Look for cheaper alternatives (many of them in Europe and not only), smaller companies than Microsoft usually have a human to deal with such cases, also their services costs 5-10x less
Starlink is amazing, but not as amazing as an actual fiber running to your house. If you can get actual fiber then you should. The primary reason is that it has very high headroom for future expansion. You might be getting 1Gbps today, but any individual fiber can actually carry 100Tbps (or 100,000 gigabits per second) using commercial equipment. The speed record is higher still, so there is plenty of scope for further upgrades in the future.
Do keep in mind, however, that residential service is usually provided by GPON or XGPON. Instead of a single fiber running from every single customer to the ISP, optical splitters are used so that up to 128 customers can share a single fiber. The fiber is run at 50Gbps or 100Gbps or whatever, and the individual customers share that using TDMA. That does somewhat limit the available headroom. Speaking just for myself, I would be entirely satisfied by a 1Tbps slice of that 100Tbps of available bandwidth.
> Under the contract terms, Mauch will provide 100Mbps symmetrical Internet with unlimited data for $55 a month and 1Gbps with unlimited data for $79 a month. Mauch said his installation fees are typically $199. Unlike many larger ISPs, Mauch provides simple bills that contain a single line item for Internet service and no extra fees.
For one, Starlink won't get anywhere close to 1gbps
In most US places, utility companies own the poles and it’s ridiculously expensive to lease space. Urban areas with competitive ISPs usually have government owned poles or leases for streetlight arbs that allow them to string fiber.
That's a weird analysis of US policy. Very few places in the US have privately owned poles. What most places have is private poles on public right of way. It's a worst of both worlds scenario. Where somehow public infrastructure is used to exclusively further private interests.
Yes the average salary of an internet installation technician is about $25 an hour or about a 1000 a week before taxes. Although, the people doing regular installs and the people who are in charge of planning and building out networks are different and often the latter are paid far more.
Fun fact, the US has always had some of the highest wages in the world- even dating back to colonial times before 1776. Adam Smith did a detailed accounting of them, going occupation-by-occupation and noting that American colonist wages were higher than on the British mainland. (I'm excited because I literally just read this last night. I would link if I could to the specific pages in my book).
I believe the standard explanation is that most of the colonists were British (already a high-wage country at the time), and you really had to pay skilled labor to get them to leave & settle on a new continent. Plus labor mobility between the proto-state governments of the time (Virginia, Massachusetts, etc.)
Perfecting Parliament, by Roger Congleton. It's a history of the global move towards parliamentary systems. Obviously not primarily an economics book, but he does touch on some econ themes- here Congleton quoted Adam Smith on American colonial wages
Mostly because most people have lots of options for employment and they typically don’t take the low options. In a place with nationalised healthcare you would still be paying for it through taxes paid by the labourer but I guess the system would be a bit more progressive than in the US so lower-skill labour would demand a smaller premium for healthcare. Though I think there’s probably more than just labour costs in the US. Eg maybe it is expensive to get the right permits to install fibre optic cables.
My home in Las Vegas is 2000Mbps down and 100Mbps up, and it's $200/month. $50/month of that is an add-on for "unlimited" usage, but Cox still writes me letters and threatens to cancel my service if I upload more than 2-3TB in a calendar month, despite having paid well over $3000 in "unlimited" add-on upcharges.
I assume you are on DOCSIS coax internet? The problem is upstream on DOCSIS is (very) constrained and if you hammer it causes huge problems for everyone on the segment (TCP ACKs start getting lost/slow, everyones ping rises massively and huge packetloss starts occurring).
Obviously no excuse to claim it is unlimited, but if the major US cable companies speeded up moving to true FTTH it would really save them a lot of trouble in the long run.
There’s no need for them to move to FTTH; 99.9% of homes don’t need more than 10-20Mbps upstream.
I was on 1000/40 for most of my history with them ($100+$50) now I have 2000/100 ($150+$50). I would be fine with 40Mbps upstream unlimited; the issue is not the throttling but the threats resulting from bait-and-switch.
The problem with cable internet is that the shared medium (coax segment) has relatively little upstream bandwidth, shared by 100's of users. FTTH has much more bandwidth and a smaller amount of homes sharing it. Typically there is a passive splitter / fiber distribution for 8 to 32 homes, at least an order of magnitude better than cable.
I switched to fiber a few years back. But at one point during covid, my cable modem upstream was getting less than a megabit (I was paying for 500/30.)
Correct, and in reality it's likely to be 100-1000x the capacity. Probably say 16 users on average on a PON segment, with XGS-PON having 10gigabit/sec symmetrical.
Compare that to docsis 3.1 - maybe 200mbit/sec between hundreds of users.
DOCSIS 4.0 is better but just basically brings the split much closer to the home, in which case you'd probably be better off finishing the job with FTTH instead of having thousands of expensive active DOCSIS terminals every few hundred metres.
Also, you can easily upgrade capacity on FTTH, just add a new OLT and you can run that side by side with the old one while you upgrade everyone's ONTs.
I disagree - video conferencing and screensharing with a couple of calls at once will quickly eat up 10-20mbit/sec. 50-100mbit/sec I would agree is enough.
Regardless you're missing the point. DOCSIS has maybe 100-200mbit/sec of upstream shared between hundreds of homes - this will vary depending on config, and keep in mind a lot of that will be used for TCP ACKs from the downstream. So you probably have say 50-100mbit/sec "real" upstream available, or less than 1mbit/sec per subscriber.
If you hammered 40mbit/sec hard you are using nearly the entire 'usable' upstream of your entire cable modem segment.
DOCSIS is just massively inferior to FTTH for this reason.
I’m in Vegas. It’s the first time I’ve actually had meaningful ISP competition and incredibly I can get fiber for 50 a month without caps. (Using quantum)
Russian public infrastructure is vastly different compared to the US though. It's probably much easier to run Internet to 10 apartment homes housing 1000 people than to 300 single family houses with the same amount of people.
I was living in Indonesia, where most of people lives in individual houses, internet installation is free or ~20$, but monthly is 20-50$ for fiber 100mbps. In house areas they have noodles of cables on the poles but it works
Yes small city in central (European) part. Mobile unlimited 4g is about 8$ but some operators has FUP 200gb monthly, with 4g modem connected to the router and special antenna in the roof will work well outside cities. About remote areas I don’t know
Abit inconsistent you’ll need to use VPN. (Don’t we have to use it in liberal countries too if open torrents)
It’s just some resources are blocked, it isn’t as bad as in China or Iran. Previously internet was same cheap but not so restricted
I recently switched from TextMate to Zed because of the lack of LSP support and other modern features. Zed comes closest to a native macOS app of all the editors I tried, but nothing could beat TextMate at that. What did you do to get LSP supported? I might give TextMate another try.
SEEKING WORK | Bali & Jakarta, Indonesia | Remote (US/EU/AU timezone)
Passionate engineer having 15 years experience in startups. Specialize on backend, full stack, devops, mostly worked on payment systems and large loads, engineering management, optimizing cloud cost. I love to work with ruby, nodejs, java/kotlin, golang, rust, kubernetes
VM with 1GB ram and some swap file can easily run rail app, Postgres and redis. With that you don’t have to limit yourself to not able to scale later.
I never used sqlite, can it be used by multiple process simultaneously? Eg rails server and rails console
When you open your database connection in WAL journal mode, you can have multiple concurrent readers. This is the new default for all Rails applications. WAL mode doesn’t allow concurrent writers, but you are often talking about milliseconds to wait for the busy connection to resolve, and SQLite retries for you invisibly.
I’ve used core i9 mbp16 for almost 3 years and this week I’ve used M1 Pro mbp, seeing hide differences in performance and knowing the actual difference in tests of these 2, it make me think that apple international slowdown and heat up intel macs, like they did (and may be still do) with iPhones
I also remember my macbook unibody 2008 and mbp 2012, with them I could do a lot with 4gb ram, even on hdd, nowadays 8gb is kinda too small for most of programming jobs, it look like macs keep getting better hardware every year and macOS using it more and more aggressively
I’ve had the i9 MBP with the 5500m from launch and it was always hot and noisy fwiw. For most people just having a second monitor plugged in made the fans always run because of a voltage issue. I sincerely doubt Apple needs to intentionally make it any worse. I hate that laptop!
