It's just talk. Google has parts of three small cities wired. Google has never done a big city, or an entire city. Sonic already has parts of San Francisco hooked up with gigabit fiber.[1]
Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
171–180 of 223 posts
Re: Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
#172Five years ago, I honestly thought everyone in major cities would be using encrypted gigabit mesh networks by now. Maybe in 2020.
There's some promising mesh projects. Stay strong!
Re: Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
#173Earlier 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.
You're off by a factor of 8, bandwidth is typically measured in bits per second while data is typically measured in bytes. Also, saying that they only have DATA_CAP / BANDWIDTH amount of time to use the internet is disingenuous at best, the only time that you're using 100% of the available bandwidth for any sustained amount of time is when downloading a large file. 21 GBs isn't a ton of data but that can easily last someone a month if they're just using it for web browsing for business purposes only. Online backup is out of the question but for just email and web browsing that data cap isn't too big of a deal.
Re: Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
#174I 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.
Strange—in New York I pay TWC $83 a month for 300/30. Edit: 300/20
We are right in the center of Midtown NYC and TWC business class is $350 for 100/10. Other option is Verizon DSL at $90!
Re: Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
#175I'm on Sonic 1 gigabit fiber in Sebastopol 50 miles north of San Francisco, one of the reasons we moved north from the city. Sonic are excellent and are building out in San Francisco in small areas.
I used to live in Santa Rosa (working for Agilent). Do you work remotely or have a job up there? The North Bay tech scene isn't as good as you think it would be.
consultant, wfh
Re: Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
#176> Yes, San Francisco has been skipped again and I’m going to go cry into my slow internet from Comcast. I seriously still cannot get over how funny this is. SF pitches itself as the centre of the tech universe, and yet, it still hasn't "disrupted" its own crappy broadband infrastructure. (Much less the rest of the country's!) I'm sure there's many good reasons for Google passing them over, but that doesn't keep it fr…
Sonic.net will likely beat Google in building out gigabit in SF. This megathread has been following their progress in the Sunset (and soon the Richmond) since 2013: https://forums.sonic.net/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=1085 According to the CEO, though some of the issues have been related to permitting/bureaucracy, they have also had some contractor-related setbacks as well.
There is no likely; their truck just ran fiber in front my house in sunset. $40/mo for gigabit.
Re: Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
We[0] make SAAS for developers, so we expect a lot more of our customers to be in the bay. There’s also a deeper market for technical talent and VC capital. LA has a lot of lifestyle perks (beach, forests, desert, great weather, more daylight in the summer, more sqft of office/apartments per $). I imagine that the bars and restaurants in LA are better (but I don’t know). So mostly, The Bay is where to ecosystem is. […
Nice "Invalid security certificate" popup you have there?
You don't say? . . . That's going on the list.
Re: Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
#178Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I agree with your point but framing things as war instead of defense spending is leading and politically inclined.
I think most people distinguish between "baseline defense spending" and "elective war" in a general sense without either term feeling overtly political.
But if we were to take the set of [Korea, Cuba, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Yugoslavia, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq] and try to decide in particular which are which, we would quickly find that to be political.
So in America, the political-ness of "war" tends to shift with the times. Right now, those times are 'interesting'.
Re: Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm from chicago too, so I guess I do understand by that logic. I'm not even sure what we're arguing about, in fact
You are both "from Chicago"? Meaning, the city itself or the suburbs. Big difference. The suburbs are not Chicago.
I live in CHICAGO.
Re: Chicago and Los Angeles Are Next Up for Google Fiber
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was referring to the pro-growth/housing measures that won in the municipal election last month. Though it's hardly disruption, as it is "finally dealing with."
The housing measures that help reduce the housing supply by allowing apartments and condos to serve as short-term AirBNB rentals for non-residents? Certainly, it's pro-growth (for AirBNB), but I don't see how it's pro-housing for anyone else. Unless you expect to live week to week in AirBNB rentals.
The city got a blank check for 300M to make the problem go away (but it won't because they dont want to be NYC, so they limit supply, but then demand with money exceeds so prices go up)