[HN Gopher] After defending false data, Comcast admits another F...
___________________________________________________________________
After defending false data, Comcast admits another FCC broadband
map mistake
Author : mfiguiere
Score : 130 points
Date : 2023-02-23 17:24 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (arstechnica.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (arstechnica.com)
| bastard_op wrote:
| Sounds like a perfect job for ChatGPT to verify every address
| against their website.
| jt2190 wrote:
| ChatGPT is not the right tech for the job, but I don't think
| you should be downvoted for suggesting that verifying the
| database entries is something that can be facilitated with as
| bit of tech.
| db48x wrote:
| There is one small problem with that. submitting a challenge
| requires agreeing to this statement: I
| hereby certify, under penalty of perjury, that:
| I have examined the information contained in this challenge
| and, to the best of my actual knowledge, information, and
| belief, all statements of fact contained in it are true and
| correct. If an individual, I own or reside at the
| location being challenged or am otherwise authorized to
| request broadband service there. I acknowledge
| that the information provided in this form will be shared
| with the provider selected above for the sole purpose of
| reviewing and resolving the challenge. If this
| form is being submitted by the representative of a company,
| organization, government, or other entity, then the
| certification must be signed by an authorized officer or
| signatory of the entity (e.g., corporate officer, managing
| partner, sole proprietor, or government official) who has
| reason to be aware of the truth and correctness of the
| information submitted herein. [] The entry of my name
| above constitutes my electronic signature to this
| certification. Persons making willful false statements in
| this form can be punished by fine or imprisonment under 18
| U.S.C. SS 1001.
|
| I'd like to see the news stories about them fining or
| imprisoning someone for correcting their database at an
| address where they don't actually live, but I bet it
| discourages a lot of people from doing it.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| check out "No WAN's Land: Mapping US Broadband Coverage
| with Millions of Address Queries to ISPs" by David Major,
| Ross Texiera and Johnathan Mayer at Princeton University.
|
| great praise to this team at Princeton for going for the
| gusto in this in-your-face excoriation of lumbering greed-
| heads at Comcast and friends. more like this, please.
| PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
| What is it in that quoted text that would discourage you
| from submitting a challenge?
| db48x wrote:
| I didn't say that it would deter me, only that it
| probably deters a lot of people, but this line in
| particular: If an individual, I own or
| reside at the location being challenged or am otherwise
| authorized to request broadband service there.
|
| Basically, they only want people to challenge the service
| where they actually live, not at every address in their
| neighborhood.
| justinclift wrote:
| Personally, I'm kind of surprised someone hasn't set up a
| website for people to submit their address for contesting
| bogus FCC data.
|
| Having a bunch of affected people working together gives
| extra power as a group, and potentially allows more ways
| forward legally (more clout, maybe class action, etc).
| uoaei wrote:
| You mean the website everyone on this thread is talking
| about?
|
| https://broadbandmap.fcc.gov/home
| uoaei wrote:
| The second sentence...
| barkerja wrote:
| There's a national (fiber) ISP that claims -- according to the
| FCC broadband map -- to provide 1000/1000 to my entire village.
| According to their own website, the closest address they service
| is about 25 miles away.
|
| I submitted an FCC challenge about 2 months ago, and just today
| received notice "provider subject to your challenge has conceded
| the challenge and is required to submit a correction for the
| challenged location in the online portal within 30 days".
|
| I am curious what benefit a provider receives from feeding this
| false information to the FCC? Is it funding (grants, etc.)
| related? It will also be interesting to see if the updated data
| will only reflect for my specific address, or if it will also
| apply to other areas around me that aren't serviced by the
| provider.
|
| If it's the former, I will be submitting more challenges.
| gurchik wrote:
| > Correcting false data is important because the map will be
| used to determine which parts of the US are eligible for $42.45
| billion in federal grants to expand broadband availability
| starting in mid-2023.
|
| > One of those investigations began after our report about an
| Ohio ISP called Jefferson County Cable, which admitted to lying
| to the FCC about the size of its network in an attempt to block
| funding to rivals.
| barkerja wrote:
| Thanks for that info! I live in a somewhat rural area
| (central NY) and my Town is in the process of rolling out its
| own municipal broadband. They are relying on grants to
| continue the rollout of service.
|
| I've brought this to their attention, a neighboring ISP has
| fed false data and it could potentially be harming their
| options for funding.
| aidenn0 wrote:
| In that context, it's really hard not to see this as
| intentional. Be aware that only the challenged address must
| be fixed, so (after the 2 week update period) you might
| want to randomly sample some addresses in town to challenge
| as well.
| gurchik wrote:
| Consider reaching out to Jon Brodkin (journalist who has
| been covering this for Ars Technica). It sounds like
| Comcast was just going to get away with this until Brodkin
| shined a spotlight on it.
| [deleted]
| theFletch wrote:
| I work for a rural ISP and would say that the data can be
| pretty overwhelming. We rely on the counties for GIS
| information regarding addresses, which in a lot of cases is not
| great (especially rural). For the big guys, and maybe even some
| smaller, there is a certain amount "land grabbing" for
| protection from competition. When you ask what the benefit
| would be, it could simply be the equivalent of a rounding error
| too. Maybe someone drew the polygon too big. It certainly
| matters though when it comes to not only the availability of
| funds to each state, but also the application process for
| certain areas.
| grecy wrote:
| > _I am curious what benefit a provider receives from feeding
| this false information to the FCC?_
|
| I think the more interesting question is what are the penalties
| for a provider submitting this false information to the FCC.
|
| Clearly there's a LOT of money up for grabs, and it seems like
| whoever tells the biggest lies will get the lions share. With
| no consequences for lying, you'd be stupid not to.
| mistrial9 wrote:
| > you'd be stupid not to
|
| people wonder why businessmen and thieves are sometimes
| indistinguishable
| aidenn0 wrote:
| This is pretty bad considering Comcast's website itself is a bit
| optimistic as to which addresses have service.
| chrismeller wrote:
| I do find it odd that Ars never mentions anything about the
| website search tool not being 100% accurate. It's not until a
| human looks at it that they can really confirm or deny
| availability.
| olliej wrote:
| "mistake" - this is clearly intentional and deliberately
| fraudulently misrepresenting their coverage in federal documents.
| Once or twice is a mistake, but a consistent pattern of over
| claiming coverage in a way that cuts funding to support
| competition is clearly intentional.
| polygamous_bat wrote:
| Unfortunately, if there's anything Americans fear more than
| losing basic rights to to pad corporate profits, it's
| "government overreach" in the form of holding such a
| corporations liable.
| coleca wrote:
| Is there any decent tool to determine areas where symmetric
| broadband coverage in a given area is available? From what I can
| see on the FCC map it just using their "broadband" definition of
| 25down/3up which is akin to dial-up for most of the folks on HN.
| db48x wrote:
| There's a little icon to the right of "Broadband" that you can
| click on to change the search criteria. It wasn't obvious to me
| at first either.
| CyberDildonics wrote:
| Just another very profitable mistake.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| AT&T is bad at this too. In fact, they lobbied to have a bunch of
| 1.5mbps DSL results removed from average speeds because "the
| technology is obsolete", and the FCC obliged.
|
| Now, to be clear, they are still SELLING said technology, and in
| many cases they present it to you as their only option, but
| y'know, since it's obsolete, we'll just not count it.
| causi wrote:
| I only found out my dad was being scammed into paying them $35
| a month for that 1.5mbit service when I was helping him
| troubleshoot why his Alexa kept losing connectivity.
| beauzero wrote:
| I wish you could provide a "reverse" challenge. In Carroll
| County, GA Spectrum/Charter provide or are rolling out
| underground rural fiber. CarrollEMC/Crossbeam are rolling out "on
| the power pole" fiber in the same rural area. Neither show up on
| the map to the extent they are provided. It would significantly
| help my neighbors to know these are options.
| dzdt wrote:
| Is it an option? Probably they are running the fiber but only
| for long haul and 5g wireless backhaul and wont actually sell
| you a connection to it.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-02-23 23:01 UTC)