[<UPDATED POLL>] How far would you move for phenomenally better internet?

[Gestalt]

We're talking gigabyte per second wireless on a bullet train, downloading 8K movie today and getting it yesterday, would you pack up and stake claim on the "new world"

 

~*-_-*-_-*~

 

NOTICE: Poll and purpose of the thread have been modified since its creation. Please contribute accordingly.

Edited February 8, 2014 by Lord Shen

[OneUnder]

 

While faster internet would be great, I have adequate speeds and generally enjoy the country in which I reside.

[The Shaper]

Some how I feel like changing countries, citizenship, education, friends, family, and careers isn't a fair exchange for redundantly fast internet speed. I like high-speed internet, don't get me wrong, but I can't complain about my current situation enough to want to change countries.

 

Unless of course you are starting some weird scientific utopia which would have all the technological wonders I could ever ask for.

[Redeemer]

Highly country dependent, but networking is still important to me.

[Dr. Orange]

Yes. 

 

'Nuff said. 

[Sarita]

I have other reasons for switching countries, the 20x faster fiber-optic internet speeds are just a super bonus.

[Gestalt]

Given that it would be stupid to make another topic, I have updated the poll with an additional question and thus modified the thread's general angle a bit.

 

Please contribute.

 

I am a robot lady. Bask in my glory.

[The Shaper]

In terms of your latest question, I base my moving decisions on a number of factors, the speed of my internet is not among them and I don't see how someones life could be so simplistic that theyd move anywhere for no other reason than to experience amazing bandwidth.

[Gestalt]

experience amazing bandwidth.

We are considering, revolutionary bandwidth. There is a difference.

 

 

I don't see how someones life could be so simplistic that theyd move anywhere for no other reason than to experience revolutionary bandwidth.

 

I know that internet is not the only factor that determines where one might live. Nonetheless, it can be a factor and the topic is how heavy that factor weighs with each of us.

~*-_-*-_-*~

 

For me and others, it is most certainly a critical factor. So big in fact that I would not move to a place if I deemed the price and speed to be unfavorable.

 

Take verion FiOS that offers a great internet bundle at 500Mbps down at $300/month. Meanwhile, a company in Vermont offers twice the speed of that @ 1Gbps up and down no data caps (one costumer managed using 3TB a month) at a mere $48/month and revolutions like Google Fiber will offer 1Gbps for $70/month.

 

Why on earth would I stand for company's like AT&T selling ~700Kbps for $20/month when the world around me is changing? 

 

 

why is there so much space here

[Fedora]

Highly country dependent. Like HIGHLY. 
 
For example, I would never move to Russia for faster internet. Besides the cold weather, the country has an insane amount of hackers. People are given warnings not to bring any critical data and devices with them to the Olympics even!
 
Imagine where someone as your information and just grabs it all. Always taking, you're never sure what they will do that info....

At least Google tells you up front they're doing it!
*Ba-dum TISH!* "Get off the stage!"

[Harlow]

(Insert long political rant about job oportunities, better light and water services, dumbing of the nation i'm residing, and how it all works better in the US overall)

 

Internet is an added bonus. If the country functions well, that will also be running nicely.

[Scourge]

Due to the fact that A: I still live at home, and B: my father works from home and does a lot of video conferencing, my connection here is pretty stellar, despite the fact that every once in a while, COX decides to be a bunch of COCKS and break for a few days -_-

[Ori]

Yes, yes and just yes.

 

*insert rant about questionable national ethics to comedic levels*

*eventual ban*

 

Anything is better than paying over $65 (USD) a month for crapsack-level rubbish that is highly unstable and is as slow as less than one megabit.

Need more reason for me not to show up on TF2 nights? >.>

[Icy]

Down here Comcast is the only real choice, and the cheapest thing you can get is nearly $100 per month for Internet + TV (extremely basic cable, nothing over channel 25 or so) and there's no option to just have Internet and no TV. The TV cost is what makes it so much for that cheap option.

The more expensive options that actually have decent cable TV included are nearly $150 and up to almost $200..

 

The speeds we get through Ethernet are about 57Mbps down and 10Mbps up, which is amazing considering it's not advertised that way.

 

We consistently have bad problems with Comcast, and if you don't have a perfect router, every little snag in the connection from Comcast requires multiple restarts of the router. It used to be horrible but it's gotten better recently.

 

I can't stand it but at least the speed is nice enough.

The price is insane, the service is meh, the bandwidth cap (300GBs + $10 for every 50GB over) is meh if you're a large family that does a lot of downloading & streaming, buuuuut, I am pretty content.

 

However, I also don't like where I live. Never have. I have a desire to move to a much different part of the US and live there. Not sure when that will happen, but when choosing that certain place, Internet service would be one of the first things to look over, as it's a pretty vital thing to have these days.

[Steve]

There are many factors to consider, a lot of them are outside anything you could do. For example, even if you have 100gbps internet connection, 99.9% of the servers and ftp/streaming services have constrains, not even Steam would let you download games at insane speeds. You will be certainly capped. Yes, multitasking is a valid reason to get a lot of internet speed.

 

Also consider the fact that everything  you do throws read/write instructions to your storage device. Your download speed will be capped by your hard drive speed. I'm pretty sure Google Fiber has this issue with users using your conventional Sata III Hard Drives. Having a SSD would be required. 

 

 

 

 

Why on earth would I stand for company's like AT&T selling ~700Kbps for $20/month when the world around me is changing? 

 

Because they take advantage of the fact that a lot of people live on the boonies and other companies do not have coverage. It's simple, when a service can't reach a designated geographic location and there's just one company that can reach, then you can raise your prices or be smartass with the service you are offering. Even on the US, there are a lot of people still living far away from places that might have the infrastructure.

 

 

Yes, I would basically have good internet coverage as primary decision to move to another place, within my current city. I don't think your overall "life basics" would allow you to simply say "hey let's move to x country for their amazing internet"  

[Snys93]

I'm really not worried about it. Maybe a little when the router conks out but not enough to leave the country, much less the state. Besides who would leave the state or country just over bandwidth? That will be really awkward when someone asks you for the first time.

 

 

 

 

 

Random someone: "So, why did you decide to come all the way out here?"

 

You: "My internet connection was crappy where I lived."

 

Random someone: "Oh I thought it was a job or something like that. So the internet?"

 

You: "Yeah the internet."

 

Random someone: "oh okay." *back away slowly*

 

 

 

 

 

(ficitional scenario, ofcourse )

[Gestalt]

For example, even if you have 100gbps internet connection, 99.9% of the servers and ftp/streaming services have constrains, not even Steam would let you download games at insane speeds. You will be certainly capped. Yes, multitasking is a valid reason to get a lot of internet speed.

 

Well, at lest the constraints would be realized. And you are right, for a true networking revolution everyone would have to roll up their sleeves. Though I doubt the server side would do any pushing until the client side is capable.

 

Also consider the fact that everything  you do throws read/write instructions to your storage device. Your download speed will be capped by your hard drive speed. I'm pretty sure Google Fiber has this issue with users using your conventional Sata III Hard Drives. Having a SSD would be required.

 

Then we all had five thousand dollar enterprise tier ssd's:

2,800 MB/s Max Read/Write..

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227772

(kidding, mostly)

 

Because they take advantage of the fact that a lot of people live on the boonies and other companies do not have coverage. It's simple, when a service can't reach a designated geographic location and there's just one company that can reach, then you can raise your prices or be smartass with the service you are offering.

 

I can get with the premium of accessibility to a certain degree. And again, some people just want a trustworthy line. But it still seems like they could pump a little more throughput through whatever conduit they may be using, for that price...as if a full 1Mbps is evil or something. Throttles, throttles everywhere.

 

~*-_-*-_-*~

I haven't gotten well acquainted with my ISP but they did offer a speed increase (from 36/2Mbps to 52/5Mbps) to existing costumers at no additional cost. +1 to Metrocast.

[Steve]

 

 

I can get with the premium of accessibility to a certain degree. And again, some people just want a trustworthy line. But it still seems like they could pump a little more throughput through whatever conduit they may be using, for that price...as if a full 1Mbps is evil or something. Throttles, throttles everywhere.

 

 

Companies won't be investing in new lines unless the gain is greater than the cost spent. That's why this issue exists. 

[Gestalt]

^Eeyup

 

My vote, btw:

 

1) Highly country dependent

2) Stupid High

3) This before moving country

Edited February 10, 2014 by Lord Shen

[amazinglife]

Right now I currently live in a remote area of New York, so my only choices of internet are either Dial Up & Satellite. I currently have Exede, and with it I get 20 download (which is more then they advertise), and 3 upload. It is not terrible, but living in a house with 5 people, you cannot do all that much with a 15gb monthly limit.

 

Time Warner Cable is in my area, but because I live 2.3 miles from their closet service, they won't extend here unless we pay them $62,000 to run their service here. xD

 

I don't know about leaving the country to get faster internet, but I do want to move to the part of my town that does have Time Warner (mostly to get out of my parent house though). xP

[Sarita]

Companies won't be investing in new lines unless the gain is greater than the cost spent. That's why this issue exists. 

 

Steve and I have first hand experience with companies treating their customers like crap because they can't be bothered with a line. AT&T does this to my parents. They're the only ones that will come out to us, so they treat us like ass and try to make us spend more money to fix an "issue" with a solution that is a solution to SOMETHING, just not our problem.