• Amju Wolf@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    The funniest (or saddest?) part of all this is that $15 is considered “low”. It’s still pretty high for something so vital (and tbf I’d much rather see a requirement for like 5-10 Mbps at $5 or so; you don’t need much bandwidth for meaningful, very useful service).

    • Squizzy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      I understand the argument but there is far less issues and costs associated with fibre connections which are virtually limitless in terms of speed - theoretical limits apply butbwe are still seeing new equipment at either ends that allow for multiple tbps speeds.

    • pcr3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      It’s crazy how many people equate Mbps latency. Broadband companies spread this lie that faster is better.

      You can game lag free and have VoIP calls with zero interruption on 5Mbps.

      Only thing more Mbps helps with is downloading larger files faster.

      • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        8 days ago

        Also helps with streaming and many, many other services

        Having said that, though, yeah… 99% of the population doesn’t need more than 10Mbit / person

      • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        Still remember playing WoW on under 5Mbps, updating was painful but otherwise playing was fine

    • nnullzz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      I not disagreeing but $15 would still put it at one of the cheapest if not the cheapest vital service. I’m not sure you could get any other utility for much lower than that.

      • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Sure, but the fixed costs are really low (mostly administrative and one-time installation related stuff which you could potentially just charge for separately) and the ongoing costs per customer are close to zero.

        Also really depends on where you live; I guess for NY it’s a really good deal.

      • Amju Wolf@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        I mean, kinda? Sure, there are fixed costs per customer, and it ultimately doesn’t matter if one guy has access to (and uses) a 1Gbps versus 1Mbps service… But when you have millions of customers that you want to serve those speeds to reliably, there’s an insane difference as you need way more expensive equipment and stuff.

        And yeah, more bandwidth has gotten cheaper. But again - for such a critical service, it should be very cheap and minimum speed isn’t really a factor. So if they could make it 1/3 cheaper by cutting the speed to 1/5, that’d be a win for a lot of people.