This may just bolster the researcher's point. That more than speed matters. What really matters it the performance of things on the application layer.
Also, behind all these NATs and blocked ports, the whole system is designed to not be used. Update it so everyone has strong connections with consistent bandwidth and low latency with IPv6 and perhaps we would see more possibilities with home internet use.
The upload is so pathetic because cable doesn't have symmetric bandwidth, you have to choose if you want more download channels or more upload channels. Most households don't need much upload, thus the ratio.
10mbps up is a minimum requirement for me though IMO.
Actually low upload bandwidth makes it harder to give 3rd parties data :P
Question, does AT&T fiber do fiber all the way to the home? Because I know one of my family members has their fiber offering, but they have serious bandwidth issues around normally busy hours - suggesting even with fiber they're over provisioned.
That said, AT&T has been selling their U-Verse FTTN (fiber to the node) service as "fiber home internet" for many years now. This is still based around DSL technologies but have fiber terminated much closer to the house than at a central office. If they're not on a Gigapower plan with a true optical network terminal inside their house, they probably don't actually have fiber.
I have 3 gbps of upload bandwidth at my house. (1 Comcast fiber line with 2 gbps symmetric, and one Verizon fiber line with 1 gbps symmetric.) I still host everything on One Drive because what the heck is the point of hosting your own servers as a consumer?
Even when I’m working from home and uploading large files to S3, it barely hits 100Mbps on a good day and the CLI automatically uses multiple streams to upload.
My VPN connection to our AWS network also rarely hits 100Mbps.