181
California says AT&T can't shut down copper DSL network
(www.lightreading.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
181 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
59020 readers
2730 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Honestly, it might be worth doing a cost-benefit analysis as to what kind of finds they might get if they just said fuck you and did it anyway. The price of fixed wireless is much lower since you just have to run the fiber to a tower and make sure that that tower has backup power.
If they don't want to maintain the copper lines, they can always replace them with fiber.
Not to mention, fiber is cheaper than copper at this point.
Telecoms are just lazy and don't want to string up new lines.
Pretty sure the Californian authority is not a copper DSL religious cult. If you actually read the article, the regulations they are citing are built for vulnerable communities to protect them from for-profit utility providers from cutting them off by shutting down old but only available way to provide internet to the people.
Wireless is not a fix-all solution, and can be unreliable and bandwidth limited for dense areas.
This message is sent to you by someone whose utility provider decided to do exactly what you wish and now is stuck with wireless towers that completely go down if there's any heightened usage (tourism, people moving in, and so on) or pretty much randomly (and since the infrastructure is not built yet, the company's nearest branch is nowhere near me), if you move too quickly, go to a room the tower doesn't properly reach (yes can be fixed, but now the burden of cost is on the person not the company), and many more issues that arise when 'wireless towers' are provided instead of actual internet cables that might be slower, older and more expensive for the provider but much more reliable, stable and actually working most of the time.
Wireless as the only option is a fucking joke.
I barely want to use WiFi at home let alone send it to a tower far away. This reminds me of those stupid 5G home internet plans you can get — why on earth would I want to add so much latency to my internet connection?
Actually, I used one of those 5G home internet plans when I used to live in an apartment and they kept raising my rates on God awfully bad cable. And so I told them to shove it. It actually worked out really well. I was a little bit surprised because I had heard that wireless ISPs were not very good.