Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: DREDIOCK on June 02, 2010, 06:33:28 PM
-
Government is looking for 10,000 volunteers t test the actual speeds of their broadband connection
The US government needs 10,000 volunteers to hook a free, specialized router up to their broadband connections.
The FCC announced yesterday that 80 percent of Americans don't know the advertised speed of their own broadband connection—and that says nothing about the actual speed, which is often 40 or 50 percent slower. Broadband quality relies on more than sheer speed, but the public knows almost nothing about important, but more esoteric measurements like connection uptime, packet loss, latency, jitter, and DNS query time.
Neither does the FCC.
The rest of the text here
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/06/uncle-sam-wants-you-to-test-your-broadband-connection.ars
-
See Rule #14
-
See Rule #14
-
See Rule #14
-
See Rule #14
-
It's bad enough the gubmint peeples monitor everything we do as it is...now they want people to voluntarily hook up a piece of government equipment designed to do who knows what under the guise of public information. We are truly a nation of lemmings.
Not happening in my house.
-
See Rule #14
-
To me it looks like maybe (down the line) they will have some regulation about truth in advertising. As-is now we're surrounded and bombarded with outright LIES by the companies trying to sell their bandwidth to us, often throttling the bandwidth back after you sign up, or reducing the quality of your connection several fold at the 6-month-mark.
The entire system is rampant and without oversight. Look at it. Do you want that to keep going? I surely don't.
So, despite all the Big Brother paranoia (just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you!), I see this as a step forward.
Broadband connection quality is an intangible thing. They want to learn more so they can regulate it. How they do it, and whether you trust them (or not) is one thing, but I see the effort itself as a good thing.
-
The whole point of the study is to find out the state of broadband in the US. (Which, by the way, pales in comparison to many other industrialized nations- we even rate below countries you've never heard of* where you'd expect the major mode of transportation is donkey. We pay way more and get way less.) I know that my cable broadband is terrible. It meets specs when no one else is awake or home, like 3 AM or the middle of the day on workdays. It can fall a factor of 10 to 20 below specs when you'd actually want to use it, i.e. during the evening. Example: last Monday evening when people got back from their Memorial Day vacations my download rate fell to 0.28 Mbps and the ping went up to 427 ms. This kind of information is what the "evil government's" router is designed to automatically collect. In my area there is no competition so nothing improves and complaints about performance go directly to /dev/null.
The study is entirely voluntary, no one has to sign up. I'm not going to sign up because I already measure this kind of data, I already have proof the service stinks, I've already sent a letter to the cable company, and they've already thrown it into the trash (it wasn't even a complaint letter- I just showed the data and asked if they are planning a node split). No amount of further data is going to help me and the service will never improve as it is a monopoly. I just smile, accept the terrible service, and pay whatever top dollar they ask.
*netindex.com
-
Krusty, you probably know the history of technology as well as anyone and who has controlled a majority of it since its inception. I.P. address space, wireless frequencies, Unix operating systems, security algorithms, telephone systems, communications satellites, etc... Unless the FTC and FCC are suddenly out of the loop, there is no way the government doesn't already know what consumers have known. There is a reason advertised bandwidth is precursored with the words "up to" and end with "depending on your".
There is a very interesting and innocuous place in Mississippi where the military does things, in public view and otherwise. One of the really cool things about this place is that it's a technology incubator for people who, if they present a project deemed worthy of further development can use government money and facilities to develop things that could be used for many different purposes. They supply the office space, warehouse space, labratory space, computers, telephones, etc... That place is tapped into many other sites across the country with similar missions, and one of the many things they have the capability of doing is exactly what the supposed purpose of that government project is claiming it's for.
-
See Rule #14
-
See Rule #14
-
See Rule #14
-
Why do they need to test your broadband speeds you have already said it yourselves, your broadband rates are a joke.
In the UK they are not brilliant 15 - 20 Mps, Virgin offer fibre optics and HD TV + Films etc
By the way where's our tea?
(oneway pls don't send me a moody pm)
-
To me it looks like maybe (down the line) they will have some regulation about truth in advertising. As-is now we're surrounded and bombarded with outright LIES by the companies trying to sell their bandwidth to us, often throttling the bandwidth back after you sign up, or reducing the quality of your connection several fold at the 6-month-mark.
The entire system is rampant and without oversight. Look at it. Do you want that to keep going? I surely don't.
So, despite all the Big Brother paranoia (just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you!), I see this as a step forward.
Broadband connection quality is an intangible thing. They want to learn more so they can regulate it. How they do it, and whether you trust them (or not) is one thing, but I see the effort itself as a good thing.
This is due to people not understanding what they are buying. I can guarantee your immediate connection to your ISP is never throttled by anyone. I can also guarantee your immediate connection to the Internet is exactly what you bought.
No one can guarantee the overall throughput of the Internet. No one. No amount of oversight or prying into is going to change that. People like you will cause the end of the Internet as we know it. Mark my words.
If you do not like your ISP's service, then terminate it. That is how you control ISP's. If you do not have the stomach for it, then quite whining about it. You are the reason they can do what they do. They count on sheep like you.
-
skuzzified 101..
:D
-
because of the non-political rules here I will refrain from commenting on this topic......but the truth is ....... it has very little to do with internet activity at all...and more to do with broadcasting...an industry that is very near and dear to my heart. FCC...stay away from the Internet please.
-
This is due to people not understanding what they are buying. I can guarantee your immediate connection to your ISP is never throttled by anyone. I can also guarantee your immediate connection to the Internet is exactly what you bought.
No one can guarantee the overall throughput of the Internet. No one. No amount of oversight or prying into is going to change that. People like you will cause the end of the Internet as we know it. Mark my words.
If you do not like your ISP's service, then terminate it. That is how you control ISP's. If you do not have the stomach for it, then quite whining about it. You are the reason they can do what they do. They count on sheep like you.
Someone actually gets it. The FCC is seeking an excuse to increase their control over the Internet. To get it, they look for sheeple to provide the excuse, and their consent. Government control is not your friend.
-
Government control is not your friend.
:aok :salute
-
The FCC is seeking an excuse to increase their control over the Internet.
it's bigger than that....and it has more to do with the "fairness doctrine". their ultimate aim is talk radio.
-
Wow, someone hit a nerve.
-
Get 'em Skuzzy!
-
It's been reported that speedometers and odometers are inaccuarte in automobiles. Unle Sam wants you to volenteer (for now) to have a black box installed on your car to "monitor" instument accuracy...
-
It's been reported that speedometers and odometers are inaccuarte in automobiles. Unle Sam wants you to volenteer (for now) to have a black box installed on your car to "monitor" instument accuracy...
You're a bit late bud...they have been able to do that with the onboard gps systems for a few years now...GMs Onstar system can do a lot of things. Same deal with the GPS system in cell phones...all they need is a court order.
-
You can disable onstar and the like by pulling the fuse. :noid
-
I strongly agree with the rest you wrote, but not this:
I can guarantee your immediate connection to your ISP is never throttled by anyone.
Think of TWC hard cap trials (on top of existing soft caps), Comcast throttling torrent under pretense of QoS, lots of other examples.
-
What ever happened to the trials that were done in Ohio & Texas with the utility company's providing internet service through your home wiring? I know they have done this in a few Asian country's & is supposed to very good & very cheap. Then every outlet in your house would make a PC on line the moment you plugged it in.
-
Wireless is where it's at. Currently local municipalities hinder competition by dis allowing content providers access to utility easements. It is currently possible to deliver 40 - 50 MBPS via microwave transmission. It is just a matter of implementation.
-
What ever happened to the trials that were done in Ohio & Texas with the utility company's providing internet service through your home wiring? I know they have done this in a few Asian country's & is supposed to very good & very cheap. Then every outlet in your house would make a PC on line the moment you plugged it in.
You mean BPL? (broadband over power lines)
That stuff is very VERY bad for amateur radio operators
-
You mean BPL? (broadband over power lines)
That stuff is very VERY bad for amateur radio operators
Not sure what it was called I guess your right though. How so with radio guys?
-
OMG, serious......? ? ?
Skuzzy, I'd REALLY like to hear your thoughts on the original topic.
Would YOU let one of those devices in your home?
Would YOU recommend anyone allows that device in their home?
A simple Yes or No, I don't want or need explanation on your thoughts.
Thanks :aok
-
I strongly agree with the rest you wrote, but not this:
Think of TWC hard cap trials (on top of existing soft caps), Comcast throttling torrent under pretense of QoS, lots of other examples.
Data throttling has nothing to do with the physical speed of your local connection. That speed is constant.
OMG, serious......? ? ?
Skuzzy, I'd REALLY like to hear your thoughts on the original topic.
Would YOU let one of those devices in your home?
Would YOU recommend anyone allows that device in their home?
A simple Yes or No, I don't want or need explanation on your thoughts.
Thanks :aok
No, I would not allow it. No I would not recommend it.
-
I think Orwell was off by about 30 years ... never thought it was possible until about 7 years ago - when the media showed their true colors.
-
Data throttling has nothing to do with the physical speed of your local connection. That speed is constant.
But that's not the issue. It's about what ISP is selling to you (ie broadband/wideband) and what you actually get.
-
But that's not the issue. It's about what ISP is selling to you (ie broadband/wideband) and what you actually get.
That is just it. The ISP is not being dishonest. They are not juggling anyone's actual connection speed. Again, no one can guarantee actual data throughputs. There are far too many variables involved to do that.
-
I think Orwell was off by about 30 years ... never thought it was possible until about 7 years ago - when the media showed their true colors.
(http://www.mraceman.com/Humor/Computer%20Humor/nsa-1984-%20behind%20schedule.gif)
-
The ISP is not being dishonest.
Since when?
I can give you hundreds of examples.
They are not juggling anyone's actual connection speed.
Yes they do. Bad signal, too many splitters, overloaded nodes, all examples when ISP know about the issue but doing nothing to fix it.
Example: http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r23199119-What-the-heck-is-going-on-in-SoCal-Part-3
Again, no one can guarantee actual data throughputs. There are far too many variables involved to do that.
Almost every business account gets SLA with guarantees including data throughput. You're not telling me they are physically that different?
NOTE
When I'm talking about data throughput I go by ISPs definition, using their own speedtest servers.
-
Those guarantees, for businesses, are for their local connection and not for Internet wide throughput. No one can guarantee you will get the connection speed data throughput from a server on the other side of the world. They would be insane to do so.
Physical issues with a connection is not an intentional ploy to reduce speed. As to whether or not they actually fix it, is a support issue.
Data throughput and the physical speed of the connection are physically separate items. On a properly maintained connection, you will always get 100% of the connection speed in data throughput to the first router. You can bank on that, unless there is maintenance being done or any other normal support operation.
-
Skuzzy,
I know some guys who live in areas where the ISP oversold their local connection. I also know some guys who got burned with comcast injecting false data or simply discarding packets to cause resends, to throttle back a data transfer to well below their advertised sustained download speed, even when no bottleneck (local or otherwise) existed.
THAT is dishonest, and you're saying it doesn't and didn't happen. Nonsense, and you know it. Some ISPs throttle locally when there is no real bottleneck, and some ISPs oversell local connections to the point where they cannot provide advertised performance on their own local subnets. That is a problem, and I've had to deal with oversold local subnets a couple of times. Very irritating.
-
Again, there is a physical difference between the connection speed and the data throughput. No matter how oversold a connection is, the actual clock/speed on the connection does not vary. I guarantee the download speed, over your immediate connection, is never throttled and will always deliver 1:1 speed to data throughput on the immediate connection.
Data throttling techniques impact the data throughput, not the speed of the connection. If you measured the actual bit rate of a single packet of data coming to your computer, it will be running at the connection speed a user purchased.
I am not making a statement as to how ethical or unethical anything is. I am stating a simple fact.
Now, you want to get into marketing speak? 99% of the users have no idea how it all works. 99% of the users do not understand the difference between connection speed and data throughput. ISP's are not being dishonest when they state your connection speed will be 50Mb/sec. Are they being unethical when they cannot deliver the data throughput on a 1:1 ratio with the connection speed? That is a can of worms. From what point on the Internet, to your computer, should they be held accountable?
By the way, every ISP oversells thier connections. They have to in order to be able to be competitive. They have always oversold thier connections. Some, more than others. End user usage habits have changed though. Now it is more and more difficult to do that without having problems. ISP's are left with two solutions. 1) Get rid of the abusers or 2) Increase the prices to everyone so they can reduce how much they oversell connections.
Moving on; No single ISP has absolute control, on an end-to-end basis, for every site on the Internet. 8 times out of 10, most problems I see are not in the local ISP's network, but in the Tier 1 provider they are connected to.
As Tier 1 providers dwindle each year it is getting so there is little competition. The competition that drove the Tier 1 providers to actually do what they are supposed to do. Getting rid of competition has been an ongoing effort between the cable and phone companies. Users happily signup for those services without realizing they are killing the Internet in the U.S. Once there is nothing left but the phone and cable companies, and all the independents are gone, everyone will reap those just rewards.
So excuse me if I appear to have little sympathy for people who complain about a service, but are not willing to drop the service and move on. Oh, you have no more service providers in your area now? Gee, wonder how that happened.
-
Again, there is a physical difference between the connection speed and the data throughput. No matter how oversold a connection is, the actual clock/speed on the connection does not vary. I guarantee the download speed, over your immediate connection, is never throttled and will always deliver 1:1 speed to data throughput on the immediate connection.
That's really splitting the hair, besides, whenever you'd have any channel bonding (docsis 3, bonded T1s, etc) and a channel fallout, you'd cut your speed (just one example).
Also, consumer is not buying network timing/clock, but data throughput, and blaming the consumer for not knowing technical details is really a bit too much. Kinda like expecting every driver to know their car into smallest technical detail.
-
It is not splitting the hair, and you keep bringing up technical problems as if the ISP does it on purpose. Sure any number of technical problems can cause signal degradation to complete loss of signal. That is going to happen.
I am not splitting hairs here. It is like buying a car with a 500HP engine and expecting the car to 0-60 in 4 seconds flat. The automobile company advertises the 500HP, but they do not say how fast it really is. Is that deceptive?
There is a physical different between data throughput and actual connection speed. Guess what? No matter what the actual speed is, you will never get 100% of that speed in data throughput due to protocol overhead. Is that deceptive?
Just because you do not like the facts, does not make them any less true. And again, how far up the line do you hold the ISP responsible for the data throughput?
Your immediate connection (yes, I am assuming the connection is actually working correctly) is running as close to 1:1 data throughput to connection speed as it can be. It always does. Prove me wrong. Show me a single data packet that does not come into your computer at the speed of the connection you pay for. Anyone.
Also, consumer is not buying network timing/clock, but data throughput, and blaming the consumer for not knowing technical details is really a bit too much. Kinda like expecting every driver to know their car into smallest technical detail.
The consumer is ignorant. I looked all over Verizon's WEB site (whom I have no love for) and I'll be damned if I can find any claims of data throughput. They sell bandwidth, as most ISP's (I say most because I do not want to waste time on looking at all of them) do. You assume that bandwidth actually equates to some physical data throughput. That is an assumption which is not correct. Whose fault is that?
Look, I do not really care about this stuff anymore, but I do care when people jump off the deep end without having all the facts. All I am doing is presenting those facts. No matter how you twist it, or try to get around it, the speed of the connection and the data throughputs are two different measures. Until that is accepted, people will continue to make the wrong choices as to how to handle this.
The first question to ask is, where does the ISP's responsibility begin and end as it pertains to the quality of the Internet connection. If you are going to try and govern the Internet, you better hope like heck someone is smart enough to ask the right questions are you are going to end up with a massive mess on your hands which we will all pay for.
Unfortunately, I am afraid there are people just like you and eagl (nothing personal guys) sitting on that panel which will decide things on behalf of the consumer, which will invariably screw the consumer. None of you want to know what the real problems are. You are just looking for a scape goat. The ISP is the easy target.
You have made that clear by continually, and incorrectly, generalizing an aspect of service, in light of the facts, and avoiding the real questions that need to be asked and answered.
-
There is a physical different between data throughput and actual connection speed.
I tried earlier to understand that, but still, I'm not sure what you mean with that. In networking, speed was always throughput (bandwidth), and it still is.
1Gbps connection -> 1Gbps bandwidth -> 1Gbps throughput
Just because you do not like the facts, does not make them any less true. And again, how far up the line do you hold the ISP responsible for the data throughput?
How far? Until I leave their network. Even then, some things are still in ISP control through peering agreements.
Your immediate connection (yes, I am assuming the connection is actually working correctly) is running as close to 1:1 data throughput to connection speed as it can be. It always does. Prove me wrong. Show me a single data packet that does not come into your computer at the speed of the connection you pay for. Anyone.
Depends on definition of "speed".
In networking speed is measured with how much data you pass per unit of time (bitrate), and I go by that definition (as most other people go).
Look, I do not really care about this stuff anymore, but I do care when people jump off the deep end without having all the facts. All I am doing is presenting those facts. No matter how you twist it, or try to get around it, the speed of the connection and the data throughputs are two different measures. Until that is accepted, people will continue to make the wrong choices as to how to handle this.
OK, maybe I'm wrong. If so, correct me.
Let me ask you
a) How we measure bandwidth?
b) How we measure data throughput?
The first question to ask is, where does the ISP's responsibility begin and end as it pertains to the quality of the Internet connection. If you are going to try and govern the Internet, you better hope like heck someone is smart enough to ask the right questions are you are going to end up with a massive mess on your hands which we will all pay for.
Unfortunately, I am afraid there are people just like you and eagl (nothing personal guys) sitting on that panel which will decide things on behalf of the consumer, which will invariably screw the consumer. None of you want to know what the real problems are. You are just looking for a scape goat. The ISP is the easy target.
You have made that clear by continually, and incorrectly, generalizing an aspect of service, in light of the facts, and avoiding the real questions that need to be asked and answered.
Sorry, but that's what you assume. Just because I'm not all cuddly when we talk about ISPs doesn't mean I'm for some government control of internet.
So to make it clear:
I do believe ISPs are screwing customers big time,
and I believe the solution is more competition, not more control.
Hence, in my opinion, FCC shouldn't fiddle much with anything but assure competition in all (communication) markets.
-
I tried earlier to understand that, but still, I'm not sure what you mean with that. In networking, speed was always throughput (bandwidth), and it still is.
1Gbps connection -> 1Gbps bandwidth -> 1Gbps throughput[snip]</quote]
Sorry, I have other committments to deal with today, so I will try to explain this.
The physical speed of the connection represents the best case data throughput, but it does not represent the actual throughput.
Like a CPU that runs at 3Ghz. Guess what, when an internal cache miss occurs, the aggregate throughput drops like a rock. Same with a network connection. Protocols slow the actual data throughput to something that is always less the the actual speed of the connection. Get a retry on a bit error and the data throughput drops like a rock, while the speed of the physical connection never changes.
I take something back, or I should augment something. I have been talking strictly about wired connections. If we throw wireless into the mix, then all bets are off as wireless always varies its connection speed to reduce bit errors in the stream.
Have to go. I'll try to get back to this tomorrow.
Does that help?
-
Control most avenues of Information Sharing (largest being the Internet), you have a grasp on the Population.
I agree with everyone who is intelligent enough to NOT have a box installed to test.
-
The physical speed of the connection represents the best case data throughput, but it does not represent the actual throughput.
To me throughput is the throughput. What the actual payload is, that's another matter.
Let say, if your signal drops out of range, so will your speed/bandwidth/throughput (physical speed as you call it)
Anyway, for consumer, thinkering about overhead doesn't really makes much of a difference and it shouldn't. TCP overhead (at usual MTUs) is no more than 3-4 percent (customer shouldn't have to worry about under-laying tech like ATM, and that shouldn't be counted). On properly maintained network, error overhead shouldn't be more than 1-2 percent either. Add everything else like peak times saturation, etc and your net payload should still be well over 80% at worse and averaging over 90% most of the time.
Just imagine if some network in medium/large enterprise would perform as badly as some of ISPs. People would get fired in no time...
On the end, network is network, no matter how big, no matter the technology, you still have to properly size it, expand if needed, maintain it, etc, so why would ISPs be an exception? Oh, maybe because they can do whatever the hell they want in their virtual monopolies.
I'll say again, blaming the consumer really goes a bit too far, I mean really, why would granma need to know all this tech crap just to get what she's paying for?
-
I'm going out on a limb here, and volunteering for the test. That said, whatever they send out will not have access to my lan. My router can build sandboxes, and I also have a spare router that has a "DMZ" capability where one port will be completely open to the internet, but walled off from the lan. Whatever they send out to me will be outside the lan.
-
quote author=eagl link=topic=290278.msg3691320#msg3691320 date=1275788522]
I'm going out on a limb here, and volunteering for the test..
[/quote]
:headscratch: