Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

blog.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 223 posts

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#141

Post by loup-vaillant »

Denzel wrote: post #120
orthecreedence wrote: post #4

I want to say this first: I love net neutrality and I support it 100%. That said, I think this battle will go on forever until either - We have a decentralized network anybody can plug into without ISPs (mesh net) or - Cities build their own fiber infrastructure (or 4G towers for rural areas) and rent it out to companies. Cable/DSL become a thing of the past, and you connect via radio/public wifi/direct fiber. This b…

I'm very interested in and motivated towards mounting an attempt to bring munifiber to my city. Few things have been bugging me though: what vectors do ISPs compete upon if they're all renting the lines at the same price? How would one be able to offer similar speeds for less price? What value-added services can they possibly offer? If someone could answer these questions for me, then I'll have the ammo to seriously…

There is a cost to those lines, and a minimum cost you can lease them to the ISP. This applies to ISP owned lines just the same. The difference is, you cannot hide that cost, and everyone is put at the same level. (Make sure there is no bulk offer, though, that would kill small ISPs).

Now the ISPs can compete on customer support, neutrality, even privacy. Good support costs money, so that will be a consumer choice. Same goes for TV multicast streaming. The rest however cannot beat full neutrality and zero spying, so I expect they'll become the new baseline.

And if it means all the big ISP die a painful death (with unemployment and all), then good riddance: they will be replaced by smaller ISPs, that will take their customers and their employees. And the resulting competition should end most monopoly practices.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#142

Post by rayiner »

amq wrote: post #134
durandal1 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My Stockholm apartment had multiple ISPs competing for service over fiber laid down by a state-owned company. In 2007 this meant symmetric 100mbit for about $30/month.

Hard to believe, but in a certain Eastern European country, ISPs are competing to lay fiber to private houses, for about $10/month. That's a symmetric 100mbit to Frankfurt.

Rich European countries like Germany and France meanwhile have even less fiber than the US. I suspect much cheaper labor and less anti-development regulation is the big factor in the low cost of fiber in Eastern Europe.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#143

Post by [deleted] »

amq wrote: post #134
durandal1 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My Stockholm apartment had multiple ISPs competing for service over fiber laid down by a state-owned company. In 2007 this meant symmetric 100mbit for about $30/month.

Hard to believe, but in a certain Eastern European country, ISPs are competing to lay fiber to private houses, for about $10/month. That's a symmetric 100mbit to Frankfurt.

[deleted]

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#144

Post by loup-vaillant »

mnm1 wrote: post #98
orthecreedence wrote: post #4

I want to say this first: I love net neutrality and I support it 100%. That said, I think this battle will go on forever until either - We have a decentralized network anybody can plug into without ISPs (mesh net) or - Cities build their own fiber infrastructure (or 4G towers for rural areas) and rent it out to companies. Cable/DSL become a thing of the past, and you connect via radio/public wifi/direct fiber. This b…

Totally agree, but I think the problem is that in America, a monopoly or duopoly is considered a viable market. What we need are anti trust laws and prosecutions. I guess that doesn't bring as much money in as letting everyone get ripped off. But hey, "let the market decide," said no one with a brain.

No, you need a physical and legal infrastructure that will make a viable market. Basically, have the state own the cable, and rent those to ISPs by the bandwidth. No bulk order, and no minimum area or minimum bandwidth, so players of any size (including 10 nerds who want to be their own ISP) can enter the market.

Then you can "let the market decide". It will decide very differently from what it is currently deciding.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#145

Post by kpil »

rayiner wrote: post #139
kpil wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit: I ranted about publicly operated trains in Sweden on a post regarding US . Sorry for that. Since I spent 10 minutes ranting on the subject, I will keep the rest of the rant... The only subway in Sweden that I am aware of is operated by some company from Hong Kong. Or was that last week and we have now someone else? The "free market" muppets have had free reins for 30 years, and they are still claiming that an i…

I mean subways and trains in the US are publicly owned and operated.

Oops, Sorry.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#146

Post by justforFranz »

jbob2000 wrote: post #46

Where is Apple, Google, and Microsoft on this? What is the point of an app store if I can't use 90% of the apps on it? What the hell do I need a search engine for if there's only a few websites to search? Why would I use a computer at all if it just serves me the same garbage as a TV? Come on, throw your fucking weight around, jesus...

All three companies are sitting on so much cash right now that if the ISPs do destroy net neutrality and start to poop on their customers, any of those three could sweep in and murder the ISPs right in the face.

I'm not saying it will happen, but if the ISPs present a large enough target of themselves, there's a lot of investment dollars waiting on the sidelines to pick their pockets.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#147

Post by justforFranz »

mabbo wrote: post #11

> During the public comment period in 2015, nearly 4 million citizens wrote to the FCC, many of them demanding strong net neutrality protections. We all need to show the same commitment again. Do they really think that the people who made these decisions did it because they care about the best interest of the people?

Well look, for the time being, it's a democracy. It could be called off due to lack of interest however. The FACT of low voter participation while politicians are bashing us in the face is at least as big a problem as being bashed in the face.

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#148

Post by Denzel »

loup-vaillant wrote: post #141
Denzel wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very interested in and motivated towards mounting an attempt to bring munifiber to my city. Few things have been bugging me though: what vectors do ISPs compete upon if they're all renting the lines at the same price? How would one be able to offer similar speeds for less price? What value-added services can they possibly offer? If someone could answer these questions for me, then I'll have the ammo to seriously…

There is a cost to those lines, and a minimum cost you can lease them to the ISP. This applies to ISP owned lines just the same. The difference is, you cannot hide that cost, and everyone is put at the same level. (Make sure there is no bulk offer, though, that would kill small ISPs). Now the ISPs can compete on customer support, neutrality, even privacy. Good support costs money, so that will be a consumer choice. S…

Awesome, thank you, that makes a lot of sense.

So basically, if I understand correctly, it looks like munifiber would reorganize high-capex costs (buying and laying the fiber) into more manageable opex costs (renting/leasing capacity on fiber laid by the city). And furthermore, by normalizing the playing field, many different ISPs can sprout up and compete effectively on what truly matters to the end-user. That would be fantastic.

If anyone is interested in talking about bringing a FTTH (fiber-to-the-home) project to fruition in a 100k+ pop. city in PA, then please reach out to me. Email in profile.

Now is absolutely the right time. We're in the midst of a mayoral election and over the past 7 years or so we've had a NIZ (neighborhood improvement zone) granted by the state with the specific intention of doing things like this. Two stadiums have been built, along with numerous office and residential buildings, and we're in the process of building an entire waterfront. Laying munifiber would fit right in, and I think we could get it done with a proper proposal.

I need some added expertise around estimating the cost of the project. I can build and write the proposal effectively with a solid cost basis. If anyone can help me with estimating the buildout cost of a muni-FTTH network, then once again please email me (email in profile). Thank you!

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#149

Post by justifier »

orthecreedence wrote: post #4

I want to say this first: I love net neutrality and I support it 100%. That said, I think this battle will go on forever until either - We have a decentralized network anybody can plug into without ISPs (mesh net) or - Cities build their own fiber infrastructure (or 4G towers for rural areas) and rent it out to companies. Cable/DSL become a thing of the past, and you connect via radio/public wifi/direct fiber. This b…

How does a mesh net cross oceans?

Re: One Step Closer to a Closed Internet

#150

Post by justifier »

ianai wrote: post #8
orthecreedence wrote: post #4

I want to say this first: I love net neutrality and I support it 100%. That said, I think this battle will go on forever until either - We have a decentralized network anybody can plug into without ISPs (mesh net) or - Cities build their own fiber infrastructure (or 4G towers for rural areas) and rent it out to companies. Cable/DSL become a thing of the past, and you connect via radio/public wifi/direct fiber. This b…

I, for one, vote for the mesh network.

How does a mesh network cross oceans?
Post reply on HN