151–160 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't live in SF proper but why can't Google Fiber come to the surrounding areas? There are plenty of communities that could use this outside of SF.
They're going to San Jose, that's a start. It's likely they'll spread around a bit from there with time. At a minimum, having Google Fiber that close should spur San Francisco locals to get louder about the problem.
I can't wait for this in LA. I'm currently paying $115 per month for 1Mbps/10Mbps for Time Warner "business class" internet-only service. My company does visual effects work, so I actually have to drive my video files home on a USB drive to upload them since my home connection is 20Mbps/200Mbps for $50 per month. The internet monopoly situation in the US is terrible for businesses here.
I feel your pain. TWC business class is the scam of the century. TWC really has colluded the market here. In our current office, we basically have no choice: TWC or Verizon DSL at 3Mbps for $100+ per month. What is this? 1997? Their service from what I hear is shoddy, crappy customer service and of course they really take you for what's it worth when it comes to the bandwidth / cost ratio -- because they can apparent…
edit: B b blah. 2,400 seconds.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your first question is fair. Your second question brings politics into here for no reason.
sorry, I was trying to put it in perspective...
Congrats to the residents of Chicago and LA for having the local government leadership to work with Google. I wish I could say the same for NYC where I live. Despite the fact that Google owns one of the largest office buildings in the city where many engineers and other staff work, there is no Google fiber here. Sadly, the mayor seems more focused attempting to slow the growth of Uber until the residents vociferously…
Meh, from what I've read in this thread, the bandwidth situation is much worse in LA. At least you can get 300/20 here in NYC for under $100/month. Plus, while the competition is usually limited to a single provider (TWC or Verizon), there are some smaller ones like RCN.
As a Chicagoan I'm excited, but also worried it will lead to the incarceration of multiple public officials and a raw deal for the city, somehow.
At least you can get shit built in Chicago by paying people off. In places like Baltimore, you're just not allowed to build anything.
As a Chicagoan I'm excited, but also worried it will lead to the incarceration of multiple public officials and a raw deal for the city, somehow.
I have another, related thought:
These two cities are, without any reasonable dispute, centers of horrific police brutality.
Will Google Fiber drive down internet prices (and promote more public wifi) so as to cause a measurable increase in reporting and uploading of high-definition video of incidents?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel your pain. TWC business class is the scam of the century. TWC really has colluded the market here. In our current office, we basically have no choice: TWC or Verizon DSL at 3Mbps for $100+ per month. What is this? 1997? Their service from what I hear is shoddy, crappy customer service and of course they really take you for what's it worth when it comes to the bandwidth / cost ratio -- because they can apparent…
So literally 300 seconds worth of internet for $100/month? edit: B b blah. 2,400 seconds.
Honestly, if your options are share a 3Mbit connection with a few people or have a fast connection limited to 21Gbytes / month I could see paying for that out of pocket.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your first question is fair. Your second question brings politics into here for no reason.
I think it's entirely reasonable to discuss tech priorities and national infrastructure spending. Maybe 'war' has a particularly political dimension, but so does Social Security, welfare programs, national health care, manned space exploration, etc. Basically any large spending program is going to be a political, almost by definition.