broadband

ISPs angry about California law that lets renters opt out of forced payments

broadband, California, FCC, Policy / Kris Guyer / October 15, 2025

Rejecting opposition from the cable and real estate industries, California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill that aims to increase broadband competition in apartment buildings.

The new law taking effect on January 1 says landlords must let tenants “opt out of paying for any subscription from a third-party Internet service provider, such as through a bulk-billing arrangement, to provide service for wired Internet, cellular, or satellite service that is offered in connection with the tenancy.” It was approved by the state Assembly in a 75–0 vote in April, and by the Senate in a 30–7 vote last month.

“This is kind of like a first step in trying to give this industry an opportunity to just treat people fairly,” Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom, a Democratic lawmaker who authored the bill, told Ars last month. “It’s not super restrictive. We are not banning bulk billing. We’re not even limiting how much money the people can make. What we’re saying here with this bill is that if a tenant wants to opt out of the arrangement, they should be allowed to opt out.”

Ransom said lobby groups for Internet providers and real estate companies were “working really hard” to defeat the bill. The California Broadband & Video Association, which represents cable companies, called it “an anti-affordability bill masked as consumer protection.”

Complaining that property owners would have “to provide a refund to tenants who decline the Internet service provided through the building’s contract with a specific Internet service provider,” the cable group said the law “undermines the basis of the cost savings and will lead to bulk billing being phased out.”

State law fills gap in federal rules

Ransom argued that the bill would boost competition and said that “some of our support came from some of the smaller Internet service providers.”

ISPs angry about California law that lets renters opt out of forced payments Read More »

AOL announces September shutdown for dial-up Internet access

AOL, aol dial up, BBSes, broadband, dial-up, dial-up internet, digital divide, DSL, Internet access, internet history, internet infrastructure, Internet service providers, modem, modems, retrotech, rural internet, satellite Internet, Tech, telecommunications, yahoo / Mike M. / August 12, 2025

A screenshot of America Online's version 2.5 client in 1995. — A screenshot of America Online’s version 2.5 client in 1995.

The company’s cultural impact extended far beyond mere connectivity. AOL Instant Messenger introduced many users to real-time digital communication. Chat rooms created some of the Internet’s first social networks. The famous “You’ve Got Mail” notification became so iconic that it was a title for a 1998 romantic comedy. For better or worse, AOL keywords trained a generation to navigate the web through corporate-curated portals rather than open searching.

Over the years, Ars Technica documented numerous dial-up developments and disasters that plagued AOL users. In 2015, 83-year-old Ron Dorff received phone bills totaling $24,298.93 after his AOL modem started dialing a long-distance number instead of a local access point—a problem that had plagued users since at least 2002, when New York’s attorney general received more than 50 complaints about similar billing disasters.

The financial risks weren’t limited to technical mishaps: AOL itself contributed to user frustration by repeatedly adjusting its pricing strategy. In 2006, the company raised dial-up rates to $25.90 per month—the same price as broadband—in an attempt to push users toward faster connections. This followed years of subscriber losses that saw AOL’s user base fall over time as the company struggled with conflicting strategies that included launching a $9.95 Netscape-branded service in 2003 while maintaining premium pricing for its main offering.

The infrastructure that remains

AOL’s shutdown doesn’t mean dial-up is completely dead. Several niche providers like NetZero, Juno, and Dialup 4 Less continue to offer dial-up services, particularly in areas where it remains the only option. In the past, some maintained dial-up connections as a backup connection for emergencies, though many still use it for specific tasks that don’t require high bandwidth, like processing credit card payments.

The Public Switched Telephone Network that carries dial-up signals still exists, though telephone companies increasingly route calls through modern packet-switched networks rather than traditional circuit-switched systems. As long as traditional phone service exists, dial-up remains technically possible—just increasingly impractical as the web grows more demanding.

For AOL, maintaining dial-up service likely became more about serving a dwindling but dependent user base than generating meaningful revenue. The infrastructure requirements, customer support needs, and technical maintenance for such a legacy system eventually outweigh the benefits.

The September 30 shutdown date gives remaining dial-up users just over one month now to find alternative Internet access—a challenge for those in areas where alternatives don’t exist. Some may switch to satellite or cellular services despite higher costs. Others may lose Internet access entirely, further widening the digital divide that dial-up, for all its limitations, helped bridge for three decades.

This article was updated on August 12, 2025 at 10: 45 AM Eastern to add details about when AOL began offering true Internet access.

AOL announces September shutdown for dial-up Internet access Read More »

FCC Democrat: Trump admin is declaring “Mission Accomplished” on broadband

broadband, FCC, Policy / Kris Guyer / August 8, 2025

The Federal Communications Commission is hamstringing its upcoming review of broadband availability by ignoring the prices consumers must pay for Internet service, FCC Commissioner Anna Gomez said in a statement yesterday.

“Some point to existing law to argue that availability is the only metric Congress allows to measure broadband deployment success. But the law does not require this agency to view broadband availability with one eye closed and the other one half-open,” said Gomez, the only Democrat on the Republican-majority commission.

The FCC said on Tuesday that it voted to kick off the next annual review with a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) that “reorients the Commission’s approach to the Section 706 Report by adhering more closely to the plain language of the statute and takes a fresh look at this question of whether broadband ‘is being deployed to all Americans in a reasonable and timely fashion.'” That would remove affordability as a factor in the review.

In other federal broadband news this week, the Trump administration told states they will be shut out of the $42 billion Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) grant program if they set the rates that Internet service providers receiving subsidies are allowed to charge people with low incomes.

ISPs participating in BEAD are required by law to offer a “low-cost” plan, but the Trump administration is making sure that ISPs get to choose the price of the low-cost plan themselves. The Trump administration also made it easier for satellite providers like Starlink to get BEAD funds, which will reduce the number of homes that get fiber Internet service through the program.

“As the Commerce Department seeks to redefine the goals of the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program, one must wonder if this is a coordinated effort to roll out the ‘Mission Accomplished’ banner as millions remain without access to a fast, reliable, and affordable way to participate in the main aspects of modern life,” Gomez said, referring to both the BEAD changes and the FCC broadband analysis.

FCC Democrat: Trump admin is declaring “Mission Accomplished” on broadband Read More »

Starlink kept me connected to the Internet without fail—until Thursday

broadband, Space, spacex, starlink, Ukraine / Tim Belzer / July 26, 2025

A rare global interruption in the Starlink satellite Internet network knocked subscribers offline for more than two hours on Thursday, the longest widespread outage since SpaceX opened the service to consumers nearly five years ago.

The outage affected civilian and military users, creating an inconvenience for many but cutting off a critical lifeline for those who rely on Starlink for military operations, health care, and other applications.

Michael Nicolls, SpaceX’s vice president of Starlink engineering, wrote on X that the network outage lasted approximately 2.5 hours.

“The outage was due to failure of key internal software services that operate the core network,” Nicolls wrote. “We apologize for the temporary disruption in our service; we are deeply committed to providing a highly reliable network, and will fully root cause this issue and ensure it does not occur again.”

Elon Musk, SpaceX’s founder and CEO, apologized for the interruption in service on X: “Sorry for the outage. SpaceX will remedy root cause to ensure it doesn’t happen again.”

Effects big and small

The Ukrainian military has been at the leading edge of adopting Starlink services and adapting the system for use in war zones. Ukraine’s exploitation of Starlink connectivity has been instrumental in directing military operations, supporting battlefield communications, and controlling drones engaged in reconnaissance and offensive strikes.

The commander of Ukraine’s drone forces, Robert Brovdi, confirmed Thursday’s Starlink outage reached his country’s ongoing war with Russia.

“Starlink went down across the entire front,” Brovdi wrote on Telegram. “Combat operations were carried out without broadcasts; reconnaissance was carried out … using shock weapons.”

Brovdi added that the interruption in service illustrates the importance of having multiple paths of connectivity, especially for time-critical military operations. “This incident, which lasted 150 minutes in the war, points to bottlenecks,” he wrote, urging the military to diversify its means of communication and connectivity.

Oleksandr Dmitriev, the founder of a Ukrainian system that centralizes feeds from thousands of drone crews across the frontline, told Reuters the outage was an example of the shortcomings of relying on cloud services for military operations, particularly battlefield drone reconnaissance.

Starlink kept me connected to the Internet without fail—until Thursday Read More »

California backs down to Trump admin, won’t force ISPs to offer $15 broadband

broadband, Broadband Equity Access and Deployment, California, Policy, trump administration / Mike M. / July 23, 2025

“Complete farce”: State lawmaker says US threatened to block broadband funding.

Credit: Getty Images | Adrienne Bresnahan

A California lawmaker halted an effort to pass a law that would force Internet service providers to offer $15 monthly plans to people with low incomes.

Assemblymember Tasha Boerner proposed the state law a few months ago, modeling the bill on a law enforced by New York. It seemed that other states were free to impose cheap-broadband mandates because the Supreme Court rejected broadband industry challenges to the New York law twice.

Boerner, a Democrat who is chair of the Communications and Conveyance Committee, faced pressure from Internet service providers to change or drop the bill. She made some changes, for example lowering the $15 plan’s required download speeds from 100Mbps to 50Mbps and the required upload speeds from 20Mbps to 10Mbps.

But the bill was still working its way through the legislature when, according to Boerner, Trump administration officials told her office that California could lose access to $1.86 billion in Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) funds if it forces ISPs to offer low-cost service to people with low incomes.

That amount is California’s share of a $42.45 billion fund created by Congress to expand access to broadband service. The Trump administration has overhauled program rules, delaying the grants. One change is that states can’t tell ISPs what to charge for a low-cost plan.

The US law that created BEAD requires Internet providers receiving federal funds to offer at least one “low-cost broadband service option for eligible subscribers.” But in new guidance from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), the agency said it prohibits states “from explicitly or implicitly setting the LCSO [low-cost service option] rate a subgrantee must offer.”

State lawmaker describes “complete farce”

After losing their case against New York, Internet service providers asked the Trump administration to try to block state affordability laws. Although New York’s court win seemed to solidify states’ regulatory authority, the Trump administration could use its control over BEAD funding to pressure states into abandoning low-income requirements.

“When we introduced the bill, there were looming changes to the BEAD program,” Boerner told Ars. “There were hints at what would happen, but we had a call two weeks ago with NTIA that confirmed that… explicit or implicit rate regulation would disqualify a state for access.”

NTIA officials also made it clear that, even if California obtained the funding, ISPs could exempt themselves from the proposed low-cost broadband bill simply by applying for BEAD funding, Boerner told us. She said the NTIA’s new guidance is a “complete farce,” since ISPs are getting public money to build infrastructure and won’t have to commit to offering low-income plans at specific rates.

“All they would have to do to get exempted from AB 353 [the $15 broadband bill] would be to apply to the BEAD program,” she said. “Doesn’t matter if their application was valid, appropriate, granted, or they got public money at the end of the day and built the projects—the mere application for the BEAD program would exempt them from 353, if it didn’t jeopardize from $1.86 billion to begin with. And that was a tradeoff I was unwilling to make.”

We contacted the NTIA and asked whether Boerner’s description of the agency’s statements is accurate. We also asked the NTIA whether it believes that ISPs applying for BEAD funding are exempt from the New York law. The NTIA declined to comment today.

Boerner’s account of NTIA’s guidance raises the question of whether the NTIA is trying to pressure New York into changing or dropping its low-cost broadband law. New York Attorney General Letitia James defended the state law in court, but her office declined to comment when contacted by Ars. We also contacted Gov. Kathy Hochul’s office yesterday and did not receive a reply.

Boerner said the federal government’s action is “a flat-out giveaway to large corporations and denying Californians and Americans access to what’s essentially a basic service that everybody needs, which is access to broadband.”

Advocates: California shouldn’t back down

An earlier version of Boerner’s bill was approved by the state Assembly on June 4. Boerner said there were negotiations with the Senate on how to proceed, and the bill was amended. But last week, after the call with NTIA, Boerner decided not to move ahead with it this year.

“I held it in committee,” Boerner said.

Boerner’s top donors include Cox, AT&T, and Comcast. Boerner acknowledged that when the bill was still moving ahead, she lowered its required speeds based on discussions with cable companies and other ISPs. The 50/10Mbps threshold is “what I was able to negotiate for the $15. Most companies—especially cable, a lot of the big ISPs in California—already offer $30 for 100/20Mbps,” she said.

Advocacy groups say that California lawmakers shouldn’t bend to big ISPs or the NTIA. The BEAD law’s funding is for subsidizing new broadband deployments, while California’s proposed law would mainly apply to networks that have already been built, they point out.

Moreover, New York beat ISPs in court after nearly four years in litigation. The US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit upheld the law last year. While the Supreme Court never directly ruled on the law, it rejected telecom groups’ petitions to hear their challenge to the appeals court ruling.

“No matter which way you slice it, federal changes to the BEAD program do not override the Supreme Court’s affirmation of a state’s authority to establish a broadband affordability standard. They just don’t,” Arturo Juarez, policy advisor for the California Alliance for Digital Equity, told Ars.

Speed cut negotiated with ISPs “a non-starter for us”

California-based advocates were eager to push for a low-income requirement after the Supreme Court rejected efforts to overturn New York’s law. “When the chair decided to take up the measure, we were really excited,” Juarez said. “She obviously sits on a key committee to getting the bill out.”

But advocates were disturbed by changes made to the bill, including the speed cut.

“We learned that there had been some backdoor, closed negotiations with industry to lower the speed threshold… that, of course, was just a non-starter for us,” Juarez said. “I don’t think it makes any sense to say that we’re going to lock low-income folks into second-class connectivity or essentially offer them a broadband service that doesn’t even qualify as broadband because it’s not fast enough, it doesn’t even meet the federal definition of what broadband is.”

Natalie Gonzalez, director of Digital Equity Los Angeles, told Ars that the NTIA guidance shouldn’t apply to existing broadband networks. Having BEAD rules apply to “existing infrastructure and existing subscription packages is a pretty far reach,” she said. Gonzalez also said that no legal analysis or evidence has been made public to show how the BEAD guidance on affordable broadband would make the state legislation unviable.

“From our standpoint as advocates and being on the calls with the CPUC [California Public Utilities Commission], our interpretation is that the rules simply just eliminate any new builds” from having an affordable option as a requirement, she said.

ISP-based verification another sticking point

Juarez and Gonzalez said they were also concerned that Boerner’s proposal would let ISPs do the verification of people’s eligibility for low-income plans, instead of having the CPUC perform that task. “We didn’t want ISP-based verification… because we saw that just doesn’t work, and it really represents a major barrier to access,” Juarez said.

Gonzalez said that “parents aren’t going to work with fears of immigration raids,” and people are concerned that ISPs would share sensitive data with the federal government. She said, “there was real hesitation from community and advocates within our coalition of who is going to be housing this data, what are the transparency and accountability and reporting requirements within the ISPs to secure this type of information.”

The CPUC handles California’s Lifeline program, “and that existing state verification process has been vetted, has been around for a long time,” Juarez said. The Boerner bill stated that the CPUC would have no authority to implement or enforce the $15 mandate and would have given oversight authority to the state Department of Technology.

Juarez said that advocates also wanted the bill to have broader exemptions for small Internet service providers that serve rural areas and aren’t as profitable. Big ISPs can easily afford to offer low-cost plans, he said. He pointed to a California Public Advocates Office analysis that said, “a $15 low-income broadband requirement would potentially reduce the combined revenues of the four largest broadband providers—AT&T, Comcast, Cox, Charter/Spectrum—by less than one percent.”

“We know that these massive multi-billion dollar corporations, they really have enough subscribers and they have enough service area to accommodate this sort of plan,” Juarez said.

Lawmaker “looking for new and creative ideas”

Boerner defended her approach to the bill. While she initially proposed higher speeds, she said that the 50/10Mbps threshold is robust enough for a family doing tasks like telehealth, Zooms, online learning, and file syncing. “The use case I always have in my head is a single mom with three kids working two jobs. That mom needs to get online, apply for jobs, she needs her kids to all get online and do their homework at the same time. I’m a mom of two kids. Nobody needs their kids fighting over bandwidth,” she said.

Boerner said her goal with the bill “was always a basic broadband service” that would be affordable. “There are lots of packages out there in the world that people choose to get because they’re being price-conscious and they choose the service level that they need,” she said.

We asked Boerner about pressure from broadband industry lobbyists. She replied, “Most industries are against rate regulation. We were trying to find a balance between meeting a need, which I think all of the companies see that need, right? They see the need for low-income Californians to get online. They want to be part of the solution, and also almost every industry in California hates rate regulation. So how do you balance those interests?”

While Boerner’s bill won’t be moving forward this year, a different bill in the state Senate would encourage ISPs to offer cheap broadband by making them eligible for Lifeline subsidies if they sell 100/20Mbps service for $30 or less. Unlike Boerner’s bill, it wouldn’t force ISPs to offer low-cost plans.

Boerner criticized Congress for discontinuing a national program that made $30 discounts available to people with low incomes. Her attempt to impose a low-cost mandate in California began after the nationwide Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) was eliminated.

“We all saw the photos of kids outside of Taco Bell or McDonald’s using their Wi-Fi to turn in homework during the pandemic, and none of us wanted to go back to that,” she said.

The ACP’s $30 discounts temporarily alleviated that problem. The ACP “was one of our most successful public benefit programs, and it wasn’t partisan,” Boerner said. “It was rural, it was urban, it was Democrat, it was Republican… every American who was low-income benefited from the ACP. And I’d really like to appeal to Congress to act in the interests of Americans and find a way to have federal subsidies for low-income access to broadband again. I wouldn’t need to do state regulations if Congress had done their job.”

It isn’t clear whether Boerner will revive her attempt to impose a low-cost mandate. When asked about her future plans for broadband affordability legislation, she did not provide any specifics. “We’re always looking for new and creative ideas,” Boerner said.

Jon is a Senior IT Reporter for Ars Technica. He covers the telecom industry, Federal Communications Commission rulemakings, broadband consumer affairs, court cases, and government regulation of the tech industry.

California backs down to Trump admin, won’t force ISPs to offer $15 broadband Read More »

FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices

broadband, FCC, Policy / Paul Patrick / July 22, 2025

“As part of our return to following the plain language of section 706, we propose to abolish without replacement the long-term goal of 1,000/500Mbps established in the 2024 Report,” Carr’s plan said. “Not only is a long-term goal not mentioned in section 706, but maintaining such a goal risks skewing the market by unnecessarily potentially picking technological winners and losers.”

Fiber networks can already meet a 1,000/500Mbps standard, and the Biden administration generally prioritized fiber when it came to distributing grants to Internet providers. The Trump administration changed grant-giving procedures to distribute more funds to non-fiber providers such as Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite network.

Carr’s proposal alleged that the 1,000/500Mbps long-term goal would “appear to violate our obligation to conduct our analysis in a technologically neutral manner,” as it “may be unreasonably prejudicial to technologies such as satellite and fixed wireless that presently do not support such speeds.”

100/20Mbps standard appears to survive

When the 100/20Mbps standard was adopted last year, Carr alleged that “the 100/20Mbps requirement appears to be part and parcel of the Commission’s broader attempt to circumvent the statutory requirement of technological neutrality.” It appears the Carr FCC will nonetheless stick with 100/20Mbps for measuring availability of fixed broadband. But his plan would seek comment on that approach, suggesting a possibility that it could be changed.

“We propose to again focus our service availability discussion on fixed broadband at speeds of 100/20Mbps and seek comment on this proposal,” the plan said.

If any regulatory changes are spurred by Carr’s deployment inquiry, they would likely be to eliminate regulations instead of adding them. Carr has been pushing a “Delete, Delete, Delete” initiative to eliminate rules that he considers unnecessary, and his proposal asks for comment on broadband regulations that could be removed.

“Are there currently any regulatory barriers impeding broadband deployment, investment, expansion, competition, and technological innovation that the Commission should consider eliminating?” the call for comment asks.

FCC to eliminate gigabit speed goal and scrap analysis of broadband prices Read More »

Two guys hated using Comcast, so they built their own fiber ISP

broadband, Comcast, Features, Policy, primeone / Mike M. / July 14, 2025

Brothers-in-law use construction knowledge to compete against Comcast in Michigan.

Samuel Herman (left) and Alexander Baciu (right), founders of Prime-One. Credit: Prime-One

Samuel Herman and Alexander Baciu never liked using Comcast’s cable broadband. Now, the residents of Saline, Michigan, operate a fiber Internet service provider that competes against Comcast in their neighborhoods and has ambitions to expand.

“All throughout my life pretty much, I’ve had to deal with Xfinity’s bullcrap, them not being able to handle the speeds that we need,” Herman told Ars. “I lived in a house of 10. I have seven other brothers and sisters, and there’s 10 of us in total with my parents.”

With all those kids using the Internet for school and other needs, “it just doesn’t work out,” he said. Herman was particularly frustrated with Comcast upload speeds, which are much slower than the cable service’s download speeds.

“Many times we would have to call Comcast and let them know our bandwidth was slowing down… then they would say, ‘OK, we’ll refresh the system.’ So then it would work again for a week to two weeks, and then again we’d have the same issues,” he said.

Herman, now 25, got married in 2021 and started building his own house, and he tried to find another ISP to serve the property. He was familiar with local Internet service providers because he worked in construction for his father’s company, which contracts with ISPs to build their networks.

But no fiber ISP was looking to compete directly against Comcast where he lived, though Metronet and 123NET offer fiber elsewhere in the city, Herman said. He ended up paying Comcast $120 a month for gigabit download service with slower upload speeds. Baciu, who lives about a mile away from Herman, was also stuck with Comcast and was paying about the same amount for gigabit download speeds.

$80 for gigabit fiber, unlimited data

Herman said he was the chief operating officer of his father’s construction company and that he shifted the business “from doing just directional drilling to be a turnkey contractor for ISPs.” Baciu, Herman’s brother-in-law (having married Herman’s oldest sister), was the chief construction officer. Fueled by their knowledge of the business and their dislike of Comcast, they founded a fiber ISP called Prime-One.

Now, Herman is paying $80 a month to his own company for symmetrical gigabit service. Prime-One also offers 500Mbps for $75, 2Gbps for $95, and 5Gbps for $110. The first 30 days are free, and all plans have unlimited data and no contracts.

“We are 100 percent fiber optic,” Baciu told Ars. “Everything that we’re doing is all underground. We’re not doing aerial because we really want to protect the infrastructure and make sure we’re having a reliable connection.”

Each customer’s Optical Network Terminal (ONT) and other equipment is included in the service plan. Prime-One provides a modem and the ONT, plus a Wi-Fi router if the customer prefers not to use their own router. They don’t charge equipment or installation fees, Herman and Baciu said.

Prime-One began serving customers in January 2025, and Baciu said the network has been built to about 1,500 homes in Saline with about 75 miles of fiber installed. Prime-One intends to serve nearby towns as well, with the founders saying the plan is to serve 4,000 homes with the initial build and then expand further.

“This is our backyard”

Herman and Baciu’s main competition in their initial build area is Comcast and Frontier’s DSL service, they said. So far, they have built only to single-family homes, but they plan to serve multi-unit residential buildings, too.

“We started building in an area that’s a lot more rural,” where people have fewer options than in more densely populated areas, Herman said. “This is our home, this is our backyard, so we take this build very, very seriously.”

Baciu, who is 29, said that residents seem excited to have a new Internet option. “It’s so nice to see the excitement that they have. [People say], ‘Oh my gosh, I told everybody about Prime-One. My neighbor cannot wait for you guys to have them up, too. My boss is asking, my grandma’s asking.’ It’s a beautiful thing,” he said.

A bit more than 100 residents have bought service so far, they said. Herman said the company is looking to sign up about 30 percent of the homes in its network area to make a profit. “I feel fairly confident,” Herman said, noting the number of customers who signed up with the initial construction not even halfway finished.

Prime-One’s founders originally told us the 4,000-home build would be completed at the end of August, but Baciu indicated more recently that it will take longer than that. “We are working on sales for the next couple of months before continuing the rest of the build,” Baciu said.

Herman and Baciu started thinking about building an ISP about two years ago. With no fiber companies looking to compete against Comcast where they lived, “that was a trigger,” Baciu said. “We kept on talking. We’re like, hey, we’re doing this work for other people, why not?” In August 2024, they signed a contract with a firm that provides backhaul service, IP address assignments, and other key connectivity needs.

“We said, ‘let’s try to do it ourselves’”

ISPs generally want to build in areas where homes are built close together, requiring less fiber construction to serve more customers and make a bigger profit. Existing ISPs didn’t seem interested in expanding to where Herman and Baciu live, Herman said.

“We have spoken to all of these Internet service providers and asked them to come and service these areas. I knew that there was a dire need in this area and that everybody was sick of the Xfinity BS,” Herman said.

Having worked in construction for ISPs, they already had experience installing fiber lines and conduits.

A Prime-One installer working on a fiber build. Credit: Prime-One

“We said, ‘you know, what the hell, why not? Let’s try to do it ourselves,'” Herman said. “We know we can handle the construction, we know we can handle all that area. We need some assistance on the technical side. So we hired the right people to handle the technical side and to handle the OSS/BSS software and to manage our dark fiber. And from there, we’re here where we’re at, within six months. We have over a hundred customers on our network, and we’re still building.”

Before construction, the brothers-in-law met with Jared Mauch, a Michigan man who built a fiber-to-the-home Internet provider because he couldn’t get good broadband service from AT&T or Comcast. We wrote about Mauch in 2021, when he was providing service to about 30 rural homes, and again in 2022, when he was expanding to hundreds of more homes.

Though Herman and Baciu already knew how to install fiber, Mauch “gave us quite a lot of insight on what to do, how to build, and on the actual ISP side… he showed us the way he did things on the technical side for the ISP, what strategies he used and what products he used,” Herman said.

The brothers-in-law didn’t end up using all the networking products Mauch suggested “because we are building a much larger network than he was,” Herman said. They went mostly with Nokia products for equipment like the optical network terminal installed at customer homes, he said.

Local employees

Baciu said he was frustrated by Comcast customer support being mostly limited to online chats instead of phone support. Prime-One has 15 local employees, mostly installers and technicians, with other employees working in customer service and operations, Herman said.

Prime-One offers phone and chat support, and “many people want to be able to see someone face to face, which is very easy for us to do since we have people here locally,” Herman said.

Network uptime has been good so far, Herman and Baciu said. “The only outage we’ve had was due to severe weather that caused a massive outage” for multiple networks, Herman said. “Any time any customers are experiencing an outage, maybe because of a lawnmower that cut their service line or anything, we guarantee a two- to four-hour time to repair it. And on top of that, to promote the fact that we discourage outages and we are working our best to fix them, we offer $5 back for every hour that they’re out of service.”

Comcast seems to have noticed, Herman said. “They’ve been calling our clients nonstop to try to come back to their service, offer them discounted rates for a five-year contract and so on,” he said.

Comcast touts upgrades, new unlimited data option

A Comcast spokesperson told Ars that “we have upgraded our network in this area and offer multi-gig speeds there, and across Michigan, as part of our national upgrade that has been rolling out.”

Meanwhile, Comcast’s controversial data caps are being phased out. With Comcast increasingly concerned about customer losses, it recently overhauled its offerings with four plans that come with unlimited data. The Comcast data caps aren’t quite dead yet because customers with caps have to switch to a new plan to get unlimited data.

Comcast told us that customers in Saline “have access to our latest plans with simple and predictable all-in pricing that includes unlimited data, Wi-Fi equipment, a line of Xfinity Mobile, and the option for a one or five-year price guarantee.”

Prime-One’s arrival on the scene caught some local people’s attention in a Reddit thread. One person who said they signed up for Prime-One wrote, “I’m honestly very impressed with the service overall. Comcast was charging me for every little thing on my account and the bill always found a way to get higher than expected, especially going over my data cap. Prime-One has no data caps and the bill has been the same since I first joined, not to mention they offer the first month free… I’m happy to see a company come out here and give us a better option.”

Comcast is facing competition from more than just Prime-One. The City of Saline government recently said there’s been an uptick in fiber construction in the city by Metronet and Frontier. Baciu said those builds don’t appear to be in the areas that Prime-One is serving. “To our knowledge, both Frontier and MetroNet have recently begun building in adjacent areas near our current footprint, but not within the zones we’re serving directly,” he said.

While Prime-One is a small ISP, Herman said the company’s expansion ambitions are bigger than he can reveal just now. “We have plans that we cannot disclose at this moment, but we do have a plan to expand,” he said.

Two guys hated using Comcast, so they built their own fiber ISP Read More »

Ted Cruz bill: States that regulate AI will be cut out of $42B broadband fund

AI, broadband, Policy, ted cruz / Mike M. / June 7, 2025

BEAD changes: No fiber preference, no low-cost mandate

The BEAD program is separately undergoing an overhaul because Republicans don’t like how it was administered by Democrats. The Biden administration spent about three years developing rules and procedures for BEAD and then evaluating plans submitted by each US state and territory, but the Trump administration has delayed grants while it rewrites the rules.

While Biden’s Commerce Department decided to prioritize the building of fiber networks, Republicans have pushed for a “tech-neutral approach” that would benefit cable companies, fixed wireless providers, and Elon Musk’s Starlink satellite service.

Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick previewed changes in March, and today he announced more details of the overhaul that will eliminate the fiber preference and various requirements imposed on states. One notable but unsurprising change is that the Trump administration won’t let states require grant recipients to offer low-cost Internet plans at specific rates to people with low incomes.

The National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) “will refuse to accept any low-cost service option proposed in a [state or territory’s] Final Proposal that attempts to impose a specific rate level (i.e., dollar amount),” the Trump administration said. Instead, ISPs receiving subsidies will be able to continue offering “their existing, market driven low-cost plans to meet the statutory low-cost requirement.”

The Benton Institute for Broadband & Society criticized the overhaul, saying that the Trump administration is investing in the cheapest broadband infrastructure instead of the best. “Fiber-based broadband networks will last longer, provide better, more reliable service, and scale to meet communities’ ever-growing connectivity needs,” the advocacy group said. “NTIA’s new guidance is shortsighted and will undermine economic development in rural America for decades to come.”

The Trump administration’s overhaul drew praise from cable lobby group NCTA-The Internet & Television Association, whose members will find it easier to obtain subsidies. “We welcome changes to the BEAD program that will make the program more efficient and eliminate onerous requirements, which add unnecessary costs that impede broadband deployment efforts,” NCTA said. “These updates are welcome improvements that will make it easier for providers to build faster, especially in hard-to-reach communities, without being bogged down by red tape.”

Ted Cruz bill: States that regulate AI will be cut out of $42B broadband fund Read More »

We finally know a little more about Amazon’s super-secret satellites

Amazon, atlas v, broadband, Internet, kuiper, launch, Science, Space, united launch alliance / Kris Guyer / May 3, 2025

“Elon thinks we can do the job with cheaper and simpler satellites, sooner,” a source told Reuters at the time of Badyal’s dismissal. Earlier in 2018, SpaceX launched a pair of prototype cube-shaped Internet satellites for demonstrations in orbit. Then, less than a year after firing Badyal, Musk’s company launched the first full stack of Starlink satellites, debuting the now-standard flat-panel design.

In a post Friday on LinkedIn, Badyal wrote the Kuiper satellites have had “an entirely nominal start” to their mission. “We’re just over 72 hours into our first full-scale Kuiper mission, and the adrenaline is still high.”

The Starlink and Kuiper constellations use laser inter-satellite links to relay Internet signals from node-to-node across their networks. Starlink broadcasts consumer broadband in Ku-band frequencies, while Kuiper will use Ka-band.

Ultimately, SpaceX’s simplified Starlink deployment architecture has fewer parts and eliminates the need for a carrier structure. This allows SpaceX to devote a higher share of the rocket’s mass and volume capacity to the Starlink satellites themselves, replacing dead weight with revenue-earning capability. The dispenser architecture used by Amazon is a more conventional design, and gives satellite engineers more flexibility in designing their spacecraft. It also allows satellites to spread out faster in orbit.

Others involved in the broadband megaconstellation rush have copied SpaceX’s architecture.

China’s Qianfan, or Thousand Sails, satellites have a “standardized and modular” flat-panel design that “meets the needs of stacking multiple satellites with one rocket,” according to the company managing the constellation. While Chinese officials haven’t released any photos of the satellites, which could eventually number more than 14,000, this sounds a lot like the design of SpaceX’s Starlink satellites.

Another piece of information released by United Launch Alliance helps us arrive at an estimate of the mass of each Kuiper satellite. The collection of 27 satellites that launched earlier this week added up to be the heaviest payload ever flown on ULA’s Atlas V rocket. ULA said the total payload the Atlas V delivered to orbit was about 34,000 pounds, equivalent to roughly 15.4 metric tons.

It wasn’t clear whether this number accounted for the satellite dispenser, which likely weighed somewhere in the range of 1,000 to 2,000 pounds at launch. This would put the mass of each Kuiper satellite somewhere between 1,185 and 1,259 pounds (537 and 571 kilograms).

This is not far off the estimated mass of SpaceX’s most recent iteration of Starlink satellites, a version known as V2 Mini Optimized. SpaceX’s Falcon 9 rocket has launched up to 28 of these flat-packed satellites on a single launch.

We finally know a little more about Amazon’s super-secret satellites Read More »

Supreme Court rejects ISPs again in latest bid to kill NY’s $15 broadband law

broadband, New York Affordable Broadband Act, Policy / Mike M. / February 26, 2025

“To broadband ISPs and their friends complaining about the New York law and proposed Massachusetts laws mandating a low-income broadband service offering: you asked for complete deregulation at the federal level and you got it. This is the consequence,” Gigi Sohn, executive director of the American Association for Public Broadband, wrote today.

Sohn called on ISPs to join with consumer advocates to support a federal law guaranteeing “limited but meaningful oversight over broadband… Until then, my colleagues and I will go to every state that will listen to ensure that Internet users are protected from anticompetitive and anticonsumer practices.”

AT&T exit has limited significance

AT&T’s partial exit from New York likely doesn’t indicate that there will be a rush of ISPs fleeing the state. AT&T still offers mobile service in New York, and it only offered the 5G home Internet plan in 10 cities and towns. AT&T would have a much more difficult time pulling home Internet service out of the 21 states where it offers wired Internet service.

The lobby groups that tried to overturn the state law are the New York State Telecommunications Association, CTIA-The Wireless Association, NTCA-The Rural Broadband Association, USTelecom, ACA Connects-America’s Communications Association, and the Satellite Broadcasting and Communications Association.

The groups convinced a federal judge to block the New York law in 2021, but that judge’s ruling was reversed by the US Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in April 2024. Appeals court judges rejected arguments that the New York law was preempted by federal rules, saying that “a federal agency cannot exclude states from regulating in an area where the agency itself lacks regulatory authority.”

The FCC lacked authority over broadband after the 2017 repeal of net neutrality rules and related common-carrier regulations. The Biden-era FCC voted to restore that authority but lost a court case brought by USTelecom and the Ohio Telecom Association.

Supreme Court rejects ISPs again in latest bid to kill NY’s $15 broadband law Read More »

ISPs say their “excellent customer service” is why users don’t switch providers

broadband, federal communications commission, Policy / Tim Belzer / November 26, 2024

Broadband customer service

ISPs tell FCC that mistreated users would switch to one of their many other options.

Credit: Getty Images | Thamrongpat Theerathammakorn

Lobby groups for Internet service providers claim that ISPs’ customer service is so good already that the government shouldn’t consider any new regulations to mandate improvements. They also claim ISPs face so much competition that market forces require providers to treat their customers well or lose them to competitors.

Cable lobby group NCTA-The Internet & Television Association told the Federal Communications Commission in a filing that “providing high-quality products and services and a positive customer experience is a competitive necessity in today’s robust communications marketplace. To attract and retain customers, NCTA’s cable operator members continuously strive to ensure that the customer support they provide is effective and user-friendly. Given these strong marketplace imperatives, new regulations that would micromanage providers’ customer service operations are unnecessary.”

Lobby groups filed comments in response to an FCC review of customer service that was announced last month, before the presidential election. While the FCC’s current Democratic leadership is interested in regulating customer service practices, the Republicans who will soon take over opposed the inquiry.

USTelecom, which represents telcos such as AT&T and Verizon, said that “the competitive broadband marketplace leaves providers of broadband and other communications services no choice but to provide their customers with not only high-quality broadband, but also high-quality customer service.”

“If a provider fails to efficiently resolve an issue, they risk losing not only that customer—and not just for the one service, but potentially for all of the bundled services offered to that customer—but also any prospective customers that come across a negative review online. Because of this, broadband providers know that their success is dependent upon providing and maintaining excellent customer service,” USTelecom wrote.

While the FCC Notice of Inquiry said that providers should “offer live customer service representative support by phone within a reasonable timeframe,” USTelecom’s filing touted the customer service abilities of AI chatbots. “AI chat agents will only get better at addressing customers’ needs more quickly over time—and if providers fail to provide the customer service and engagement options that their customers expect and fail to resolve their customers’ concerns, they may soon find that the consumer is no longer a customer, having switched to another competitive offering,” the lobby group said.

Say what?

The lobby groups’ description may surprise the many Internet users suffering from little competition and poor customer service, such as CenturyLink users who had to go without service for over a month because of the ISP’s failure to fix outages. The FCC received very different takes on the state of ISP customer service from regulators in California and Oregon.

The Mt. Hood Cable Regulatory Commission in northwest Oregon, where Comcast is the dominant provider, told the FCC that local residents complain about automated customer service representatives; spending hours on hold while attempting to navigate automated voice systems; billing problems including “getting charged after cancelling service, unexpected price increases, and being charged for equipment that was returned,” and service not being restored quickly after outages.

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) told the FCC that it performed a recent analysis finding “that only a fraction of California households enjoy access to a highly competitive market for [broadband Internet service], with only 26 percent of households having a choice between two or more broadband providers utilizing either cable modem or fiber optic technologies.” The California agency said the result “suggests that competitive forces alone are insufficient to guarantee service quality for customers who depend upon these services.”

CPUC said its current rulemaking efforts for California “will establish standards for service outages, repair response time, and access to live representatives.” The agency told the FCC that if it adopts new customer service rules for the whole US, it should “permit state and local governments to set customer service standards that exceed the adopted standards.”

People with disabilities need more help, groups say

The FCC also received a filing from several advocacy groups focused on accessibility for people with disabilities. The groups asked for rules “establishing baseline standards to ensure high-quality DVC [direct video calling for American Sign Language users] across providers, requiring accommodations for consumers returning rental equipment, and ensuring accessible cancellation processes.” The groups said that “providers should be required to maintain dedicated, well-trained accessibility teams that are easily reachable via accessible communication channels, including ASL support.”

“We strongly caution against relying solely on emerging AI technologies without mandating live customer service support,” the groups said.

The FCC’s Notice of Inquiry on customer service was approved 3–2 in a party-line vote on October 10. FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel said that hundreds of thousands of customers file complaints each year “because they have run into issues cancelling their service, are saddled with unexpected charges, are upset by unexplained outages, and are frustrated with billing issues they have not been able to resolve on their own. Many describe being stuck in ‘doom loops’ that make it difficult to get a real person on the line to help with service that needs repair or to address charges they believe are a mistake.”

If the FCC leadership wasn’t changing hands, the Notice of Inquiry could be the first step toward a rulemaking. “We cannot ignore these complaints, especially not when we know that it is possible to do better… We want to help improve the customer experience, understand what tools we have to do so, and what gaps there may be in the law that prevent consumers from having the ability to resolve routine problems quickly, simply, and easily,” Rosenworcel said.

ISPs have a friend in Trump admin

But the proceeding won’t go any further under incoming Chairman Brendan Carr, a Republican chosen by President-elect Donald Trump. Carr dissented from the Notice of Inquiry, saying that the potential actions explored by the FCC exceed its authority and that the topic should be handled instead by the Federal Trade Commission.

Carr said the FCC should work instead on “freeing up spectrum and eliminating regulatory barriers to deployment” and that the Notice of Inquiry is part of “the Biden-Harris Administration’s efforts to deflect attention away from the necessary course correction.”

Carr has made it clear that he is interested in regulating broadcast media and social networks more than the telecom companies the FCC traditionally focuses on. Carr wrote a chapter for the conservative Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 in which he criticized the FCC for “impos[ing] heavy-handed regulation rather than relying on competition and market forces to produce optimal outcomes.”

With Carr at the helm, ISPs are likely to get what they’re asking for: No new regulations and elimination of at least some current rules. “Rather than saddling communications providers with unnecessary, unlawful, and potentially harmful regulation, the Commission should encourage the pro-consumer benefits of competition by reducing the regulatory burdens and disparities that are currently unfairly skewing the marketplace,” the NCTA told the FCC, arguing that cable companies face more onerous regulations than other communications providers.

ISPs say their “excellent customer service” is why users don’t switch providers Read More »

Finally, a sign of life for Europe’s sovereign satellite Internet constellation

broadband, Commercial space, European Union, Internet, iris2, Science, Space / Paul Patrick / November 2, 2024

The estimated 10 billion-plus euro cost of the IRIS² program is nearly double initial projections. European officials also confirmed the sovereign satellite network won’t begin providing services to European government customers until 2030, three years later than the commission’s previous schedule.

Rising costs and negotiations over how much governments and industry will pay for IRIS² have delayed the contract award for months. Earlier this year, press reports indicated the SpaceRISE consortium’s proposal for IRIS² carried a total cost of 12 billion euros. It seems the price has been negotiated down, at least by a small percentage, to around 10 billion.

It’s also worth noting that the EU will this year only commit to funding the IRIS² initiative through the end 0f 2027, when the commission’s seven-year budget framework expires. It’s almost certain the IRIS² program will require more government funding beyond 2027, but the European Commission said it will decide later on additional money, subject to the “availability of the corresponding appropriations.”

In April, a senior official in the German government, the EU’s top contributor, called for the IRIS² program to be restarted. Robert Habeck, Germany’s economy minister, called the proposed 12 billion euro price “exorbitant” and said the entire project was “ill-conceived” in a letter to Thierry Breton, then the EU’s internal market commissioner, according to a report in the Germany newspaper Handelsblatt.

Habeck’s protest obviously did not stop the European Commission from awarding the contract to the SpaceRISE consortium. The 12-year agreement will cover the development, deployment, and operation of at least 290 satellites placed at different orbital altitudes, from low-Earth orbit up to medium-Earth orbit several thousand miles above the planet.

At these higher altitudes, IRIS² can cover the globe with fewer satellites than Starlink, OneWeb, or Amazon Kuiper.

The commission’s press release said the agreement, the largest space contract in EU history, should be signed in December. At that time, “legal and financial commitment from both parties will be taken,” the commission said.

The SpaceRISE consortium includes numerous European satellite and telecom companies, including spacecraft manufacturers Airbus Defence and Space, Thales Alenia Space, and OHB. Telespazio, Deutsche Telekom, Orange, Hisdesat, and Thales SIX are also part of the industry group.

These companies are typically competitors in the satellite and telecom markets, as are SES, Eutelsat, and Hispasat, which head up the consortium. Getting all the contractors and subcontractors to play nice with one another will be no small feat.

Finally, a sign of life for Europe’s sovereign satellite Internet constellation Read More »