Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections

[Eric Kuhnke <eric.kuhnke () gmail com>]

Perhaps there should be some sort of harsher penalty for ILECs and other
large near-monopoly last mile local carriers that outright lie on their
form 477 data or take significant subsidy funds and then fail to build what
they promised. Numerous states' attorney generals have gone after them on
this matter to varied degrees of success.



On Mon, May 31, 2021 at 5:27 PM Mike Hammett <nanog () ics-il net> wrote:

> No one's paying me anything except 15 years of practical experience
> building last mile networks for myself and my clients. I'd imagine that
> while a larger percentage than most venues, a minority of the people on
> this list build last mile networks. Even fewer do so with their own money.
>
> I have a fiber network where I offer gigabit bidirectional to the home.
>
>
> Few people have any sort of grasp of the cost and complexity of building
> what they want.
>
> Raising the the minimal definitions for everyone to what power users
> expect is a foolish venture.
>
>
>
>
> I'm just trying to connect some of you to reality.
>
>
> " Doesn’t matter." Yes, it matters very much so when you're proposing the
> expenditure of my money to meet your unrealistic goals. I'm not against
> raising the definition. I'm not against offering 1G or 10G to the home. I'm
> against you telling people that are perfectly happy with their service that
> it's not good enough for them and then using their and my tax dollars to
> "fix" it.
>
>
>
> I don't disagree that the big ISPs have screwed the pooch many times and
> will do so in perpetuity. These programs often just give those same
> entities that screwed us all for years the money to do it. That's partially
> why they don't spend their own money doing it. They'll wait for Uncle Sam
> to pay them to do it.
>
>
> Muni broadband does suck, but that's another thread for another day.
>
>
>
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> http://www.ics-il.com
>
> Midwest-IX
> http://www.midwest-ix.com
>
> ------------------------------
> *From: *"Andy Ringsmuth" <andy () andyring com>
> *To: *"NANOG" <nanog () nanog org>
> *Sent: *Monday, May 31, 2021 9:17:17 AM
> *Subject: *Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections
>
> 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