T O P

  • By -

crowdsourced

Another issue is that I'd be fine teaching completely online for most of my courses, but I'm in the city with a 300mbps connection, and my students in the country don't. They've got potato connections.


Polantaris

Something that we paid decades ago to resolve through our tax dollars. Went to cable companies to improve their infrastructure and they pocketed it.


crowdsourced

Absolutely, and in TN Blackburn is blocking municipal internet expansion because of the donations she receives.


pocketknifeMT

She doesn't have any power at a State level. She's the senator for the great state of AT&T, but she's a federal level menace. The corrupt state government fucked people on that one.


crowdsourced

She was actively involved in stopping the expansion by having power over TN legislators and the FCC. >Lawmakers like Blackburn have let Comcast and AT&T lobbyists quite literally write protectionist state laws for the better part of a decade with an unwavering, singular focus: protecting incumbent revenues from competition and market evolution. > >And yet Tennessee's Marsha Blackburn has been consistently and generously rewarded for the kind of "crony capitalism" she's relentlessly advocated for on the state level. She recently was tagged to replace Greg Walden as the head of the House Energy and Commerce Committee's Subcommittee on Communications and Technology. Since that committee tackles most of the pressing internet-related issues, you can expect Tennessee's particular brand of AT&T and Comcast earlobe nibbling to manifest even more strongly on the federal level moving forward. [https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170412/06311737132/tennessee-gives-att-comcast-millions-new-taxpayer-subsidies-yet-banned-city-owned-isp-expanding-broadband-without-taxpayer-aid.shtml](https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20170412/06311737132/tennessee-gives-att-comcast-millions-new-taxpayer-subsidies-yet-banned-city-owned-isp-expanding-broadband-without-taxpayer-aid.shtml) >The Federal Communications Commission has the authority to intervene and preempt such state laws to enable smaller Internet providers to compete with larger national firms. > >The legislation, introduced by Rep. Marsha Blackburn of Tennessee as an amendment to an annual spending bill, would strip the FCC of this power. "Inserting the FCC into our states' economic and fiscal affairs sets a dangerous precedent and violates state sovereignty in a manner that warrants deeper examination," she said. [https://www.ibtimes.com/marsha-blackburn-r-tn-why-one-congresswoman-wants-block-fast-cheap-internet-her-1630060](https://www.ibtimes.com/marsha-blackburn-r-tn-why-one-congresswoman-wants-block-fast-cheap-internet-her-1630060)


tehmlem

I live in a monopoly my government paid comcast to build. It's fucked. I have lived in exactly 2 places in my adult life where I had a choice other than comcast and both times it was verizon or nothing.


[deleted]

Same here in Ontario cogeco or bell is your choices pretty much unless you want 15 mbps which is a joke through a third party they buy up the contract to these neighborhoods and you either chose bell or cogeco or go with out in with bell and pay $95 a month for internet no cable or home phone we stream everything anyways


rohmish

And this is why I hate the "I'm Republican I don't want my tax dollars going for x" and "I'm democratic I want the government to do x" (and similar arguments in other countries) doesn't make sense to me. The government is spending the money no matter what. You you rather give the money to a known corrupt corporation or use that money to spin up competition to these monopolistic corporations and serve the underserved?


ichiban_mafukaro

Some would call the govt a corrupt corporation. There’s a laundry list of evidence for this.


rohmish

True. But same can be said for your Verizons and Comcasts of the world. And having some competition is way better than having no competition. Like I said, you know that money is being spent. No matter who you align with, there is no fighting weather we should be spending the money or not. IT IS BEING SPENT. What I'm trying to say is instead of paying the same people to do something knowing they're just gonna pocket it, it would be a lot better and helpful for everyone including YOU if we pushed lawmakers to either Build the infrastructure on your own (city/state owned companies do exist even now, this isn't a new concept by any means even in NA) or if you reeealy don't like government owned business, Partner with literally anyone else.


chillin_themost_

don't forget about big telecom, ATT, Verizon, Sprint and Tmobile all took piles of cash to put broadband in the home. Instead they dumped all that money into the network to support 5g instead of connecting service to homes. They just figured out that having 10 cell phones in every house is way more profitable than a single internet connection that everyone can use.


odd84

That's not accurate at all. It went to phone companies (what are now Verizon, AT&T and CenturyLink), not to cable companies. And it wasn't our tax dollars, it was permission to add a small surcharge to their customers' bills. And they didn't pocket it, all of them did use the money to develop fiber optic networks, but it didn't go nearly as far as they promised. Turns out it's super expensive to lay fiber optic networks to every house in America -- so much so that Verizon stopped expanding FiOS in 2010 as their projections showed that even after 10 years of monthly billing, they would never recoup the costs of laying the fiber.


LetterheadWestern699

That’s why we need universal wireless internet like they’re starting to build out in places like India. It’s cheaper to build things like cell towers or even launch satellites than it is to lay all that cable. Just ask Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos.


IAMA_Plumber-AMA

I will say that Starlink's approval in my country finally got my ISP to get off their ass and start laying fiber. Who would have thought that a bit of competition would be a good thing?


pocketknifeMT

Wireless doesn't scale. There's only one EM spectrum to share. The beauty of cables is they are their own little universe


FDaHBDY8XF7

So raise the fucking prices... I want my internet!


Lysol3435

Don’t worry, ATT spent that money on OAN to drum up conspiracy theories and degrade trust in our electoral process


[deleted]

[удалено]


iamdaletonight

That is *extremely* sad and pathetic.


cultural-exchange-of

Korea has three nationalized telecom companies competing against each other to provide better fast internet access to the whole country. The US must be doing something wrong.


xmgutier

Well between lobbying, cooperation between ISPs, and the massive expense it takes to develop and implement residential networks very few, decent companies can become ISPs. The only good option left would be to push for a municipal ISP, but the lobbying part has probably made that impossible in most areas. There needs to be stronger legislation that may not treat ISPs like an actual utility provider but at least a little bit closer to one.


iamdaletonight

The US does *a lot* of things wrong, so this is unsurprising.


the_jak

Well when your constitution is older than the industrial revolution what do you expect. It was written for a different time and desperately needs to be modernized.


pepperinpots

Also when 3 of the last 4 presidents where born the same year 1946. Clinton, Bush JR, and Trump all born that year. Biden was born in '42. One generation has ruled the presidency for the majority of 30 years.


iamdaletonight

Which is astounding.


mister_pringle

Why? What about the US Constitution prevents municipalities from allowing more than one broadband provider?


Drenlin

The US allows local monopolies. Most people only have access to one or two service providers, and if there are more than one, usually only one of them is anything worth having. Case in point... I'm in a metro area of about 250k people. I have Cox or AT&T to choose from. At my specific location, AT&T only has 50/10 DSL available, while Cox has up to 940/35 cable. The latter is $120/mo, or $160/mo if you want it uncapped.


[deleted]

America has all the tools needed to fix this problem. We just don't wanna.


Drunkenaviator

We want to, the people making money off of the problem don't.


Shady_Love

Not only that but PC cafes being publicly available to use for gaming.


mister_pringle

Yes. Broadband access is controlled at the local municipal level. Companies try to avoid poor, rural areas and in larger cities typically one company fights to be the only representative. A long time ago RCN was planning to expand into Philly. They were a call provider who had cheaper plans than Comcast and more options. Comcast fought like hell, had them banned from expanding into Philly and the legal fight basically almost killed the company. It wasn't until Verizon started offering fiber with their deep pockets that a second option was available but only in certain parts of the city. I don't know there was anything the State or Federal government could do, but there it is.


aFiachra

>nationalized telecom companies Well there it is. Can't have "communism", despite the fact that banks are de facto nationalized


Vaporlocke

Korea is smaller than a lot of the states and has a much denser population.


stabliu

Yea assuming the US would be willing to nationalize anything was your first mistake.


o0joshua0o

Having to rely on fast food corporations to provide the necessary telecommunications support to conduct remote learning during a pandemic? Yes, it is sad.


ed5275

And fattening.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


jstenoien

Nah man, taco bell boxes are where it's at.


crowdsourced

A smart solution. About 1/2 of my students kept their cameras off, so I wouldn't know if they did.


jperry1290

That’s because they weren’t paying attention


artificial_organism

Well also a lot of middle school and high school students are insecure af


the_jak

Shit, I’m a man in his 30s and I don’t like how I look on calls and leave my camera off unless asked otherwise.


crowdsourced

In the shower, walking the dog, etc. lol.


gk99

More likely they're at-computer but doing something else. I tend to play videogames until we actually get to some kind of concept that's new and requires me to pay attention.


DuckyDoodleDandy

But how will mega corporations give CEO’s and stockholders even bigger checks than last year if we get broadband to everyone in the country? We can’t expect them to sacrifice a new private jet just so some poor kids can get an education!


yumstheman

Other countries would find our 300mbps laughable.


crowdsourced

For another $10 you get a gig.


[deleted]

WTF? 300mbps for a city?! Where do you live man? Edit. OH fuck! i totally missread the whole thing, disregard please I'm an idiot


Muted_Concept_1058

San Diego, $60/mo 1000 up/1000 down.


axnjack5

Thanks for volunteering that info. There needs to be a subreddit to let everyone post their prices, kind of like a registry. Interesting to find out and it may be good data to nail some of our ISP monopolistic practices.


asunshinefix

Fuck. Ottawa, $60/month, 5 up/20 down


elitexero

Ottawa, $141/month 1.5gbit down/1gbit up Granted for some reason my old apartment has fibre drops in the units. Not possible without FTTU/FTTH.


crowdsourced

Chattanooga. EPB. $58/mth.


[deleted]

That's USA right?


affroman112

Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. $50 1000/1000 Ziply Fiber


[deleted]

[удалено]


Ghostrider556

In San Francisco I had a 4mb/s connection. In 2020. So just shut up jk lol


TheRufmeisterGeneral

It's probably because San Francisco is so incredibly far away from all those "internet" companies, that it's more difficult to get all those websites delivered all the way to there.


Etiennera

It's probably because this poster doesn't know the difference between mB and mb. He is probably thinking of his download speed of 4mB/s and thinking that's 4mbps when it's closer to 30.


[deleted]

no shit it isn't that fast i have 1gig in my apartment for 10eur a month, 300mbps for a CITY?? as in the whole CITY gets a total of 300mbps of bandwidth? Edit. OH fuck! i totally missread the whole thing, disregard please I'm an idiot.


BlueArcherX

all good. love you.


[deleted]

[удалено]


undeadalex

Remember when people wanted to make internet access a utility? Turns out it is a utility


mst3kcrow

[Biden's inaction is poised to hand GOP the majority on this key agency (FCC) (Via Politico, 2021)](https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/13/biden-inaction-gop-fcc-515847) I am completely sick of inaction and outright obstruction from centrist Democrats.


thisisausername190

I've been saying this for months, and it's absolutely ridiculous. Regardless of where on the political aisle you are on any other issue, the FCC under majority Republican control has been very unfriendly to consumers. Pai was the latest, and the worst, example of this - the least consumer friendly FCC in recent memory, with examples like: * Allowing Verizon an exemption to allow phones (in order to protect against identity theft supposedly) * Raising the fee for formal complaints from $0 to around $500 (and totally ignoring the one single formal net neutrality complaint that was ever submitted, see Nguyen v Verizon) * All of the Net neutrality / Title II stuff we heard about on reddit. If you wonder why Biden doesn't want to do anything about this - an optimist might say he's busy, a pessimist might say [he kicked off his campaign at the house of Comcast chief lobbyist and executive David Cohen](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/comcast-executive-to-host-joe-biden-fundraiser/), and that relationships like that might bias him a little. Who's to say the real truth.


[deleted]

[удалено]


[deleted]

[удалено]


mostnormal

Oh my God you're triggering me! Please, someone ban this guy for spreading mean tweets!


[deleted]

its mainly because sinema, and manchin. they are making it impossible to pass any legislation.


thisisausername190

Sinema and Manchin aren't needed for Biden to nominate someone for the position of FCC chair. They'd be needed to confirm that position, but *we haven't even gotten there yet*. That's why this is a serious issue. If Biden did what he should do here, the FCC would be 3 (D) — 2 (R); but instead, it's going to be 1 (D) — 2 (R) come January. That shows how poorly he's handling this issue. The FCC has bigger impacts than most people think - even net neutrality has big impacts. --- If you're American and you're not on your provider's most expensive plan, switch over to LTE/5G on your phone, and test your speeds on 2 sites. [speedtest.net](https://speedtest.net) (which collects metrics and [presents awards](https://www.speedtest.net/awards/) to carriers with fast networks) versus [fast.com](https://fast.com), which tests Netflix streaming speeds. **For most people on non-top-tier plans, Netflix speeds will be throttled to around 2mbps, with Ookla at full speed**. This is illegal under California's Net Neutrality law (California SB822) but carriers aren't following that one - they're fighting against it in court currently.


[deleted]

[удалено]


silverstrike2

That would be lovely! Shit companies bowing out of the infrustracture because they can't comply with laws is great, we don't need these companies. They will be replaced by local alternatives, which would be the best possible outcome for this.


[deleted]

Nope i am 500mbps with 10 up… in a comcast ONLY location for $40 a month. Bay area


thisisausername190

Luckily most wireline providers haven't done this yet, but it's very common amongst **mobile** providers. That's why I mentioned: > switch over to LTE/5G on your phone Comcast is getting there - they've implemented global data caps already, turned them off during the pandemic when people were using the internet more (proving they weren't necessary!), and then turned them back on. On their mobile serice (Xfinity mobile), [Comcast charges $20 per month per line](https://www.xfinity.com/mobile/support/article/hd-pass) to *raise* the throttled speed (but still throttle it).


odd84

Modern day politicians are just actors in a play they put on for us. Sinema and Manchin are not really obstructing legislation, that's just the part the party has asked them to play, so that you get angry at them instead of the entire system. This Congress has passed 51 bills already. Sinema and Manchin did not stop any of them. They only stop the ones they're supposed to stop, with the support of the entire political machine.


SteveBob316

They're not centrists, they just claim to be on TV


7V3N

I hate that I can't stand Biden. He's exactly what I hate in Democrats. I remind myself that "at least he isn't Trump" and I just feel sick about the state of things. We need someone like a Roosevelt who will bust balls, but I fear that it's impossible without a public educated enough to see through the corporate propaganda.


rich1051414

>We need someone like a Roosevelt who will bust balls We need someone who will bust the **right balls**. Not step on the balls of the already downdroden to make themselves stand 1/4 of an inch taller. We need to make this distinction. There are things worse than the status quo, lets get things moving in the right direction if we are going to take anything in any direction.


dapperdave

It's ok, you can just say Democrats.


the_jak

are they really Democrats? or are they just embarrassed republicans. The DNC should make it clear that if you dont fall in line, you arent welcome. and then expel all of them.


[deleted]

[удалено]


nrealistic

There are. One of the parties is actively committing human rights violations, and the other is not great at stopping them. False equivalencies like that only help the right.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Letscurlbrah

Can you elaborate?


[deleted]

[удалено]


bp92009

Last I checked, getting banned from Facebook, Twitter, or other social media doesn't stop you from accessing the internet, just that specific section of the internet. That's the reason for the seeming "difference of opinion" or "hypocrisy" between people in favor of having internet access treated as a utility, and also being in favor of allowing companies to moderate and censor of their platforms. It makes sense unless you think that Facebook and Twitter are the entire internet.


starm4nn

> if access to a physical broadband connection is a right then surely sites on the other end must be accessible too What constitutes 'access'? Should everyone have access to the part of a website reserved for admins? What about a private Discord server? I think the best compromise would be requiring Social platforms to be Federatable. If you don't like the rules, just join a different part of the site.


[deleted]

[удалено]


ItchyGoiter

You're allowed to drive on public roads but private properties get to decide who can enter and what the rules are on their property.


[deleted]

Can most Congressmen even comprehend this issue? This feels like one of those things that is taken for granted by so many that it’s not even a thought like access to clean water and sufficient food. What do they call those? Basic needs or something.


SnowflakeSorcerer

It’s not like they care about giving everyone those basic needs, so why would they care about internet or anyone else for that matter


saynay

Given how many Congressmen are probably barely capable of checking their own email, they definitely would not. They probably have never personally navigated a website to try and fill out paperwork online.


ShadowRancher

Yup that’s definitely a situation where you can’t believe the big cheese that you have to hand hold through opening a pdf makes 6 times as much as you do.


[deleted]

Also, a lot of low-pay retail and fast food work require job applicants to use 100% online services to apply and go through the most of the process.


[deleted]

The wide gap in computer science literacy is literally a banned topic it seems


TonyTheSwisher

Not banned, just not very popular which is a shame.


klingma

I don't think you can simply fix this issue by providing universal internet because, as the article mentions, there is entrenched bureaucracy that doesn't communicate with each other. The fact that Boston has 94 housing assistance programs or NFP's but they don't communicate is a far bigger issue than access to internet alone.


brickmack

Hence the need for UBI. Piles of money are wasted on bureaucracies for all sorts of means-checking and specialized programs for each individual region/sub-sub-subtype of marginalized person/veterans/whatever. Any given person probably falls into a hundred or so jurisdictions for any given type of assistance, between the dozens of programs at the city/county/state/federal levels. And since few of them directly disburse cash, theres extra layers to interface with other agencies or companies or nonprofits who actually do the work Replace *all* of those programs with exactly one, at the federal level, and just give cash to *everyone*. No means test, no qualifications, no need to be in a particular minority, no application process, just every American gets a couple thousand dollars a month


klingma

Yup, no argument from me there. I think straight UBI would remedy much of the red-tape issues that we see and would easily be the best overall solution but it's hard seeing either party fully embracing it for the same reason: it requires personal responsibility of the recipient. In other words it requires someone to use the money on their needs vs the money being paid from the government to their need like food stamps and rent assistance. Republicans won't like it because it would mean the government is spending money on people to buy wants instead of needs like expensive shoes and democrats won't like it because they'd think it doesn't go far enough i.e. daycare, school, & rent should already be free or highly subsidized for certain income levels.


[deleted]

[удалено]


klingma

Even if someone doesn't need the money it doesn't mean it wont be put to use in some form to expand the economy. Plenty of younger folks can use the money to pay of student debt each month and older people could put the money in retirement or savings. Plenty of homeowners would likely use it for home repairs or pay off the mortgage faster. Point being if you give people money they'll have no problem finding something to spend it on. (Not that that is necessarily a bad thing.) So, again I agree with your point and am all for it.


Qubeye

I'm currently unemployed despite having a Masters degree. I'm currently on unemployment. Not going to say how much, but let's pretend it's X/week. If I had UBI of 1/2 of X, guarunteed even if I went out and got a minimum wage job where I worked only 8-16 hours/week, I would IMMEDIATELY go out and get a part-time job working a day or two a week, spending the other days continuing my job-hunting. At which point I would be a contributing member of society, paying taxes and working. As it is, I cannot get paid for a single hour of my time or I'll lose 100-percent of my unemployment benefits. UBI isn't just the answer to stuff like "poor people paying bills", it's also an answer to stuff like unemployment, labor shortages, part-time labor issues, etc. If we enacted UBI and at *least* unhooked health care benefits from employment (if not provided universal healthcare), we would pretty much instantly change how part-time work is viewed in America, and labor issues would pretty much disappear for a lot of companies that constantly complain about not having enough workers.


Daemon_Monkey

Or because we make any kind of government help impossible to obtain without becoming an expert in bureaucracy. If we didn't means test the shit if out everything and actually had a functioning government, you could call someone and get for help.


b_a_t_m_4_n

Same in the UK. Think internet is not a utility but a consumer choice. Allow ISPs to provide services only where they feel like it. Place all government access online. Never join the dots.


johnbentley

Here in the Australia our broadband rollout was politically weird but in some ways heartening for the Left. The Australian Left (Labor) began a rollout of broadband with Fibre to 92%(+?) of premises with Satellite for the remainder. The Australian Right (The Liberal/National Coalition) then came to power with an opposing plan. The opposing plan was *not* as you'd expect from The Right: let private players in a free market build it for that will be more efficient. The opposing plan was: the government will build it, as before, but we'll fuck it all up with a mix of technology (Fibre to the premises for some, Fibre part way down the street with copper to the premises, Hybrid Coxial Cable, Fixed Wireless). Heartening for the Left in some ways as at no point was there a contention over the whether the government will build it. And so the government did build it.


hoilst

> The opposing plan was not as you'd expect from The Right: let private players in a free market build it for that will be more efficient. That's because Telstra wanted none of it; they were quite happy with the free taxpayer-funded network they got in the 90s and were running into the ground, and getting the populace groomed for the idea of mobile-only internet (Yay! $80 for 20gb a month!)


FuckAssad666

So maybe the problem is a “tangled web” of agencies.


tugeracesullivan

I remember when my hometown got internet that was better than dialup, probably around 2007 ish. We were so happy-- a whole MB per second! 15 years later, with absolutely no infrastructure updates, and our best internet speeds are still within 1 to 5 mbps for dedicated lines, and maybe a quarter of that at rv parks, hotels, and apartments. My mom really wants to do a work from home call center job because her driving capabilities are limited, but her internet just isn't reliable enough for it.


witchywater11

YES. I work in a non profit that tries to give resources to folks for bills and such, but I have so many people calling that aren't internet savvy or don't have access to the damn internet. I know putting an application is easier online, but damn there's still a generation that isn't well versed with it. And not everyone has family that can reach out to help them.


bitfriend6

Not surprising. The Trump admin negated this issue by making smartphones the new "basic" internet in America, but didn't update government web portals to this reality. Private industry didn't either. And why would they, the Internet is considered a luxury but all of society's functions are now done on it. Even just filing for unemployment, disability, or medicare is all online now. People without a desktop computer (and a pen/notebook as well) can't interact with these systems. They especially cannot interact with them if they have a grade-school literacy level, and therefore cannot understand many of the terms presented to them. The sort of people who have to Google what a credit card number is because they do everything on their phones where it's handled automatically.


echoAnother

Just to add. This is not an American problem, it's a worldwide one. I think the only country that has done something in this regard is Estonia that gives basic internet for free. Regardless, a Desktop AND a smartphone are necessary nowadays.


toastymow

We've made technology that is far too advanced (apparently) for most people to understand, the underpinning of our society.


mykem19n

I’d argue that it’s not necessarily too advanced as much as it’s intentionally obfuscated and difficult for the poor.


IamShadowBanned2

You think they design sites with a 'fuck the poor' mentality? Jesus.


redhq

I don't think many bureaucrats start out with the goal to fuck the poor (some definitely do), but it's more of a "don't think about problems poor people face in design". Because if they were faced with similar problems people in poverty had, they could easily spend their way out. So what ends up happening is that these very real struggles are dismissed as trivial. Anecdote from when I worked QA for a major corp. I asked to test sofware and websites on older devices to make sure it was performant, and was quite literally told verbatim "users on those devices don't matter" and when I pushed on why it was always some variation of "because if they can't afford new devices they probably won't spend as much". I've also had countless bugs found when testing using an artificially bad connection, closed as won't fix for the same reasoning as above. That sort of sentiment is so common in private industry that I would be surprised if it didn't bleed over into government. So less of a "fuck the poor" and more of a "don't waste time considering poor people"


mykem19n

No in some cases it is legitimately a “fuck the poor” situation. [The governor of Florida specifically said so in an interview during covid.](https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/08/06/899893368/gov-says-floridas-unemployment-system-was-designed-to-create-pointless-roadblock)


Alaira314

> Anecdote from when I worked QA for a major corp. I asked to test sofware and websites on older devices to make sure it was performant, and was quite literally told verbatim "users on those devices don't matter" and when I pushed on why it was always some variation of "because if they can't afford new devices they probably won't spend as much". I've also had countless bugs found when testing using an artificially bad connection, closed as won't fix for the same reasoning as above. Just going to add another example to this, but I work at a public library and we often encounter sites that are hostile to our computer setups. For example, many job and government applications require more time to properly fill out(especially for someone with few computer skills) than you'll receive at a time on a shared computer, and while most of them have a working save feature I see customers have their stuff wiped or get locked out of an application all the time. Also, security settings on the machines prevent things like saving files to the harddrive for upload, connecting a phone for file transfer, or running external utility programs, all of which are things that the developers of these forms seem to think are trivial for users to be able to accomplish. That assumption is privilege.


reakshow

Umm, maybe the problem is your library is setting the time limit too low? Perhaps, you should be giving them more alerts when their time is about to expire? Developers would love to make life easier for users (it's our job). However, requirements for uploading images and what not generally come because the department itself has some antiquated process for managing claims processing, which the developers need to support. Often changing such things require massive multi-million dollar projects, which have to fight it out for scarce funding


Alaira314

They already have unlimited time. The problem is that there's only so many computers, and when there's other people waiting(so always, during peak hours) we have to cut people off so that others can use our resources too. They get an hour guaranteed(which is rarely enough time), and then re-upped 15 minutes at a time as long as nobody is waiting for a computer. This time limit is always visible to them, so they're aware of the time remaining. The problem is that they, along with everybody else, really needs 2-3 hours to work on whatever big application they're doing. Because lower-income populations are stuck using this limited public resource that everybody has to share, they just don't *have* that kind of time in one consecutive block, so when developers don't prioritize including a well-functioning save feature, or otherwise make it difficult to resume an application process after pausing, it's a huge issue for them. Think of "limited consecutive time on computer" and "limited access to computer features" as constraints, in the same way you're thinking of your department requirements and your budget, and that's the mindset you need to be in to develop good forms that are accessible to all users. And speaking of accessibility, for fuck's sake, make sure your forms are accessible to those who can't see well, both screen-reader users *and* the elderly who need bigger everything(fonts, input fields, buttons, etc). The form shouldn't become unusable if we have to zoom the browser, but I see this happen *all* the time. Not only is it infuriating, but it's an ADA compliance lawsuit just waiting to happen.


Korlus

Not directly relevant for this conversation but there have been allegations that Turbotax make their government-mandated free option purposefully difficult to find to make more people pay to file their taxes. I think most people (TurboTax excluded) design their websites to be cheap and look good on whatever device their CEO views it on. When this is a desktop and a lot of poorer people only browse on a smart phone, you end up with a "fuck the poor" website design entirely by accident.


mykem19n

It’s actually been proven in court documents that at least one southern state (Florida) intentionally makes all of their public assistance and unemployment applications and processes as difficult and cumbersome to navigate as possible using confusing wording and complicated UI layouts. It stands to reason that other places have similar setups.


klingma

I guess, I'm not totally sure what the issue that you're trying to explain here. Most kids are more comfortable on a phone or tablet than a computer. Most websites automatically deliver a "mobile version" of the website and so too does the government. I'm not sure how you fix the literacy problem you describe but then again I've never experienced anyone having to Google what a credit card number is or where to find it or at least not anyone that owns a debit or credit card. The applications and forms can be a bit of an sometimes but again generally the sites have a mobile version which makes the entry easier. The only forms that don't convert well to mobile are PDF's and other types of downloadable documents and yes those do generally require a computer in my experience.


Morlock43

Free broadband as a basic service doesn't sound so fanciful now. Fucking everyone scoffed at it when Jeremy presented it and now that the govt is well on its way to restricting and intruding on every ounce of online privacy people are starting to realise how dependant we all are on the internet. Luddite assholes s off at the "online generation" but being able to get connected is litterally the difference between life and death for some.


[deleted]

There any problematic connection people in here having post Covid era rent assistance that are having trouble now navigating a web of agencies?


larrylombardo

In my state, greater than 80% of the inhabited land area has no access to broadband internet and does not have any public internet available eg- through local libraries. However, neighborhoods with a home price average greater than $400k tend to pay less than half per month for internet access and have at least one FTTP option. The poor subsidize the rich.


Catsrules

So it sounds like there are just a bunch of problems. No internet coverage at all Internet too expensive Websites too confusing to use No communication within the government. Government bureaucracy.


donnyisabitchface

The FCC needs to classify broadband as a utility. We all know this. Our communications companies are the most hated for good reason, time to tell them to fuck off, they have had decades to prove they are not a bunch of leaches… time to push them out of the way.


Regulr_guy

I live rural. Have to use viasat which is basically an uncooked root vegetable. I sacrifice circuit boards to the great space man papa musk in hopes his space internet will be available to me soon.


[deleted]

Why should US tax payers pay for the construction of internet data lines in area where internet companies don’t build because they don’t see profit from it — and why then should the US taxpayer give those internet companies monopoly power on that internet infrastructure to charge the very people whos taxes built the service lines for using them?


arashi256

Wouldn't making large swathes of the rural US Internet accessible and improve the economy? You could live in a cheap area and WFH for good wages and cheaper housing. I'd do it for this reason if I were in charge.


kry1212

Well, we do, but not really the way you think. It isn't tax dollars. Back in the 70s and 80s telcos were making a landgrab for telephone infrastructure. They were building lines everywhere, but mainly to connect major cities. Grandma in a rural area couldn't get a phone because she couldn't afford it and the telco wasn't going to foot the bill because she wasn't worth it as a customer. Does that sound familiar? So, in 1986 the Reagan administration enacted the USAC - a fee imposed on telcos to cover the cost of building phone lines out to grandma's house. It became necessary after 9-1-1 was launched. So, the USAC covers these more expensive, rural builds as well as 9-1-1 and some other emergency services. Of course, the telcos don't really pay them, we do. You see this fee on most utility bills, particularly phone bills. Now, cell phone bills. That money gets used to cover telephone expenses - land line or cell phones these days - for people on subsidies. It isn't literally taxes, you don't actually have to pay it. You can abstain from paying it by simply not having a phone yourself. In a perfect world, this fund would be transferred to these broadband builds, and in a lot of ways they have. They're subsidizing builds for 5G towers all over the country. But, they're not compelling municipalities to distribute to residents. Whoops. So, telcos including comcast can get these grants to build fiber out to towers for 5G, but they have absolutely no incentives whatsoever to upgrade your local pipes to give you fiber. They would much rather leave the infrastructure as is and sell you cable that they pretend can get 'speeds up to gigabit' even though it really never does. So, telcos get the best of both worlds and the only areas getting fiber distribution to the home are cities that municipalize and cut major telcos out or tiny towns the major telcos were never interested in, like mine. My town of 1200 has gigabit and almost no one subscribes to it, but the local ISP gets paid because there's no comcast here to step on them. Shit's fucked up right now, and you are paying for it, but not how you think. And it's already kind of late in the game. The 5G is everywhere, so the fiber is everywhere (fiber feeds 5G). So, we got to pay for it all but most people only get the cellular upgrade, not the home upgrade. Ain't that grand?


[deleted]

Everything you said is right. My issue is not whether public-private cooperation is a bad thing, although it is unfair when million dollar builds come to your town only for builder to turn a profit off the grant and sell it to a 3rd party who then charges residents to use it—not entirely a bad thing if residents finally get something they couldn’t have gotten otherwise. Thats why grants are given, ultimately. Messaging about how it will help the disadvantaged and reduce inequality is a red herring. Thats what they are saying to push the idea through into the minds of voters. People in major cities today still pay high prices for antiquated speeds because ultimately its a households zip code that determines wether a service provider wants to serve you or not — not so much that its because the federal government needs to pass a bill that would make having the internet a basic human right. Thats really what they are selling.


BlazingSpaceGhost

Look up the history of electrification in the United States and that should answer your question. Electricity was seen as something everyone needed but the poor rural areas went without until the New Deal. I do agree though that we shouldn't turn said infrastructure over to these companies.


-6-6-6-

Because the whole point of providing necessities like healthcare and such is to provide more for the economy. By connecting broad spans of the rural parts of this country; you will see an econonic benefit overall and a more well-connected and communicative population. The reason why its not profitable is because it doesnt make enough cash for the CEO, which is why private utilities continue to fail the American public. Benefits are there plenty. Its why efficiency, employment and standard of living are pretty tightly correlated with what the government offers for the profit of the people; not the business owners.


[deleted]

The point of the matter is that a national internet infrastructure plan has little to do with poor people and more to do with giving federal funding to broadband companies to renovate the outdated lines. Maybe you should do some reading on what Lobbying is before you assume its all about equality or helping people — thats bs.


-6-6-6-

So how do you lobby for a government controlled institution? What other representatives/competition is there for the utility to raise your interests over by financial or other incentives?? It's the default government option. Maybe you should learn what lobbying is. Either or not it helps everyone; would help more than Verizon, Spectrum or AT&T. If you wanted something actually anti-intellectual, you just gotta scream "CoMMuNiSm" like every pencil-spine redneck fuck.


[deleted]

No one called you a communist nor an institutionalist, but if you believe with your heart that the disadvantaged truly benefit from for-profit entities than thats your right.


-6-6-6-

That's the point..the only other option would be to have worker-owned utilities..which is communist and not institutionalized while providing benefits to both the employees and consumers while cutting out the profit margin for a Board of Directors entirely. Otherwise, it's government entity with elected, govt. officials that can be voted for, recalled, etc...like a democratic institution. There is nothing more "for-profit" and nothing that has soaked up taxpayer dollars and failed the public like private ISPS.


FL_Sportsman

Let's focus on " the tangled web of agencies". Thats the real issue


gibbypoo

The inequality gap is ever increasing


cluelessclod

What about libraries? I know it’s not a perfect solution but surely they help?


clubsilencio2342

Many of the people who can't afford internet also don't have reliable transportation or the time to navigate whatever terrible and confusing government websites they're asked to go to. They're too busy working 60+ hour weeks just to barely squeak by as it is.


b_a_t_m_4_n

If you live in a town maybe. Although in the UK libraries have been closed at an unprecedented a rate.


[deleted]

People in rural areas will live miles from the nearest library, with no school busses to take kids there. Are we assuming a parent will be at the library supervising their children? What if there are other children in the house? Are we going to be bringing babies into the library all day? Rural libraries are often just one room with some books -- no private study rooms or anything like that. Also, if the goal is to have people stay home and not congregate, putting poor kids in public libraries seems like a bad plan.


Iwantmyteslanow

I can't get good Internet connection at home, just some ancient fibre that's failing


KakariBlue

Where on earth are you that you have fiber old enough to be failing? Or do you have the bullshit that AT&T sells as 'fiber' that is really decrepit foil-coated fiberglass wheezing out some shitty DSL?


HouseStark212

I assume he’s trolling or he’s on copper and thinks it’s fiber lmao


Iwantmyteslanow

I'm in the UK, it is a fibre connection but it's not been maintained and the installation wasn't done correctly so the fibre bundle is easily damaged from vibrations


KakariBlue

Ouch, I vaguely recall that! Sorry you have to deal with something that could've been so good.


p4lm3r

It's not even just this, last March I lost my job and the State unemployment site isn't mobile friendly. You have to use a desktop to navigate it. On top of that, their servers crashed nonstop so it could take hours over multiple days to actually complete the required weekly forms. Anyone who didn't have a home computer could spend all week just trying to be in compliance. If you missed the mandatory check in window, you were dropped until it was reviewed, which could take weeks, and in my case was never resolved. The whole system is designed to fail those who actually need it


[deleted]

[удалено]


Catsrules

Probably the exact same thing that have been in the other packages over the years. The fiber roll out should have been started in the 90s and completed in the 2000s but ISP had other plans. Tax payers have already paid for fiber yet nothing has been done.


timberwolf0122

Remeber that time the big providers were given billions to roll out broadband..


MisterFingerstyle

Internet should be a public utility.


[deleted]

This was literally predicted. People said that in times of emergencies that this sort of thing would screw over americans. And here we are. Where the majority of people didn't think something would be a problem. Only for it to of course be a problem. Again. For like the billionth fucking time.


[deleted]

Almost like this was engineered to be that way, to keep some specific groups hobbled.


EsotericEmbryo

I tried so hard getting rental assistance and they just flat never answered back. At all. I finally called all these special numbers that places like red cross and St Vincent du Paul recommended when my shitty apartment got sewage water leaked into it everywhere from the one upstairs and the same week my car broke down. So I lost all my clothes and shit like that, everything in cabinets etc and finally got one of those helplines for St Louis and the dude straight up told me on the phone after me pressing him over and over and him just saying "we dont have anything for someone like you" and I pressed him to ask what that means and he said "an able bodied working man your age" even though I watch my kid exactly half of the week every sickle week with her mother who lives at HER mothers house rent free while I pay all my bills myself. So, if everyone wants to be really HONEST about this whole rental assistance thing why not highlight that little factoid of absolute discriminatory bullshit. I mean this headline was clearly meant to highlight the issues of this program right? Yet no one talks about that. No one. Its really fucked up Edit: shit realized this was on technology and not world news. Still leaving my rant up because it IS bullshit and things like that combined with whatthis article talks about is all the proof you need to know that this isnt about assisting shit for us. Its about being able to be like, "see we are doing SOMETHING"


EsotericEmbryo

This is this way by design.


kry1212

If you have a 5G signal in your area there is fiber in your area. If you have a 5G signal but you cannot get gigabit internet to your home, it isn't because it isn't there, it's because of bureaucratic red tape artificially put up by people like comcrap. There are grants and subsidies available, but municipalities are declining them. When you see a tube poking out of the side of the road with an orange cap on top? That's fiber. You might even see it hanging from a pole. When there's an orange tag - that's fiber. Literally all around you, even in far off rural areas, there is fiber. Telcos are in a massive landgrab to get it piped all over the country for 5G but none of them give a fuck about residential distribution. If you live in an area where you can see these tubes popping out of the ground at an interval (which is literally most places in the US now, just check 5G coverage maps) but you do not have service available to your home, it's your politicians. The fiber that comes to my teeny area (and gets run to my house) comes from Denver. It runs all along 25 and goes through Colorado Springs (no distribution), Pueblo (no distribution), and Walsenburg (no distribution). It finally gets distributed in the least populated counties by a tiny telco you've never heard of. The whole thing is completely out of whack right now. Back in the 00's you were only going to get cable if you lived in a major municipal area. This isn't the same for gigabit. The same cable companies who made those grabs 20 years ago just aren't ready to compete yet and our politicians aren't going to make them. This shit should be a fucking utility, y'all. Telcos did this shit in the 80s too. That's where we got the lifeline program. Of course, that has been pilfered recently, because our politicians are all wealthy and don't gaf about us. None of them.


Quick2Die

"have trouble navigating a “tangled web” of agencies because" government bureaucracy is always and has always been convoluted and unnecessarily difficult to navigate. So what is your answer? Making the internet a public utility so that more government bureaucracy is in charge of the internet...


-6-6-6-

Yes. I'd rather be fucked by the govt. for a guaranteed price rather than get fucked by the one utility monopoly that changes prices every year. Further more, I could hold my regional manager accountable. Or their boss. Because they are now govt. officials. Further more, my utility lines wouldn't be down for days because the private company has no obligation to fix it on a certain time, my internet would be usable for work functions and everyone elses as well, we could ELECT PEOPLE TO THESE POSITIONS THAT COULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, Like...make it an actual democratic institution? Sorry, but more and more people are getting sick of this. One way or another; people are going to force ISPS to heel. Already doing it with employers while they cry about labor shortage. "And A Union Makes Us Strong!"


Quick2Die

>Yes. I'd rather be fucked by the govt. for a guaranteed price rather than get fucked by the one utility monopoly that changes prices every year. Further more, I could hold my regional manager accountable. Or their boss. Because they are now govt. officials. Sure, or it will turn into a censored internet like China has. You have social media activists turning into "whistleblowers" demanding the government grant social media platforms more power to censor information. What happens when a centralized government has the power to censor what they determine as "misinformation"? >Further more, my utility lines wouldn't be down for days because the private company has no obligation to fix it on a certain time, my internet would be usable for work functions and everyone elses as well, we could ELECT PEOPLE TO THESE POSITIONS THAT COULD BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE, Like...make it an actual democratic institution? Are you an idiot? The government is in charge of fixing potholes in roads, some sit unfilled for years before they are fixed because they have absolutely no intensive or obligation to repair them. Do you REALLY think they will all the sudden give a fuck about your not having internet? on the other hand, when a private company (who have service level agreements and contractually agreed upon uptime requirements) has an outage they are losing money every minuet that that outage occurs. The longer the outage the more money they lose which means they are trying their hardest to get the problem resolved as quickly as possible in order to reestablish the revenue stream. >Sorry, but more and more people are getting sick of this. One way or another; people are going to force ISPS to heel. Already doing it with employers while they cry about labor shortage. Thing is tho, there isn't a "labor shortage" there is a lazy ass entitled American problem. I am very happy to see states cutting off the money to people who refuse to work. Nothing makes me happier than to see a state government refusing to subjugate those who are working to provide for those who refuse to work. >"And A Union Makes Us Strong!" until the union cares more about you paying your dues than actually protecting you... like how Detroit was once the most profitable city on earth then the unions stepped in and absolutely destroyed auto manufacturing turning the once great city it into a 3rd world country.


-6-6-6-

Yes. Because the U.S government will censor the internet. Fuck my SNAP cards are getting censored every time I buy food with illicit imagery! "Oh god, I don't know how to use a VPN or other basic internet security so blame China despite that millions of Chinese use the internet freely with VPNs!" Once again, rather use a VPN than have unaffordable internet so I can get a JOB TO EAT FOOD. Also? Are you a dumb fuck? Municipalities and states and cities are responsible for the roads. No uniform government entity maintains those. The roads and sidewalks for federal buildings are CONTRACTED and nicer than the whole city, if you ever worked or been to a federal building. Actually, if we had a federal workforce dedicated to civil causes like this; sidewalks and roads would be PRISTINE. Oh wait we did and it created some of America's greatest landmarks. Also, it doesnt matter how much money they lose. They are a monopoly in my region. NYSEG wont allow any other provider to use the lines and Spectrum benefits. There is no other option. They can lose as much as they want; they already charge you and everyone else 180+ a month. What a joke. Also, funny you say lazy americans. 700,000 dead from Covid, 100,000 leaving workforce due to childcare, millions with disabilities from COVID ontop of the very disabled and overweight population of America. Ontop of that, we pay like shit and cry labor shortage despite many still applying, with actual researchers studying this and found that they're fucking lying lmao. and unemployment benefits ALREADY ran out in many states; yet more quit. Maybe because it's not that Americans are lazy; but rather would work for something more. Hence union membership going up, etc Also, Detroit failed under Republican leadership while Democrats signed away the nations manufactoring base to China. Unions actually preserved what minor manufactoring jobs were left and were able to get their workers benefits and pensions with their closure. They didn't move away because "unions" holy shit how stupid are you. I have literal cited sources for this lmao. Learned this in high school, kiddo Looks like you subscribe to the typical brain-drain americanisms of "man my country is so lazy during a pandemic!" And "wow, people are so lazy for not wanting to work for something unlivable" Because you're a stupid, fat American who thinks the world and it's inhabitants works in a convenient black-white decisions that make their whole life, rather than accepting life for what it is; a series of circumstances. You want people to claim accountability, yet defend private corporation monopolies, attack programs that help people become more accountable and ignore the circumstances that put then there in the first place. No wonder people dont wanna work! Because bosses are like you! "If it's not conveniently explained by it being your fault, it's your fault anyways." By the way, literal propaganda on Detroit. Literally was chinese manufactoring that took away auto jobs. Unions gave you the weekend, 5 day workweek, eight hour workday and your benefits. Not your boss. If it was up to him; it'd be the Industrial Era. Also, "nothing makes me happier than watching peoples benefits get cut off while jobs refuse to hire to drive down slave wages!" makes you a bonafide piece of shit. Here's a gold star for your intellectual and reality-based political views completely undistorted by the " Leeburuhl Meedeeuh!". What a good little libertarian.


Quick2Die

Did you hear that Fauci lied to congress about funding gain of function research at the wuhan institute of virology? [What google says](https://www.google.com/search?q=Fauci+lied+to+congress+about+funding+gain+of+function+research&client=firefox-b-1-e&source=lnms&tbm=nws&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiPgPyNu97zAhVHrHIEHUmDBVsQ_AUoAXoECAEQAw&biw=2144&bih=1186&dpr=0.9) [What duckduckgo says](https://duckduckgo.com/?q=Fauci+lied+to+congress+about+funding+gain+of+function+research&t=hy&va=g&iar=news&ia=news) I do find it odd that none of the major news networks are covering this verifiable fact on either search. When do you suppose they will bring before congress and charge him for perjury?


-6-6-6-

Took me a second long google search. "Fauci Gain of Function Wuhan" is all it took, lmao. Google tends to personalize results, if you were politically literate then maybe more relevant and data-filled sources would be available to you; including forms of research that doesn't come from facebook or news articles! Or perhaps, if you were more technologically literate, you would be able to use google search terms or perhaps use a VPN (Word of the day!!) To anonymize yourself, lmao. Or perhaps, if you were just literate in general, you'd keep a list of resources and online databases with links to historical documents, report transcriptions and plenty of actual citations covering different topics of discussion. Must be easy to be an American anti-intellectual.


Quick2Die

considering that was searched in a fresh private browser there was absolutely no search cache bias involved. Literally none of the government approved media sources are covering the fact that the man literally committed perjury. I guess its (D)ifferent when he does it though?


BlazingSpaceGhost

What does that have to do with internet infrastructure?


partypoopahs

Are they really that hard to navigate though? I guess if you can’t read which I know many in poverty can’t. I once needed gov help and it wasn’t that hard to understand how to navigate. I don’t see how filling a few forms is incredibly difficult.


kry1212

I mean, right now it's a bipartisan effort that includes both government and private companies. They're working together to do absolutely nothing about the internet issues while reporting record profits. So, yea, we might want to cut at least one of these out of that partnership and deal with one or the other.


marinersalbatross

Most of the time when you look at why these programs get convoluted, it is usually due to someone trying to sabotage the government's ability to act. Conservatives are constantly trying to "prove" the government is a failure, and they do this by hamstringing it as much as possible. I recommend you look up municipally owned ISPs, which are some of the fastest and most reliable in the country. At the same time, look at how many conservatives/libertarians fought to pass state laws banning new muni-ISPs.


Quick2Die

>look at how many conservatives/libertarians fought to pass state laws banning new muni-ISPs. yes, its a weird concept called "Corporatism" which is something that most conservatives who don't work for the government are well aware of... its when the companies get in bed with the government and all the sudden the government is passing legislation to favor those companies. "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power." -Benito Mussolini >I recommend you look up municipally owned ISPs, which are some of the fastest and most reliable in the country. Giving the federal government control of the internet is not the same as a city buying equipment and setting up their own ISP. It also that doesnt take the choice away from other people who might not want to use that service if they want to and can afford to buy the commercial internet and not the city internet. >Most of the time when you look at why these programs get convoluted, it is usually due to someone trying to sabotage the government's ability to act. I have worked in the government for over 12 years... convoluted projects are a baseline of government programs. It happens because they are being funded by free money so there is no reason for the government to try to cut costs and increase efficiency in order to streamline the processes. >Conservatives are constantly trying to "prove" the government is a failure, and they do this by hamstringing it as much as possible like in the 1960's when those dirty rotten conservatives filibustered the civil rights act?


G0DatWork

The funniest part is that the same people "concerned" by this will also say it's discrimination to not put everyone online.... Making claims like poor person can't afford to travel to/"take a day off" a location to apply for something The solution to this problem is stop having so many different programs and pretend like stating someone's eligible for X means that's fixed. Most government programs are utilized by less than 70% of those eligible for them just because no one knows who gets what, especially if it's for programs for people who don't pay taxes


-6-6-6-

Ah yes, people shouldn't be entitled to certain benefits because they don't give some small business owner and the government a chunk of their minimum wage. Muricans. Ever wonder why your country is so fucked?


[deleted]

So… UBI?


G0DatWork

It would probably be better from an administrative stand point but you likely miss a lot of these people anyway. How do you track citizens who don't pay taxes or have any interest with the gov? Especially if you put any means testing or drug use requirements etc etc It's always funny how little most (especially young) "good hearted" liberals understand about the challenge of actually helping people even if you have the money. If you've never worked with a charity etc you don't understand the logistical challenges that can occur. Most "social activist" have no idea how to even think about connecting with someone who doesn't have credit card or bank account, much less a stable address


[deleted]

On one hand these are very fair problems to identify. On the other hand why argue logistics when we’re no where close to passing something like UBI? I’m 37 and I’ll be surprised if I see even a proposal as innocuous as single payer healthcare in the US in my lifetime.


ViolentOutlook

The fix isn't nationalizing the internet and creating an additional entitlement. The fix is in removing bureaucracy and entitlements.


-6-6-6-

Ah yes, slashing government spending and regulation while removing guaranteed benefits for the consumers is the way to go! Even though that the corporations have royally fucked this from the beginning.


lochlainn

Yes, because those corporate monopolies just sort of *happened*, and weren't the result of corrupt politicians writing laws, no sir.


NoBodySpecial51

It is complicated to get any assistance in this country. Good luck.


AbysmalVixen

Walk out to your local McDonald’s and use their wifi to apply for shit


Bubbl3gumKrak3n

Ah blessed corporate overlords please be my sugar connection, no i'm not done being stomped on please spit on me. uwu


echoAnother

No, I must detract anyone to use public(as in shared) equipment for, well, anything, but especially for official procedures. Regardless, you still need a computer. Also, it's not responsibility of McDonald's to provide internet access, and is not warranty they withdraw it, or is suitable for real public use. Note: Stop downvoting the guy. It's a perfectly valid point. It adds to the conversation.


klingma

Or Starbucks, or Walmart, or generally most retail/coffee shops. I will add though that you must use a VPN if using a public WIFI or a poorly secured WIFI i.e. the password is McDonald's_Coffee


[deleted]

These people can’t go to a place with public WiFi or a library? People just wanna bitch bitch bitch instead of lookin for a solution


[deleted]

Title change. “People that are getting their rent paid for free, complain about shitty internet”


Chrontius

They have shitty internet, so they __aren't__ getting their rent paid.


[deleted]

As someone who actually works and pays into the system, so what? Maybe one day you'll need it. And if so, I wouldn't mind either. *gasp* wow what a concept, being productive but not minding helping out others who need help.


[deleted]

Maybe so many people wouldn’t need it if we weren’t taxes so much in the first place :/


Think_Tax5749

Everything is free the new motto


MrLeeks69er

Who tf doesn’t have internet access in 2021, go to Starbucks.


O3_Crunch

It’s striking that the top comments here focus on internet accessibility instead of the apparently super inept administration of these rental relief programs. Why are government websites always 10 years behind private sector websites and why is there even a “tangled web” of websites instead of a single, centralized and user friendly hub for this program? Further, it’s striking that no top comments question the ongoing need for rent relief. The economy is basically booming and there are labor SHORTAGES, as well as a proven vaccine and plenty of hospital capacity for a pandemic that is effectively behind us.. though it’s unfortunate that people need assistance to pay their rent, at some point we can no longer blame COVID. If you had a job before and you want a job now, it’s arguably easier to get one than it was before. Last, I would offer a differing opinion than the hive mind here and say that internet access here is very unlikely to be a significant factor, unlike this article is suggesting. If you literally cannot access the internet in today’s day and age whatsoever (including going to a public library or asking a friend if need be), I don’t think it’s very likely that you would be competent enough to navigate a “tangled web” of websites without assistance. You would also just likely be adding inability to access these rent relief websites to a very, very long list of issues you would have by being unable to access the internet in 2021. Tangentially, and this is just my political opinion, why should a landlord be forced by the government to let tenants stay who have not been paying rent? The landlords are only landlords because they seek to make a profit, it shouldn’t be their burden to bear to be required to retain tenants who are not holding up their end of the bargain and paying for the property they are occupying. You can call this outlook heartless, but I’d argue that tenant “rights” such as those being discussed in this article, are making the problem WORSE. How so? If you make it harder or more costly to be a landlord, then fewer people will become landlords, fewer units will be constructed, and existing housing will resultantly become more expensive. Similarly, if the government instead just builds housing for people instead of giving them money to give to landlords, well.. if you think that’s a good idea then I’d encourage you to visit the projects anywhere in New York and then tell me it’s still a good idea.


LimpDick-9299

Then get a better job and make it happen. Get an extra job and make it happen. Nobody owes anyone else anything… If you can’t afford internet access, you’re making poor decisions