tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
clubs: | Re: I seriously doubt in remote parts of the United States (the areas without ANY, or with very slow broadband) this would be a likelihood.
Also, there's the issue of caps that some of the above nations (Canada) has... | |
|
 openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA | Re: I seriously doubt So people will be transmitting large medical files from their residences? | |
|
 |
tiger72
SexaT duorP
Premium
join:2001-03-28
Saint Louis, MO
clubs: | Re: I seriously doubt Local physicians in remote areas who need assistance would likely transfer large medical files to specialists and hospitals far away. Real-time patient monitoring requires a high throughput also. Think remote Montana, Wyoming, Maine, Alaska, etc. | |
|
| | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: I seriously doubt I would hope they would do so encrypted. Also, I would imagine the hospitals they work for would have fiber. Then again, if they are TRULY remote and like a field doctor, they would have to rely on what's available. Still, I think MOST palces, MAYBE Alaska aside, would have adequate medical facilities within a 20 or 30 mile drive. Therefore, this might be a far stretch but it isn't implausible. | |
|
Frontier user
@frontiernet.net
| It appears some of our ISPs hope to be on the forefront of low caps while not providing anywhere near the speed of the carriers you mentioned in other countries.
Take Frontier for example.
»Frontier Imposes 5 GB Cap For DSL | |
|
Froggy
@bell.ca | Canada also has speed throttling and traffic shaping. Canada snubbed their nose at net neutrality. | |
|
|
|
|
