JUN 8, 2020 3:55 PM
Edit: for the article. The HN comments are much more recent.
What is this website that has users that have been signed up for a quarter of a century?
Other than the obvious fuckery Is this because they don’t have enough capacity to supply all their connections and would that be something that every ISP could do?
In a way it makes sense that a business might not want to build to full capacity if most users would tend not to use that. Cox would be the first to realize that they need to upgrade their infrastructure.
I’m not sure if this happens at all in Canada?
The same thing happened to me years ago. When I complained the response was that “unlimited” meant “we don’t block access to the content we provide you”, not “you can expect to download speeds at maximum throughput”. This was many years ago before net neutrality was a buzzword, and it was common for certain carriers (like cellular) to serve up alternative sites or isp’s prevent you from running quake servers or such. Not sure if that’s the excuse now, but it’s vague for a reason so they can exercise that wordplay.
