this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2025
798 points (99.5% liked)

News

38405 readers
1325 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Analysis of broadband affordability deemed "extraneous" by FCC chair.

The Federal Communications Commission is ditching Biden-era standards for measuring progress toward the goal of universal broadband deployment.

The changes will make it easier for the FCC to give the broadband industry a passing grade in an annual progress report. FCC Chairman Brendan Carr's proposal would give the industry a thumbs-up even if it falls short of 100 percent deployment, eliminate a long-term goal of gigabit broadband speeds, and abandon a new effort to track the affordability of broadband.

Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act requires the FCC to determine whether broadband is being deployed "on a reasonable and timely basis" to all Americans. If the answer is no, the US law says the FCC must "take immediate action to accelerate deployment of such capability by removing barriers to infrastructure investment and by promoting competition in the telecommunications market."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Tempus_Fugit@midwest.social 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I never said Starlink is in any way better than all ISPs or even infrastructure types, but it's undeniable that Starlink is the best internet solution for millions of Americans, no doubt millions of others globally. I personally know dozens of 'salt of the Earth' types that only had access to traditional satellite internet. Abysmal bandwidth with laughable latency and criminal data caps.

I'm 100% in agreement that governance has allowed and even encouraged cable/ISPs to run cartels and run rackets. If Starlink can offer the better service they should get all the customers and the ISPs companies can pound sand.

As for the rural dipshits, they don't need you to white knight for them. Their stupidity should be palpable so they have the stimuli to encourage reflection.

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah keep moving the goalposts, I never claimed you said Starlink was better than all ISPs I simply clarified 'better'. I'm white-knighting for the rural users now? No I'm pointing out how stupid it is to cheer for the regulators that are supposed to work for you instead shitting on you, because the corporations have lobbied them to and a very corporation-friendly government is in power.

Your response: cheer for the big corporate ISP (what do you think Starlink is exactly)? Gtfoh.

[–] Tempus_Fugit@midwest.social 1 points 1 year ago

🤣 I just can't take you serious. What goalpost? Am I supposed to know what 'better' means outside of using objective metrics? I'm hardly cheering for broadband standards to fall, but relishing in a bit of schadenfreude.

Apparently I didn't make myself clear way earlier in this thread when I said ALL the stakeholders of these telecom companies are parasites sucking off the hard work of their subordinates. They're vile oligarchic demons looking to squeeze every cent they can. Fascism is just the flavor of the week.