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

The beginning of the end for copper wire

potsandpansbyccg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 193 posts

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#111

Post by alsetmusic »

chmaynard wrote: post #103

The FCC chairman appears to be listening only to corporate lobbyists. I consider this to be a dereliction of duty, but of course Trump thinks otherwise. As long as Trump is in power, the rules are going to keep changing in favor of corporate interests. Those of us who oppose the new regime at the FCC need to start thinking about what economic tools we can use to discourage telecoms from taking advantage of FCC rule c…

White House petition:

https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/we-people-call-res...

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#112

Post by abalashov »

cavisne wrote: post #96
maxerickson wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They segment their reporting, page 18 of this document shows their consumer segment: https://investors.att.com/~/media/Files/A/ATT-IR/financial-r... They had as many people on Uverse video (which I guess is fiber) in 2014 as they had on copper phone lines in 2016.

Uverse seems to be mostly fiber to the node, ie it’s still copper into the home

In about the same way that cable modem service is mostly fiber. It's just coax into the home (and yes, perhaps a bit up the span as well). :-)

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#113

Post by arcbyte »

secabeen wrote: post #99
maltalex wrote: post #11

Pardon the possibly ignorant question, but what do the telecom companies have to gain by destroying their own infrastructure? I feel like I'm missing something about the US telecom market here. Aren't these companies making a profit on this infrastructure? Are they selling more profitable services and they want users to switch over? Are the maintenance fees that high?

It will so not surprise me if in 10 years the TelCos are clamoring for billions in "rural connectivity funding" from the feds to put in fiber runs to rural areas currently adequately covered by the copper they are pulling out.

Well let’s be clear, the copper in rural areas is not adequate for anything except 1930s voice connectivity.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#114

Post by dfc »

cperciva wrote: post #91
andymcsherry wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He certainly wasn't. If you read his political blog ( http://electoral-vote.com/ ), you'll find this sort of sarcasm is his hallmark.

Right, my extreme understatement was my British sense of humour coming through. I was forgetting that HN has people whose only exposure to Tanenbaum is via the Linus-Tanenbaum debate (or possibly not even that) and for whom his sarcasm and my characterization of it would be less obvious. My favourite Tanenbaumism, while I'm on the topic: Aircraft carriers are modular. If a toilet gets clogged, it doesn't start launch…

The quote would be so much better if the subject were submarines instead of carriers.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#115

Post by [deleted] »

ztjio wrote: post #77

It seems like a lot of commenters don't understand the problem. The issue is not about whether that copper wire can be useful. It's not about whether there exist alternatives to provide in places where the copper is too expensive to maintain. The point is that regulations previously required the telco provide an alternative service that works just as well as the existing copper before they are allowed to stop maintai…

[deleted]

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#116

Post by joezydeco »

cavisne wrote: post #96
maxerickson wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They segment their reporting, page 18 of this document shows their consumer segment: https://investors.att.com/~/media/Files/A/ATT-IR/financial-r... They had as many people on Uverse video (which I guess is fiber) in 2014 as they had on copper phone lines in 2016.

Uverse seems to be mostly fiber to the node, ie it’s still copper into the home

AT&T has been very picky about where and when they deploy the DSLAMs to make UVerse happen.

In a lot of cases, they run into headwinds with local municipalities regarding contracts they already have with Comcast, RCN, etc when it comes to providing television service (AT&T has argued to varying degrees of success that UVerse has nothing to do with TV). DSLAMs are also ugly boxes that have to sit in very visible and inconvenient places.

For some reason in my neighborhood, UVerse exists up until about 3 blocks from my home and it goes no further. Nobody can explain why.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#117

Post by buryat »

busterarm wrote: post #107
rayiner wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much of this infrastructure is in more rural areas, which were never profitable. All that copper was strung up in an environment where high long-distance charges were used to subsidize service in rural areas. Wireline is costly (and copper is more costly than fiber on an on-going basis). Your business is sitting in the ground depreciating and requires expensive unionized workers to make repairs every time there is a…

There are a great many businesses, even in NYC and even in the high-tech industries here that absolutely depend on copper infrastructure. The world-renowned midtown hedge fund that I used to work for had a DS1 off a copper trunk that had the payroll system (a circa-2001 Dell Optiplex running Windows 2000) on it as recently as 2008. I assume they aren't now (god, I hope so, but that system hadn't been touched in years…

it's not about big cities, it's about unprofitable rural areas. The copper wire will be kept alive as long as it brings money.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#118

Post by ams6110 »

rmason wrote: post #40
distances wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does unreliability show itself with a cell phone? My data isn't always flowing perfectly, but can't remember problems with calls since 2000 or so.

Two reasons basically: 1. I needed a separate box at home tied to my wifi to even get a signal on my phone. Thankfully after switching to Google Fi and a Pixel phone I no longer need the box. 2. If I'm making a business call and making the sale depends on a clear connection that will not drop the landline phone still wins out.

Republic Wireless will automatically place and receive calls over your home (or any connected) WiFi. Works great for me as I get barely 1 bar of cell signal at home.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#119

Post by brians »

lucio wrote: post #84
ztjio wrote: post #77

It seems like a lot of commenters don't understand the problem. The issue is not about whether that copper wire can be useful. It's not about whether there exist alternatives to provide in places where the copper is too expensive to maintain. The point is that regulations previously required the telco provide an alternative service that works just as well as the existing copper before they are allowed to stop maintai…

Then that will be a good market for a startup, or other players. Are the telcos obliged to provide you with telecommunication?

Yes, in return for getting poles along streets throughout the rest of America. Similarly, they have to interconnect with other telcos.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#120

Post by charliesome »

lucio wrote: post #84
ztjio wrote: post #77

It seems like a lot of commenters don't understand the problem. The issue is not about whether that copper wire can be useful. It's not about whether there exist alternatives to provide in places where the copper is too expensive to maintain. The point is that regulations previously required the telco provide an alternative service that works just as well as the existing copper before they are allowed to stop maintai…

Then that will be a good market for a startup, or other players. Are the telcos obliged to provide you with telecommunication?

In other parts of the world, yes.

Telstra in Australia is bound by the Universal Service Obligation, for instance: https://www.acma.gov.au/Industry/Telco/Carriers-and-service-...

This is an area where it's critically important to regulate the market to make it actually work for the people, not just profit margins. If the service providers were not obliged to provide service to people in remote areas at the same price as everyone else, no service provider would.

Post reply on HN