OH SHIT, SON! The FCC just redefined broadband to be 25Mbps and up. ISPs pissed as hell, Republicans - Polidicks

On one hand this is great for anyone that cannot get 25mbps and needs it. On the other hand, this is fucking awful for any smaller or rural ISP. They will no longer be getting any gov't money like the big guys do because their infrastructure cannot support it, but they offer actual reasonable prices, or capless slow connections where only 4g 2gb limited connections would be offered otherwise. All these small ones will go out of business, and the giants will be all that is left. It's awesome, but it's not all good. The big ISP's have the capability in most areas to comply without any problem, so [B]this benefits the big guys in the long run.[/B]

[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;47035259]Broadband as in wide bandwidth? No, you mean high data transmission speed. [IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f6/Bandwidth.svg/542px-Bandwidth.svg.png[/IMG] This is bandwidth. It has nothing to do with your Internet speed. This is important. You are using the word wrong. [sp]Also, not being on fiber-optics since the early 2000's LOL[/sp][/QUOTE] In the realm of signals, that image illustrates what bandwidth is, yes. In terms of networks, bandwidth is used to refer to the data rate because the data rate is proportional to the analogue bandwidth of the actual signal that carries your Internet data

[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;47035328]Well, yes, in popular usage but it's stupid and wrong.[/QUOTE] This has been an acceptable use of the term "bandwidth" for at least 3 decades (that wiki sources a book from 1985), possibly even longer. Its even in the dictionary and is an industry standard term. So no, its not "stupid and wrong" any more than saying something is cool when your not talking about its relative temperature.

[QUOTE=ArcticRevrus;47035367]Thats not even popular usage. It is the literal definition. [url]http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bandwidth[/url][/QUOTE] Ok, yes, but it's sloppy and undescriptive, if not misleading, compared to "transmission speed" or "bitrate". [QUOTE=Demache;47035402]So no, its not "stupid and wrong" any more than saying something is cool when your not talking about its relative temperature.[/QUOTE] generally a relative temperature will be implied given the context so it's not a problem

[QUOTE=momoiro;47035371]So when are [B]download[/B] caps going away?[/QUOTE] Fixed that for you.

[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;47035405]Ok, yes, but it's sloppy and undescriptive, if not misleading, compared to "transmission speed" or "bitrate".[/QUOTE] It is not. Connections are commonly depicted as pipes in network design, the term is meant to visualize the width of the pipe, describing how much data can be pushed through it all at once.

[quote]The NCTA told the FCC that 25Mbps down isn't needed for 4K streaming — the number Netflix recommends for anyone streaming its Ultra HD content — and that users aren't even interested in higher quality content yet.[/quote] Hey, fuck you too.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47035351] That reminds me, I should update the OP: The FCC is expected to introduce proposed regulations next week, with a vote later this month, to put the ISPs under Title II. Title II allows the FCC to regulate pricing. If the ISPs start gouging everyone because they're pouty bitches that want to punish consumers for the free ride ending, the FCC can clamp down on them. This isn't likely to be introduced at first since the FCC is being urged to apply a light touch and not enact all Title II restrictions (it can pick parts to exclude), but it'll be an option.[/QUOTE] Ok thats really really good

[QUOTE=ArcticRevrus;47035421]It is not. Connections are commonly depicted as pipes in network design, the term is meant to visualize the width of the pipe, describing how much data can be pushed through it all at once.[/QUOTE] But that still paints a false picture. There is no "width" in data transmission, only speed. Regardless of your connection, only one bit is sent at a time.

[QUOTE=Levelog;47035391]On one hand this is great for anyone that cannot get 25mbps and needs it. On the other hand, this is fucking awful for any smaller or rural ISP. They will no longer be getting any gov't money like the big guys do because their infrastructure cannot support it, but they offer actual reasonable prices, or capless slow connections where only 4g 2gb limited connections would be offered otherwise. All these small ones will go out of business, and the giants will be all that is left. It's awesome, but it's not all good. The big ISP's have the capability in most areas to comply without any problem, so [B]this benefits the big guys in the long run.[/B][/QUOTE] [quote]The FCC does set a minimum speed for rural broadband projects that rely on Universal Service funds, but it settled on a definition of 10Mbps down and 1Mbps up for that purpose.[/quote] Ars Technica Source in OP A little higher than it was, but not quite as hard to achieve as the minimum for larger ISP's.

Enjoy your (hopefully) new speeds americans.

Since Australia seems to copy America when it can, I hope it copies this over as well.

I really hope Canada takes a good slice of that cake too. Our internet speeds are absolutely terrible compared to the rest of the 1st world countries.

[QUOTE=Demache;47035444]Ars Technica Source in OP A little higher than it was, but not quite as hard to achieve as the minimum for larger ISP's.[/QUOTE] A lot of them will still struggle with that. You'd be surprised the amount of rural areas that depend on LoS tech to get anything that isn't 4g (actually 3g is all they can get in the area, but they're paying for 4g) IR ain't very fast.

Hopefully ISPs don't take this as a go ahead to triple their prices.

"Come on, guys! Stop improving our Internet speeds already!" -- Said no one (sane) ever

[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;47035517]Hopefully ISPs don't take this as a go ahead to triple their prices.[/QUOTE] All the more justification for them being a) placed under Title II regulations (which may happen as soon as the end of February) and b) the pricing restrictions of Title II being enforced on them. The FCC has the power to require Title II operators to get permission from them before raising prices. The pricing control aspect of Title II is something that Obama has urged the FCC [I]not[/I] to apply, because if the full suite of Title II was applied on the ISPs it would actually fuck things up some. ...but I guarantee it's no worse than letting them continue to do what they want and use Americans as an all-access cum dumpster.

Title II classification hasn't happened yet though. It still can fall through. I'd be more comfortable if Title II happened [I]first[/I] and [I]then[/I] we raised broadband definitions. We still have the chance at getting fucked even harder as it stands.

As a republican, I really fucking hate the GOP (Congress wise especially). I mean, for fucks sake, why the hell would you want to restrict the FCC? It's bad enough America has internet speeds that rival third world countries. [QUOTE=Scot;47035302]Maybe a single person doesn't need 25mbps but a family of ~4 all using the internet at the same time certainly do. It's impossible for me to do anything on the internet when I'm at home (5mbps) without my brother bitching that he's trying to play LoL.[/QUOTE] Try a family of five with 56k.

[QUOTE=Deaglez7;47035212]I wonder why the republicans are angry? I wonder if it's all that bribe money :^)[/QUOTE] not like the dems aren't in someone's pocket too [editline]29th January 2015[/editline] the slowest speed my ISP still sells is 50 mbps anyway. there are still people on slower plans but if you buy a new plan today then it's 50 mbps or faster

[QUOTE=hydrated;47035657]not like the dems aren't in someone's pocket too[/QUOTE] When these bills come to a vote, we'll curse the name of any Democrats who support it as well, but the fact is the Republicans wrote this bill on behalf of the ISPs so we're blaming them.

So, this just changes the definition of "Broadband"? Can't they just invent a new marketing term for their expensive, shitty, slow internet access?

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47035670]When these bills come to a vote, we'll curse the name of any Democrats who support it as well, but the fact is the Republicans wrote this bill on behalf of the ISPs so we're blaming them.[/QUOTE] I'm talking more broadly, not just on this issue. dems and gop both accept bribes, often from the same companies. both parties are shit, it's just a matter of which one is less shit about any given issue [editline]29th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;47035685]So, this just changes the definition of "Broadband"? Can't they just invent a new marketing term for their expensive, shitty, slow internet access?[/QUOTE] yeah they'll probably call it wideband or something. broadband is a coined term that doesn't mean anything anyway

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;47035685]So, this just changes the definition of "Broadband"? Can't they just invent a new marketing term for their expensive, shitty, slow internet access?[/QUOTE] There are sizable financial benefits from being a broadband provider though, so they will want to stick with it.

FUCKING AWESOME

[QUOTE=hydrated;47035657]the slowest speed my ISP still sells is 50 mbps anyway. there are still people on slower plans but if you buy a new plan today then it's 50 mbps or faster[/QUOTE] Oh, okay, so because things are okay in your area we shouldn't do anything. This is why anecdotal evidence is worthless. [QUOTE=hydrated;47035687]I'm talking more broadly, not just on this issue. dems and gop both accept bribes, often from the same companies. both parties are shit, it's just a matter of which one is less shit about any given issue[/QUOTE] And on this issue, Republicans are being shitlords of the highest order. Come back when Democrats are being the cunts and yell at people if they don't call them out as cunts. We're calling out cunts, here, and that's the GOP today.

[QUOTE=MoonlessNight;47035442]But that still paints a false picture. There is no "width" in data transmission, only speed. Regardless of your connection, only one bit is sent at a time.[/QUOTE] Ok we get it you have no idea what you're talking about, point made.

[QUOTE=Dermock;47035721]Ok we get it you have no idea what you're talking about, point made.[/QUOTE] Please explain.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47035717]Oh, okay, so because things are okay in your area we shouldn't do anything. This is why anecdotal evidence is worthless.[/QUOTE] I'm just saying it doesn't affect me, not that it doesn't affect anyone. try not to get your panties in a wad [QUOTE=elixwhitetail;47035717]And on this issue, Republicans are being shitlords of the highest order. Come back when Democrats are being the cunts and yell at people if they don't call them out as cunts. We're calling out cunts, here, and that's the GOP today.[/QUOTE] they're all cunts

[QUOTE=Gum;47035263]25 mega [I]bits[/I] per second? That's only 3.125 megabytes.[/QUOTE] Guess what? Brighthouse (a sister company of Time Warner Cable) calls my shitty 10 mega bits per second "blazing fast high speed internet" and theres fuck all I can do about it unless I cough up more money.