AT&T rushes to install fiber after 90-year-old's WSJ open letter goes viral

redhat

Posts: 148   +185
I hear a lot of people complaining about no fiber internet in rural area specially in big countries and I wonder why they dont use 4G, I mean you get a decent internet and also for ISP will be much cheaper
 

OrumusST

Posts: 13   +37
What do Americans say about their country?... wait... oh yes, I got it, the Greatest Country in the World! Haha, yeah right, ok bye, going back to streaming on my modest, per UK standards that is, 300MB/s ;-P

You forget. The USA is a far far FAR larger country then the UK. Some places the internet connections suck others it does not. I live on the east coast pay $77 a month for 1GBS down 50MPS up. Does that mean all of the UK sucks because I happen to have a faster internet connection? No of course not.
 

eTheBlack

Posts: 10   +22
What do Americans say about their country?... wait... oh yes, I got it, the Greatest Country in the World! Haha, yeah right, ok bye, going back to streaming on my modest, per UK standards that is, 300MB/s ;-P
Yeah, you dont have 300MB/s, you have 300Mbps, big difference.


You forget. The USA is a far far FAR larger country then the UK. Some places the internet connections suck others it does not. I live on the east coast pay $77 a month for 1GBS down 50MPS up. Does that mean all of the UK sucks because I happen to have a faster internet connection? No of course not.
You dont have 1GB/s, you have 1Gbps. Its not that hard to understand difference between Gigabyte and Gigabit
 

JohnSmithESP

Posts: 35   +17
Does Spain span across as much land as USA does? Does it have 300+ million residents?
No.
So, I am sorry for directing this at you, it's meant for everyone claiming greatness of their country's internet connection. While actually stating your personal plan speeds, most of you have no idea what rural parts, or just other parts of your country can have, have or will never have.You have no idea if your provider would install fiber infrastructure for a small community in which not everybody would even subscribe to it.

Personally I have 130/10mbit cable connection. I could get fiber, but the speeds are similar (up to "whole" 300mbit) and costs much more. A lot of people have faster connections, but even more (much more) do not. I am not going to go and say "my country has 300mbit fiber" because it's not completely true. Only ~20% of the country can apply, and even less will get it.
I know it's big, like, it's the US. And no, that's not my actual speed
But in a installation in 2021, like, how can't you get more than that, the ones from years ago I guess so. In Spain we have quite decent percentage of rural areas, and new fiber runs do 1gig per customer, always, that's why I was surprise
And if you want to compare to the entire Europe, do it, it will be similar


So
- I know what rural areas and the rest of my country have
- I know that not everyone gets a fiber run here, but all the new ones asure 1gig unless it's not a real fiber to you house-run (like high in the mountain, being that a exception, no the rule)
 

Mr Majestyk

Posts: 677   +582
Wow what a pathetic indictment of the government and especially the FCC under that criminal scum Ajit Pai that you could be allowed to offer such a pathetic service. It would be bad enough in the middle of nowhere in Alaska, but to be in North Hollywood in LA is an effing joke. Anything under a reliable 25Mb/s connection is criminal in this day and age in a country like America.
 

amghwk

Posts: 1,015   +926
Shocking, to say the least. United States of America. The self-proclaimed world's greatest country still has only 3MBps speed, and that too in the advanced state of CA.??? Absolutely shocking.

Those people who call us "3rd-world country people" in South East Asia already have much better speeds even on the mountains and villages.

This message is not to demean a country in retribution, but meant at AT&T's (and other similar companies) lackluster attitude in providing the best service for all.
 

mgwerner

Posts: 109   +107
At, so that's why internet is so limited in US - you are even further from Switzerland where it was invented. Case closed;)
The web browser was invented at CERN. The internet was a DARPA project. Actually do some research before spouting off about things of which you are apparently ignorant.
 

mgwerner

Posts: 109   +107
Power and phone where ran on the government's dime who then sold those lines to the utility companies
Nope. Both were private entities to begin with. It was only later that the gov't got involved and costs went up, service went down.
 

Ludak021

Posts: 411   +286
The web browser was invented at CERN. The internet was a DARPA project. Actually do some research before spouting off about things of which you are apparently ignorant.

I did, and protocols defining internet we know today, came from CERN, developed for their use by few of the employees so they, employees, can get faster and easier access to data.
You can also do some research. US likes to steal than brag with portions of other people's breakthrough. Like it brags they invented nuclear fission and the bomb, not the Jew imported to US to do that.
 

mattferg

Posts: 149   +153
Uuuh...am I supposed to believe they don't have cable where this guy lives? Cable has gigabit service practically everywhere now. But then again, big telecom outfits will fight tooth and nail to even keep competitors out even in areas they don't bother to serve!

I have friends who live in the boonies, miles from the nearest cable internet..but they have fast DSL. Why? Because Verizon finally sold off their control of the landline infrastructure allowing a new company to actually provide "last mile" solutions. Even so, progress has been glacial to actually get service to most of the rural areas - the company that filled Verizon's void is completely mismanaged and hasn't met any of its commitments. Several local governments finally got impatient and got the state to allow the new infrastructure provider to allow competitors to use their lines, and in no time at all you had acceptable DSL running into areas that would still be stuck with dial-up or overpriced wireless Internet. Small companies can take advantage of federal grants allowing them to still make a profit on providing service to areas beyond city limits. This is one form of socialism that actually makes sense.

As opposed to the other forms which don't make sense, like the police, fire department, and in some countries, actually affordable healthcare?
 

candle_86

Posts: 729   +729
Nope. Both were private entities to begin with. It was only later that the gov't got involved and costs went up, service went down.

Not in rural areas, my grandmother's town got power when the roosevelt administration setup power lines during the depression , she didn't have electricity until 37 or 38 same with phones
 

Raytrace3D

Posts: 227   +227
I'm rocking 25 mb/s at the highest speed available to me (through AT&T). I used to have 50 down until they were kind enough to "upgrade" me with new equipment and then said I couldn't have 50 anymore because the lines don't support it... Thanks AT&T...

Signed up for Starlink on day one of pre-order... Can't wait to get away from AT&T.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 5,785   +3,992
IMO, this aptly demonstrates that ISPs do not give a crap unless someone does something like this to put their crap service and BS claims about it being too expensive to run some extra cable/fiber into the public eye like this guy did.

After years on Spectrum, I've just dropped them for a local ISP that brought FTTH to my area, then to top it off, I got a letter from Spectrum a few days after I had the fiber installed, that said, "We've just doubled your speed at no extra cost." Too late, Spectrum. I multiplied my speed by 5 at less cost.
 

wiyosaya

Posts: 5,785   +3,992
you have states which pride themselves on independence from other states. you can run wires or fiber to those places, it's just that without government intervention it will never happen and the ISPs paid for laws that prevent that. regional monopolies defended by laws... so stupid.
Those laws, in many places, are at least a century old, and were intended to protect telephone companies, not ISPs. Those laws, too, are being abused by the ISPs. Unfortunately, this is why government needs to be involved - by removing these asinine laws from the equation so that consumers, in the US, get a fair shake at competition.
 

mgwerner

Posts: 109   +107
Not in rural areas, my grandmother's town got power when the roosevelt administration setup power lines during the depression , she didn't have electricity until 37 or 38 same with phones
To. Begin. With.
Slow enough for you?
 

mgwerner

Posts: 109   +107
I did, and protocols defining internet we know today, came from CERN, developed for their use by few of the employees so they, employees, can get faster and easier access to data.
You can also do some research. US likes to steal than brag with portions of other people's breakthrough. Like it brags they invented nuclear fission and the bomb, not the Jew imported to US to do that.
I've actually written on the topic, but since you are a know-it-all the effort is wasted on you. Short version - ARPANET established TCP/IP protocols in late 1969, part of the US defense dept.
And no serious WW2 historian believes that the atomic bomb was a US-only effort. Tube Alloys was sent to the US by Churchill due to the threat of invasion, and only later was it realized that only the industrial capability of the US could affect such a project. And yes, a lot of scientists were Jewish refugees, but not most.
Get a library card, might do you some good. Books are much better than your keyboard.
 

Ludak021

Posts: 411   +286
USA imported scientists because it had very few. Maybe you are the one who should do less writing of lectures and go to library...Push for "Americans made internet" is not flying with me. I have read on the topic that opposes this nonsense.

edit: send CERN to library too. What do they know...
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,137   +1,266
TechSpot Elite
So, essentially, if you want good internet service in the areas of the USA where AT&T reigns supreme, it will cost you $10,000USD.

Thanks but I'll stay in my "communistically regulated" Canadian market where fibre optic internet has existed for almost a decade already. You don't even need a fibre optic network to get better than 3Mbps. I have DSL at 50Mbps right now and had 15Mbps DSL for almost four years before that.

Even an old, outdated, copper-wire telephone system in an antiquated post-war house is capable of 100Mbps on a DSL line so there's literally no excuse for AT&T holding Aaron Epstein at 3Mbps. They were just assuming that, as an older person, that he didn't really know what he was talking about and didn't need faster internet. Like most corporations that are unregulated, the difference between them and criminal racketeers is sometimes impossible to tell (because there isn't any).

The way that this man has been treated is absolutely disgusting.
 
Last edited:

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,137   +1,266
TechSpot Elite
Enjoy those high taxes for a service your country did not invent.
Don't be too proud of yourself because, well, let's see... The telephone was invented in Canada by someone who is Scottish-born (so UK) which formed the original backbone framework for the internet. That means the UK and Canada both had a hand in the creation of internet because the telephone and telegraph were every bit as revolutionary then as the internet is now. They literally changed the world.

Without those innovations first, there would be no internet today. You Americans really need to start paying attention in history class.
 

Avro Arrow

Posts: 1,137   +1,266
TechSpot Elite
Uuuh...am I supposed to believe they don't have cable where this guy lives? Cable has gigabit service practically everywhere now. But then again, big telecom outfits will fight tooth and nail to even keep competitors out even in areas they don't bother to serve!

I have friends who live in the boonies, miles from the nearest cable internet..but they have fast DSL. Why? Because Verizon finally sold off their control of the landline infrastructure allowing a new company to actually provide "last mile" solutions. Even so, progress has been glacial to actually get service to most of the rural areas - the company that filled Verizon's void is completely mismanaged and hasn't met any of its commitments. Several local governments finally got impatient and got the state to allow the new infrastructure provider to allow competitors to use their lines, and in no time at all you had acceptable DSL running into areas that would still be stuck with dial-up or overpriced wireless Internet. Small companies can take advantage of federal grants allowing them to still make a profit on providing service to areas beyond city limits. This is one form of socialism that actually makes sense.
In Canada, what happened is that Bell and the cable providers were regulated monopolies. That means the Federal Government has control of the original hardware backbone networks. As a result, companies like Bell, Rogers and Shaw have no choice but to not only allow third-party ISPs to use that same network (that the government built) but to actively enable it. My third-party DSL setup was done by an actual Bell Canada technician.

When the government has control, they can force competition to occur and I'm talking more than just an oligopoly here. Here's a site that compares and contrasts the third-party ISPs in Canada of which there are at least 20. I say at least because I know of one (Acanac) that isn't listed there so that's 21 ISPs:
Note that the "Big 3" of Rogers, Bell and Telus aren't represented on that site. That means Canada has, at least, 24 ISPs in a country of only 37,590,000 people. Not too shabby if you ask me. :laughing:
 
Last edited:
I must agree. I live outside Austin, Texas within the same county and the best AT&T can do is 45 MB. Austin is a technology hotbed. My neighborhood in Pflugerville can’t get Spectrum and I only hear problems out of Suddenlink. If a real high speed Internet company can setup in the Austin suburbs, there is plenty of money to be made. AT&T is a real disappointment. I admire the gentleman for posting his complaint in the WSJ. Job well done.
 

Chad Pattan

Posts: 7   +1
As someone who worked for AT&T when it was still SBC Pacific Bell, right when they were all-in on DSL...

To those saying "go to another provider" - should be the right answer. The problem is that even cable has issues reaching some areas simply because the providers don't want to invest in it.

I'm in a densely populated area in Nevada yet cannot get gigablast from Cox, nor gigabit from CenturyLink.


They've gone wide-eyed at 4G and 5G, "nice! No more wiring individual houses!" - problem is, those technologies are super sensitive to physical buildings and they aren't practical in distant rural communities.

But it means you're going to see less and less people connected that aren't in urban central cores.