I agree that what is being subsidizes needs to be re-evaluated. USF is one of the largest slush funds we have.
----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions http://www.ics-il.com Midwest-IX http://www.midwest-ix.com ----- Original Message ----- From: "Blake Dunlap" <iki...@gmail.com> To: "Baldur Norddahl" <baldur.nordd...@gmail.com> Cc: "NANOG" <nanog@nanog.org> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2021 3:56:52 PM Subject: Re: New minimum speed for US broadband connections The co op electric serving my families house in bfe tn that doesn't have either sewer or cable managed to run hard fiber for dirt cheap to all their subscribers. Its clear from that the problem isnt can't, it's won't. Setting the bar so low that podunk wifi 300k links that barely have more backhaul meet it only serves to limit the interest in fixing the problem correctly so Darryl's wifi and plumbing doesn't have to invest more than 50 bucks for few more years. We shouldn't be subsidizing ancient copper plants that are barely maintained as it is simply because established companies want to collect the gov'ment dole while doing bare minimum to zero work to actually make anything better because it's better for their bottom line to keep everyone's expectations firmly in the 90s or even 80s. On Sun, May 30, 2021, 12:54 Baldur Norddahl < baldur.nordd...@gmail.com > wrote: søn. 30. maj 2021 15.29 skrev Mike Hammett < na...@ics-il.net >: <blockquote> What can you do with 100 megs that you can't do with 25 megs and why should anyone care? That is really the wrong question. People want 100 Mbps over 25 Mbps and therefore it becomes a need for rural communities. Doesn't matter that someone believes these people could do with less. The year is 2021 and perceived good internet is minimum 100 Mbps. Regards Baldur <blockquote> </blockquote> </blockquote>
