Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday August 12 2017, @03:57PM   Printer-friendly
from the better-latency-than-never dept.

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

The FCC under Chairman Ajit Pai is signaling new broadband policy changes that can only be described as friendly to ISPs and hostile to consumers. In a "Notice of Inquiry," a public comment step often taken ahead of rule changes, the commission proposes that both fixed and mobile can be counted as broadband under Section 706 of its rules. That differs from the current standard, developed under Tom Wheeler, that requires timely deployment of both wired and wireless networks in the US.

On top of that, the FCC has suggested that if mobile networks are providing this "broadband," all one needs is 10Mbps download and 1Mbps upload speeds. That's less than half of the 25Mbps down and 3Mbps up speeds currently required to fit the definition of home broadband. At the same time, the Notice of Inquiry proposes to leave home speeds at the current level.

The FCC says the "statutory language" gives it the right to scoop mobile and land transmission into one broadband basket. Section 706, it says, defines advanced telecommunications tech "as high-speed, switched, broadband that enables users to original and receive high-quality voice, data, graphics and video telecommunications ... without regard to any transmission media or technology."

[...] The FCC's Democrat Commissioner Mignon Clyburn doesn't agree with gist of the Notice of Inquiry. "We seek comment on whether to deem an area as 'served' if mobile or fixed service is available," she wrote in a concurring statement. "I am skeptical of this line of inquiry. Consumers who are mobile only often find themselves in such a position, not by choice but because they cannot afford a fixed connection."

[...] The Notice of Inquiry calls for public comments at this link until September 7th, with reply comments due by September 22nd. So far, the commission has done a lousy job of handling comments about net neutrality, with intermittent or no access during an eight-hour period on May 7th, 2017. That was either due to a DDoS attack or, as some security professionals think, just a bad commenting system. Anyway, even if lots of folks express their disapproval, the FCC doesn't really care.

I'm guessing they just don't want to have to provide actual broadband to unserved areas to qualify for special perks and subsidies. Which is precisely why I live in a town rather than fifteen miles away from the nearest one.

Source: https://www.engadget.com/2017/08/10/fcc-mobile-data-as-broadband-slower-speeds/

Also at: Ars Technica.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by kaszz on Saturday August 12 2017, @09:22PM (4 children)

    by kaszz (4211) on Saturday August 12 2017, @09:22PM (#552976) Journal

    Wireless makes sense in many cases. It's just not anywhere near being a fast internet (aka broadband). It sucks in terms of latency and datacaps. So they should not be allowed to mislabel a connection type as something better than it is. Rather it reminds me of George Orwell's 1984 "newspeak" where the definition of words are hollowed out to inable citizens to speak their mind.

    Rather let them call it radioband(tm) or something else. And define it as good enough if the population density is below a certain threshold. For more dense areas it's simply won't cut it if America is to compete with say South Korea. But it's of course always possible to make a political decision to slide into the backwater of the world.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by jmorris on Saturday August 12 2017, @10:00PM (1 child)

    by jmorris (4844) on Saturday August 12 2017, @10:00PM (#552986)

    Wireless isn't -always- capped. We got a deal from T-Mobile to circulate some of their accesspoints at our public library. Totally uncapped as long as it connects to a T-Mobile owned 4G tower and zilch if it doesn't. Have had some problems with coverage, some people have to set the box out on their porch to get a signal and some others just lose. T-Mobile says they aren't done building out yet so there is hope for better coverage. But considering the horror that sometimes comes back in the bag with the laptops that circulate, the porch is probably cleaner for some of these people.

    • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Saturday August 12 2017, @10:22PM

      by kaszz (4211) on Saturday August 12 2017, @10:22PM (#552998) Journal

      It's great provided it's labeled as a wireless solution and without datacap. What FCC & lobby wants to do is to hide what they are selling and enable artificial limits.

  • (Score: 2) by chromas on Sunday August 13 2017, @12:24AM (1 child)

    by chromas (34) Subscriber Badge on Sunday August 13 2017, @12:24AM (#553049) Journal

    Rather it reminds me of George Orwell's 1984 "newspeak" where the definition of words are hollowed out to inable citizens to speak their mind.

    That's racist!

    • (Score: 2) by kaszz on Sunday August 13 2017, @01:28AM

      by kaszz (4211) on Sunday August 13 2017, @01:28AM (#553065) Journal

      Wired internet. Racist since the 1960s or so.. ;-)