(Huge kudos for this project in general)

That said, I know our page isn't particularly lightweight anyway, I've been pretty focused on expansion efforts and haven't had much time to update & work on the site.

The backend is an azure appservice running on a single low-spec worker at the moment, wasn't planning on enabling scaling before doing a hard-launch but here we are.

If you used Ayva's fiber internet that video would download instantly =D

This nerdsniped me.

10 minutes later, and TIL: MPD is some sort of streamed-MP4 format; dash-mpd-cli is a xplatform Rust utility binary that can download this to an MP4, just given the MPD URL in dev tools.

However I keep getting 1.5 MB and 500 KB for the two videos, no matter window width. Chrome on macOS arm64, 16" MBP.

I'm curious what your environment is, if you don't mind sharing

(also, trivia for audience: last week I saw a tweet that palantir.com was doing over 100 MB worth of videos, and of course, A) they are B) they're poorly compressed, as much as 10x the bitrate they need to be.)

In the left panel, at the end of the video you'll see two important numbers: 28.5MB transferred, 40.7MB resources. "Transferred" is the (compressed) size of everything downloaded over the wire, 40.7MB is the ultimate (uncompressed) size of those.

I don't show it in that video but you can filter by "initiator" to see that the video files are the lion's share of this.

However, what is indeed slow is the initial load, and the lack of CDN for their static assets (css etc). When the HN effect started eating their resources, these static assets are what hurt their load time the most.

I dunno, (social) economics seem pretty sweet to me.

p.s self-plug: for our senior year capstone we are working on a secure/private home router firmware. Since you are in this space (tangentially) and local, I would love to chat with you

Does spending 30k per household connected make any sense?

The backup is great and shockingly resilient, nobody ever notices when it's in use and it'll usually still get us 300-600mbps of throughput on average. I'd say we typically see about 5-10% of the network revert to the backup radio during a major blizzard/hailstorm, otherwise everything seems to do quite well with normal snow & rain.

If it was already affordable to connect those houses there wouldn't have been a need for federal funding (not to say that I think tax dollars should be spent that way or that the program was run well).

That said, some ISPs have been known to collect hundreds of billions in taxpayer money on the promise of providing service only to just pocket that money without providing it anyway so for consumers, the real world impact of ISPs losing that money isn't so clear.

1: http://irregulators.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/BookofBro...

2: A more recent example from 2024: https://www.washingtonpolicy.org/publications/detail/the-42-...

Rural programs are really successful, until the money runs out. Cities get screwed though — I served on a commission with my city on this topic and the only feasible competition at scale, Verizon, refused to engage unless the city allowed them to pick individual blocks to deploy, which means no servitude for underrepresented people.

Nationwide telecomms did that with funds for fiber to the premises as well. I have no idea why these telecomms can take the money and just refuse to provide the services.

Over the lifetime of the structure (which can be upwards of 100 years)? Probably, just like the road, water, sewer, and electrical service to it. It’s another utility.

This was 20 years ago now, but the service was very reliable using Motorola radios. Relatively low bandwidth (4-6mbps, not bad for the day) but you could on a good day do that at a few miles out.

Side note, truly inspirational an something I would love to do in my little village in Ohio.

I was very pleased (before making an offer on the house) to find out about the cable internet as I have worked remote for 11 years. But the ISP is Spectrum, which has historically been a very shady business (like most Cable companies, ISP's).

I also run a Mofi router with a SIM card as a back up network.

Year 1: $52/mo Year 2: $74/mo Year 3: $98/mo

I have made no changes to my account.

This is why we need choices for ISP's.

Useful threads:

https://hn.algolia.com/?q=startyourownisp.com

It's not crazy, but it's longer time horizons than a business would ever care about.

That's not much different than what it costs to connect them to power grid or the water and sewage system.

God I wish that was me. Xfinity has a raised middle finger where the privacy policy should go.

Does long-range ubiquiti just work because you’re in the mountains?

I’m down in much-flatter Columbia South Carolina. Would a similar setup even be physically feasible?

We had a company burying fiber, but their installers almost blew up a gas line during 5 o’clock traffic and it really pissed city council off.

Also, this is a highly highly resource-dependent website. Consider a scale back. It'd be a funny tongue-in-cheek thing if you made it super encumbered and say "Our customers can load this page just fine!", but it's counter-intuitive for everyone else haha

The first information is fine (say, speed) but when I switch to latency the graph does not change (and BTW it's not readable on mobile)

Same for the coverage

Someone, somewhere says that they built something for a local community and suddenly Joe from Sydney and Marie from Bordeaux are on the site, discussing its tech stack and comparing the pricing in Wakanda.

Great site.

I see all your replies to people; have you considered that running a video on a website is just completely unnecessary?

Video background and scroll to animate stuff was cool...in 2013. I think people appreciate a faster loading page with up front information these days.

But you do you I guess! :)