Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

[Andy Ringsmuth <andy () andyring com>]

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?

----
Andy Ringsmuth
5609 Harding Drive
Lincoln, NE 68521-5831
(402) 304-0083
andy () andyring com

“Better even die free, than to live slaves.” - Frederick Douglas, 1863

> On May 31, 2021, at 8:01 AM, Mike Hammett <nanog () 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
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> From: "Baldur Norddahl" <baldur.norddahl () gmail com>
> To: "NANOG" <nanog () 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 () 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. 
>
> Regards 
>
> Baldur