amount of the total aggregate capacity of that coax segment).
Cox and Comcast and RCN and similar operators are squeezing every last dollar possible for the ROI out of legacy copper coaxial last mile stuff. Only in places where the local phone company or another operator is building proper FTTH (GPON/XGSPON) are they starting to overbuild their own network with their own FTTH. Comcast is doing it in the Seattle area, for instance, in areas where the local telco (Ziply or Centurylink) offers a symmetric 1 Gbps product based on single strand FTTH/GPON.
Your average coaxial cable tv last mile operator like Cox is a telecom industry dinosaur.
The article here was published in early 2020 during peak covid19 lockdown but the general technology problem of copper/coaxial last mile stuff from 25+ years ago is exactly the same today.
The FTTH offerings from Ziply, Cox, Comcast, Google, ATT, Centurylink etc are all the same "shared media with high oversubscription" design too. Among them the typical ratio is ~32 PON users for the given "base rate" PON standard, similar to a typical ~20-50 for coax at a given DOCSIS standard. Both have better/worse examples (particularly early gigabit PON deployments were 64) but FTTH has rarely been about getting dedicated bandwidth up to the neighborhood box... honestly most of the time the lion's share of the benefits are "it's a sign your area just got upgraded cabling and equipment for the first time in many many years" than anything to do with the physicalities of the wire.
For GPON that's 2.5 Gbps for downstream and 1.25 Gbps for upstream. So with a 32 split it's the same story of 2-3 people downloading a popular Linux ISO at 980 Mbps still eat up the entire fiber line for all 32 people.
The difference on the fiber, outside the better upload symmetry we already see, is it will be able to scale a lot more in the future. Some places already have 10G PON (which, unlike GPON, is usually actually said speed) such as where ATT offers 2G and 5G symmetric service. The next step will be 25G PON (again, about the actual nominal speed).
This reads as though the cable companies aren’t aware of the limitations of their tech and that couldn’t be farther from the truth. The last mile isn’t the same as today. Docsis technology continues to improve, more RF channels are being allocated to high speed internet, and cable companies are wholesale replacing their CMTS infrastructure with higher frequency (read: more channels) equipment.
The truth is that only some cable companies make these investments - you can look up “fiber node size” for respective performance across different companies. A fiber node being the place where optical is terminated and switched to coax. These have been getting smaller everywhere, but it only makes sense to invest there when the upstream infrastructure can support it. So from a consumer perspective, your “Linux isos” will be slow to download in any case until the upstream network is upgraded and your node is split to offer higher performance.
Cable is definitely shared but CMTSes added bandwidth management features years ago. Cox could just slow down the "hogs" but they're too lazy/incompetent or they're using really old equipment.
Went and looked at some FCC maps to fantasize about having ISP competition after reading, and it turns out North Dakota has the best fiber coverage in the US, followed by South Dakota. I assume it's a combination of government subsidies and the prevalence of telephone co-ops out there, but very interesting nonetheless.
Very familiar with Cox as they are the only cable provider in my area and fiber largely has not made it to any other part of the city except the really new and wealthy areas.
While I have not yet run into any caps with my gigabit plan I am painfully aware of how limited the so called "unlimited" gigabit plan is. During COVID it was particularly egregious. I was paying about what Mike was paying except from the hours of 11am to around 9pm my download would be capped at 10Mbps or so and my upload halved from whatever it is to around 2Mbps. Cox didn't have the common courtesy to tell anyone that they were QoSing entire city blocks because their "infrastructure couldn't handle it". I only learned this by isolating the network and running my own tests. After what felt like 30 escalations with their tech support and a large portion of my night they all but confirmed they were doing this to handle the "streaming services". I work from home - this was a major problem. Despite this I was simply upsold yet another super-duper plan rather than given anything I could work with.
I get regular outages with them and run my own tests on the coax. Despite having noise levels that are pretty good for the most part their service still doesn't work right all the time. Despite my insistence calling a tech out their labyrinthine tech support tree all but prevents you from talking to anyone but a moron with a flowchart where all roads lead to "reset the modem" or "upsell hardware" and a hands free phone.
I used to run my own modem as I prefer to control my hardware. When I upgraded to gigabit years ago I was forced to lease a modem from them as prior to this they refused to service my house with third party hardware installed. All problems were always blamed on my modem, or my router, or anything they could point to that wasn't them. Dealing with their technical support or on-call techs was worse than pulling teeth. It was like performing dental surgery with a sledgehammer.
I won't get into what it was like cancelling my cable TV. Yet another mess made more complicated by the same situation. At least it was easy to drop off the set-top boxes at the local store.
I hate the amount of control ISPs have over us with the last-mile laws. Companies like Cox can more-or-less do whatever they want in my town because they're the biggest players with the most pipes. The result is as expected - terrible service, fine print bear traps, and high cost.
I'm in the same city as Mike and have been a Cox customer for 15+ years. While I have had problems, for the most part I've been satisfied. I've not historically been a top-speed-tier customer though. They are running some kind of promotion right now where they've moved me from 500Mbps to 1Gbps for 12 months at no charge, and it's the first time where I've not gotten really anywhere close to the advertised speed (not even 500, now). I'm not sure what this accomplishes for them; maybe they'll cut speeds in half next year and try to suggest I just got accustomed to faster speeds.
Support is challenging when you need it. You usually have to talk to multiple people before your problem is resolved. For example, last time I got a new modem I had to be handed off twice before I got to a level where they could 'reset my registration,' and I definitely got the figurative stink eye over the phone for not renting their modem (which, is probably why it didn't "just work"). They usually try to sell you something like wiring insurance as well, and really like to emphasize the potential cost to you if they feel like they have to roll a truck. Fortunately, I've only had perhaps 3 support engagements (1 truck) in that 15+ years. Otherwise I'd be a lot less satisfied.
I'm hopeful that the various fiber providers 'coming soon to my area' will help with this. AT&T is here but not cheaper - they force you to rent their equipment - and I don't want to be an AT&T customer. At the very least it might stop Cox from raising rates $3-$6 a year.
The wholesale price of bandwidth is so low, I can't really understand this as anything other than BOFH-esqe behavior by the network planners, but maybe there is some path to a poorly executed attempt to eventually shakedown customers. Beyond the transit fees, its hard to imagine them struggling to backhaul with modern fiber optic data rates and the cable industry has always been a leader in fiber backhaul. Beyond all that, the protocols will almost certainly do the right thing.
Further, having a ton of eyeballs pulling downstream gives Cox a ton of leverage in negotiating settlement-free peering that for instance a pure wholesale carrier would not have. Cox is also a carrier, so the eyeballs are valuable beyond just their subscription fees.
with the ftc finally going after companies lately i really hope they go after these companies who make up entirely new meanings for words.
for example, it’s crazy to me that we allowed companies to redefine “unlimited” to mean “limited”.
when people pontificate on how we seem to be heading towards dangerous levels of low trust society—this is a great place to start. few things reach as many people as marketing. we can’t trust so much of what we’re being sold. that’s not good, at all.
I could only dream of having 10mbps upload... we are still stuck on DSL here, I am lucky to get close to 1mb upload, not enough to even watch my home camera feed reliably, especially with audio on.
During covid my local ISP got a grant to run rural fiber. We went from satellite to a full gig fiber connection. It has literally changed my home life.
Cox (coaxial) is the only real viable ISP for me, in southern California, in a neighborhood built 25 years ago. Nobody wants to lay fiber in the neighborhood. A neighborhood with nearly 2,000 houses. If Cox wasn't around... we'd probably all have fios. I had faster, cheaper fiber a decade ago at my house in no-name Virginia city and while living aboard a few years in asia. So frustrating.
man, as much as I hate spectrum, I will say, as much as I want to pay them for bandwidth and speed they’ll give me what I want, and sometimes even more. YMMV of course. imho this is why net neutrality should be a thing.
The engineering problem here is in limitation in aggregate Mbps/Gbps capacity in a specific last-mile service segment for N number of end user residential customers, due to use of DOCSIS3 on coax vs more modern FTTH access methods. Nothing to do with peering/net neutrality at the local city's IX point or how the ISP exchanges traffic with other AS.
We only have unlimited access on France but the speed is never guaranteed. It is always "up to ..." and usually asymmetric.
I have a 2.5 Gbps link which I would never saturate continuously no matter what because I have generic equipment at home (despite self-hosting a lot).
I tried a few times to saturate it and whatever I managed to pull was never slow. This is probably because the ISPs allocate some realistic amount of people to the group of people who use the 10 Gbps provided to that group.
As unfortunate as it is, ISPs are really in the business of scamming and monopolizing the market, lest we talk about how ISPs robbed nationwide fiber from us. ISPs dont want to charge for usage, because then they wouldnt get their ransom, but since they scam average users, those who put their claims to the test are punished.
Privatizing infrastructure clearly isn't working. It's time to nationalize. Cox is basically a mafia at this point, able to sell "service" and then threaten you to use the service in some arbitrary way, but keep paying btw or you get nothing.
I get 250 Mbps download and 2 Mbps upload on Spectrum (Charter Communications) in semi-rural Texas for $60/month. (I'm itching to switch to GVEC.) Recently, I had Google Fiber 2 Gbps symmetric with an option for 5 and 8 Gbps with a trial for 20 Gbps.
I think if the company could offer Fiber To The Curb and then the last 10-20 feet between the curb and the house's router was either DSL or Cable or 5G, that would ba huge win.
FTTC would avoid this scenario at least where a heavy user brings down the whole neighborhood.
But perhaps the bandwidth through the last 10 feet of DSL/cable/5G isn't enough to upsell customers to convince them the switch or modem equipment is too big to fit at the curb.
For many years the Canadian ILEC Telus branded its last mile copper based ASDL2+ and VDSL2 products (10 Mbps to 100 Mbps, approximately) as "Optik" with lots of marketing images of fiber optic cables, when it was of course anything but. The DSLAM would have a fiber uplink, sure, but definitely not the last mile.
A year ago, I had fast Cox internet for $70 per month. I moved a mile away, and Cox wanted at least $233 for any connection at any speed because AT&T was not a competitor in that neighborhood. I said no and relied on 5G until AT&T moved in a few months later with the $70 market rate. When business people take control of companies from engineers, we get enshittification. Cox has somehow managed to make me nostalgic for the enshittification phase, which has morphed into this logjammin phase where no one even pretends to be competent enough to fix the cable.
this isn't going to be fully effective until they name and shame.
little popups (like viasat did) that say something like "your internet will continue to suck until your neighbor at $address stops torrenting the 100gb h0rse archive"
and then they can get extra fees for "anonymous" as well as "unlimited"...
Or alternatively they could take some of their record profits and upgrade their 30 year old infrastructure. The modern world is internet-enabled and these people are the ones with their foot on the hose selling water.
Can’t tell if this is serious or not. People here are doing basement and house work without any permits, without any gas line indicators, while being filmed. Neighbors are leaving because they fear a gas line puncture will lead to an explosion. The city won’t bother addressing it. Nobody, absolutely nobody gives a single infinitesimal fuck about a pipsqueak neighbor “naming and shaming” them over download limits. Laughable.
userbinator|1 year ago
"Unlimited data" should mean you can saturate the connection 24/7. Anything less is deceptive advertising. For a gigabit connection, that would mean around 300TB per month.
ReverseCold|1 year ago
The internet is a series of tubes! You can get a dedicated gigabit sized tube but it’ll cost 1-2 orders of magnitude more.
E: Even elsewhere on this thread people are like
> I dunno, I pay $70 a month for gigabit from Google Fiber and absolutely saturate that thing all day long up and down.
Yes! You are the noisy neighbor getting lucky that your neighbors aren’t also noisy!
beloch|1 year ago
They started charging me overage fees. I called them up and asked them to explain why they were charging me overage fees on an unlimited bandwidth account.
Their explanation was that the bandwidth was unlimited in when I could use it, not in how much I could use.
Fortunately for me, there were other providers in the market that I could switch to. So I did.
kristopolous|1 year ago
mindslight|1 year ago
kstrauser|1 year ago
My ISP lets me use the service all of the days of the month, not just one. His ludicrously low limit is unfathomable.
sneak|1 year ago
I gave Cox over $2000 explicitly for unlimited data and still got nastygrams from them for uploading 4TB of my original digital photos to S3 for backup.
It’s effectively illegal to start new ISPs in America, that’s why this shit happens.
thunky|1 year ago
It has nothing to do with speed/bandwidth.
Just like "unlimited text" plans don't charge per text message. But there is still a physical limit for how many texts you can send.
exabrial|1 year ago
datahack|1 year ago
fennecfoxy|1 year ago
Fire-Dragon-DoL|1 year ago
throawayonthe|1 year ago
[deleted]
AyyEye|1 year ago
Then the cherry on top was they wouldn't even put me back on my old plan because it "wasn't offered any more". So they tried to charge me an extra $15/month for half the speed I was getting before. I switched to a local wireless ISP that ended up being even more expensive for even slower service -- but at least they weren't liars and when I had a problem I could talk directly with the owner if it wasn't sorted (and no data caps).
idatum|1 year ago
I won the fiber lottery where I live, and I will never go back to cable (I had a choice). Let's just call the rejected cable choice a "30 Rock episode".
And that same cable provider eventually was called out for advertising a "10G Plan!". Yeah.
Meanwhile my fiber provider advertises options based on symmetric upload/download speeds. And I think this is the key in these days when we send a lot of outbound data with video call and offline backups.
Put in place a rule that only the lowest speed can be advertised by providers.
bachmeier|1 year ago
ct0|1 year ago
rkagerer|1 year ago
createaccount99|1 year ago
lolinder|1 year ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23460868
jamesy0ung|1 year ago
throwaway48476|1 year ago
dboreham|1 year ago
xyst|1 year ago
We truly fucked ourselves by giving these national ISPs so much power. In return, they abuse us, they collude to make sure other ISPs do not compete against each other to justify high prices and low bandwidth, and hire lobbyists to implement/push stupid laws in various states to prevent municipal ISPs (eg, Texas).
lotsofpulp|1 year ago
verisimi|1 year ago
Why did you give them so much power? Maybe you should have asked questions, drawn up better agreements.
walrus01|1 year ago
It's built on a limited number of RF channels in a certain segment that have many modems all going to a single "port" on a DOCSIS CMTS (cablemodem termination system).
There is a great deal of absurdity in their claims to be selling a gigabit service product using coax-based technology, when the oversubscription ratio is INSANE. If you had more than a few customers on a segment trying to actually make use of gigabit speeds at one time (just 2 or 3 people downloading a torrent of a popular linux ISO at 980 Mbps will eat a huge amount of the total aggregate capacity of that coax segment).
Cox and Comcast and RCN and similar operators are squeezing every last dollar possible for the ROI out of legacy copper coaxial last mile stuff. Only in places where the local phone company or another operator is building proper FTTH (GPON/XGSPON) are they starting to overbuild their own network with their own FTTH. Comcast is doing it in the Seattle area, for instance, in areas where the local telco (Ziply or Centurylink) offers a symmetric 1 Gbps product based on single strand FTTH/GPON.
Your average coaxial cable tv last mile operator like Cox is a telecom industry dinosaur.
The article here was published in early 2020 during peak covid19 lockdown but the general technology problem of copper/coaxial last mile stuff from 25+ years ago is exactly the same today.
zamadatix|1 year ago
For GPON that's 2.5 Gbps for downstream and 1.25 Gbps for upstream. So with a 32 split it's the same story of 2-3 people downloading a popular Linux ISO at 980 Mbps still eat up the entire fiber line for all 32 people.
The difference on the fiber, outside the better upload symmetry we already see, is it will be able to scale a lot more in the future. Some places already have 10G PON (which, unlike GPON, is usually actually said speed) such as where ATT offers 2G and 5G symmetric service. The next step will be 25G PON (again, about the actual nominal speed).
condiment|1 year ago
The truth is that only some cable companies make these investments - you can look up “fiber node size” for respective performance across different companies. A fiber node being the place where optical is terminated and switched to coax. These have been getting smaller everywhere, but it only makes sense to invest there when the upstream infrastructure can support it. So from a consumer perspective, your “Linux isos” will be slow to download in any case until the upstream network is upgraded and your node is split to offer higher performance.
wmf|1 year ago
daemonologist|1 year ago
FCC Map - https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov/location-summary/fixed?version=...
Vice article - https://www.vice.com/en/article/why-north-dakota-has-the-bes...
New America article - https://www.newamerica.org/oti/reports/united-states-broadba...
zer8k|1 year ago
While I have not yet run into any caps with my gigabit plan I am painfully aware of how limited the so called "unlimited" gigabit plan is. During COVID it was particularly egregious. I was paying about what Mike was paying except from the hours of 11am to around 9pm my download would be capped at 10Mbps or so and my upload halved from whatever it is to around 2Mbps. Cox didn't have the common courtesy to tell anyone that they were QoSing entire city blocks because their "infrastructure couldn't handle it". I only learned this by isolating the network and running my own tests. After what felt like 30 escalations with their tech support and a large portion of my night they all but confirmed they were doing this to handle the "streaming services". I work from home - this was a major problem. Despite this I was simply upsold yet another super-duper plan rather than given anything I could work with.
I get regular outages with them and run my own tests on the coax. Despite having noise levels that are pretty good for the most part their service still doesn't work right all the time. Despite my insistence calling a tech out their labyrinthine tech support tree all but prevents you from talking to anyone but a moron with a flowchart where all roads lead to "reset the modem" or "upsell hardware" and a hands free phone.
I used to run my own modem as I prefer to control my hardware. When I upgraded to gigabit years ago I was forced to lease a modem from them as prior to this they refused to service my house with third party hardware installed. All problems were always blamed on my modem, or my router, or anything they could point to that wasn't them. Dealing with their technical support or on-call techs was worse than pulling teeth. It was like performing dental surgery with a sledgehammer.
I won't get into what it was like cancelling my cable TV. Yet another mess made more complicated by the same situation. At least it was easy to drop off the set-top boxes at the local store.
I hate the amount of control ISPs have over us with the last-mile laws. Companies like Cox can more-or-less do whatever they want in my town because they're the biggest players with the most pipes. The result is as expected - terrible service, fine print bear traps, and high cost.
saxonww|1 year ago
Support is challenging when you need it. You usually have to talk to multiple people before your problem is resolved. For example, last time I got a new modem I had to be handed off twice before I got to a level where they could 'reset my registration,' and I definitely got the figurative stink eye over the phone for not renting their modem (which, is probably why it didn't "just work"). They usually try to sell you something like wiring insurance as well, and really like to emphasize the potential cost to you if they feel like they have to roll a truck. Fortunately, I've only had perhaps 3 support engagements (1 truck) in that 15+ years. Otherwise I'd be a lot less satisfied.
I'm hopeful that the various fiber providers 'coming soon to my area' will help with this. AT&T is here but not cheaper - they force you to rent their equipment - and I don't want to be an AT&T customer. At the very least it might stop Cox from raising rates $3-$6 a year.
OptionOfT|1 year ago
And it's not like they put you on slow speeds once you expire it, no, they charge you $10 per 50GB (!). Automatically. You cannot opt out.
Oh, and their counter isn't real-time...
trothamel|1 year ago
supportengineer|1 year ago
kibwen|1 year ago
[deleted]
kev009|1 year ago
Further, having a ton of eyeballs pulling downstream gives Cox a ton of leverage in negotiating settlement-free peering that for instance a pure wholesale carrier would not have. Cox is also a carrier, so the eyeballs are valuable beyond just their subscription fees.
toofy|1 year ago
for example, it’s crazy to me that we allowed companies to redefine “unlimited” to mean “limited”.
when people pontificate on how we seem to be heading towards dangerous levels of low trust society—this is a great place to start. few things reach as many people as marketing. we can’t trust so much of what we’re being sold. that’s not good, at all.
whatever1|1 year ago
I am kidding, Cox is probably their only choice. They better write a letter to apologize as a neighborhood for their bad behavior.
qwertyuiop_|1 year ago
https://www.atr.org/senators-demand-bead-program-accountabil...
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/kamala-harris-announces-plan-...
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
tensility|1 year ago
majorchord|1 year ago
Loughla|1 year ago
willcipriano|1 year ago
cavisne|1 year ago
They way HFC (cable internet) works you would have to cap upload speed for everyone on the network, as it uses time multiplexing for uploads.
mh-|1 year ago
No different than when they change their speed plans and roll out new tiers.
ddtaylor|1 year ago
toast0|1 year ago
Just like prop 65 warnings don't help when everything has them.
kylehotchkiss|1 year ago
JohnMakin|1 year ago
walrus01|1 year ago
BrandoElFollito|1 year ago
I have a 2.5 Gbps link which I would never saturate continuously no matter what because I have generic equipment at home (despite self-hosting a lot).
I tried a few times to saturate it and whatever I managed to pull was never slow. This is probably because the ISPs allocate some realistic amount of people to the group of people who use the 10 Gbps provided to that group.
zoezoezoezoe|1 year ago
komali2|1 year ago
hi-v-rocknroll|1 year ago
zoezoezoezoe|1 year ago
"If your ISP isnt in the business of servicing internet, they should rethink their business model"
kkfx|1 year ago
Mistletoe|1 year ago
https://www.lightreading.com/cable-technology/cox-called-out...
https://www.cox.com/residential/internet.html
somethoughts|1 year ago
FTTC would avoid this scenario at least where a heavy user brings down the whole neighborhood.
But perhaps the bandwidth through the last 10 feet of DSL/cable/5G isn't enough to upsell customers to convince them the switch or modem equipment is too big to fit at the curb.
walrus01|1 year ago
fat_cantor|1 year ago
maxlin|1 year ago
CatWChainsaw|1 year ago
sadler315|1 year ago
[deleted]
sadler315|1 year ago
[deleted]
tencentshill|1 year ago
sadler315|1 year ago
[deleted]
unknown|1 year ago
[deleted]
h2odragon|1 year ago
little popups (like viasat did) that say something like "your internet will continue to suck until your neighbor at $address stops torrenting the 100gb h0rse archive"
and then they can get extra fees for "anonymous" as well as "unlimited"...
alistairSH|1 year ago
zer8k|1 year ago
alt187|1 year ago
stonethrowaway|1 year ago
Can’t tell if this is serious or not. People here are doing basement and house work without any permits, without any gas line indicators, while being filmed. Neighbors are leaving because they fear a gas line puncture will lead to an explosion. The city won’t bother addressing it. Nobody, absolutely nobody gives a single infinitesimal fuck about a pipsqueak neighbor “naming and shaming” them over download limits. Laughable.