• Queen HawlSera@lemm.eeEnglish
    411·
    10 months ago

    The internet needs to be classified as a utility, living without it is just not possible in the world we have created.

    • rmuk@feddit.ukEnglish
      11·
      10 months ago

      On all lines the total amount of available bandwidth has to be split between upload and download. If you’ve got gigabits or even hundreds of megabits to play with then symmetric is great, but on slower connections is makes a world of sense to heavily favour download just because humans are better at consuming information than creating it. Consider how many hours of videos the average person watches per week versus how many they create in the same period. Same for photos, emails, articles, etc. There are people who have parity but they are in a pretty tiny minority.

      That said, I hear there are people in the US getting 300Mb/s down and 10Mb/s up which is pretty fucking nuts.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zipEnglish
      4·
      10 months ago

      Because regular users need more download than upload, while servers need more upload than download.

  • bigredcar@lemmy.worldEnglish
    8·
    10 months ago

    I just hope Ofcom will have a similar idea for the UK. Currently you only have a “universal service obligation” for 10Mbps, and if you can be provided by 4G then Openreach doesn’t have to upgrade your old copper line. Large areas of my city are still copper only.

  • Redhotkurt@kbin.social
    41·
    10 months ago

    You might have figured it out by now, but “megabits per second” is abbreviated as “Mbps” with an uppercase m; yeah, it’s kinda pedantic, but using lowercase means it’s a millibit, which is much, much smaller. The same applies to “gigabits per second,” which should be expressed as “Gbps.”

    At any rate, thank you for posting this, it really is good news. And about time they did this, too.

    • CmdrShepard@lemmy.oneEnglish
      31·
      10 months ago

      I think it’s common parlance to use Mbps and mbps interchangeably since nothing uses “millibits” as a unit of measurement. More commonly people misuse Mbps and MBps which is incorrect since it signifies bits and bytes.

      • ripcord@kbin.social
        1·
        10 months ago

        To avoid the Mb/MB confusion I’ve gotten in the habit of writing Mbit and MByte, so there’s really no ambiguity (like, even if I used them right, it’s reasonable that people might not be sure if I’m using them right or not)

        At least when talking about network-related things, particularly transfer rates. With storage and things it’s way more rare that anyone might be talking about bits.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zipEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      There is no 1000ths of a 0 or 1.

      Milibit does not exist.

      Network speed is measured in Megabits per second, which is indeed 8 times smaller than Megabyte per second that OSes show when transferring files.

    • Avanera@kbin.social
      11·
      10 months ago

      No one would ever say millibits, because a bit is the smallest meaningful datapoint. It’s a non-existent term, and a very pointless pedantic hill to try to build so that you can die on it

    • u/lukmly013 💾 (lemmy.sdf.org)@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
      2·
      10 months ago

      I hover around 3Mbps on download, often falling below 1Mbps during peak hours :-/
      It’s still enough to stream YouTube videos in 360p/480p.

      40Mbps would be damn fast. For me, at least.

      • 56!@lemmy.mlEnglish
        1·
        10 months ago

        I usually get 5-10 Mbps download during peak times, which is enough for 720p YT and decent video calls. I really don’t understand why people always need faster and faster internet. Although I just checked, and I’m getting 60 down just now, which is way more than I have ever seen.

    • gnurd@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      1·
      10 months ago

      Same. In a large city no less. With new apartments down the road, less than a quarter mile away, having fiber while we have DSL ffs in our whole neighborhood. No other choices for broadband. Fuck ATT.

  • popemichael@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    2·
    10 months ago

    I did telecom work about 5 years ago

    It was shocking the amount of area that depends on a low-quality copper wire infrastructure.

    I don’t know if that changed in 5 years, but companies are going to have a hard time getting that replaced nationwide

    • shastaxc@lemm.eeEnglish
      2·
      10 months ago

      They already got billions from the government to upgrade their infrastructure. It’s on them if they didn’t actually use the money for that by now.

  • smileyhead@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    2·
    10 months ago

    It should also require allowing incoming connections. Too much ISPs, especially mobile, are gives one-way Internet now. Basically like having a phone line with no phone number.

  • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    10 months ago

    100 mbps? That’s 100 millibits per second, or 0.1 bits per second. I’d certainly hope for better bandwidth than one bit every ten seconds; that’s slower than smoke signals.

  • akilou@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    16·
    10 months ago

    I just did a speed test. 329 down, 22 up. I pay like 45 bucks a month and it’s totally sufficient. I pirate and stream shit all the time, manage a home media server, have a bunch of smart home bullshit. I don’t need 100mbps. Not yet at least.