148
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2025
148 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
7227 readers
184 users here now
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I hate to be the one defending companies but this time I have to align with the ISPs.
As a "fake fiber" client myself, there's virtually no performance difference between the two. But "fiber" has become such a marketing slang that most clients wouldn't signup for an ISP if they don't sell "fiber".
Alternatively the ISP would have to replace perfectly functional infrastructures purely for the sake of marketing, resulting in waste.
There's two arguments I have against your comment:
In my country it's illegal to call it full fiber if it isn't 100% fiber. That's why the ISPs found a loophole and now call it "dynamic fiber". They made me waste a shit ton of time troubleshooting why I wasn't getting the fiber speeds, only to see a tiny print on the bottom of some KB article that said "only for those who have full fiber" after which I had to waste even more time trying to figure out what type of connection I had. I literally bought the "fiber" pack.
Doesn't matter. The ISP lied to their customer. If there's no difference they're free to advertise it as a better way, but lying is fucking scummy, and it's all about saving money for them. They don't give a shit about the wasted materials.
When the 'last mile' is copper, the ISPs almost always use xDSL for the data delivery.
The extra equipment increases latency, decreases reliability, and often precludes high upload speeds.
I'm on true full fibre, and I get 500/500mbps, with the option of going to 2.5Gbps. A friend of mine on the same ISP who is limited to 'fibre to the neighborhood' maxes out at 300mbps down, 90 up.
The difference is packet loss.