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

121–130 of 193 posts

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#121

Post by droopybuns »

dashundchen wrote: post #79
droopybuns wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you hear telco execs talk about “the copper plant,” they are referring to all of the underground copper. This wire is laid out in sheathed bundles of excess pairs that can be used to replace a pair that has a short. When they eventually run out of pairs, the only solution is to dig trenches and replace bundles. It is filthy, expensive work for a feature that no longer generates the revenue that funded the deploy…

> Maybe we could have afforded a national deployment of fiber. Verizon and other telcos already learned they can get billions in subsidies for building fiber networks, and never follow through with it with no consequences. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131012/02124724852/decad... At this point I think municipal run ISP utilities are the future we should be shooting for.

I don’t want the governments monitoring our internet access any more than they already are.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#122

Post by fencepost »

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 the US, the telcos were generally required to provide service. Some of that cost was subsidized. In return they got effective monopolies, easements to put in the infrastructure required to provide service (including in profitable areas), etc.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#123

Post by cperciva »

dfc wrote: post #114
cperciva wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Perhaps... but the non-modular software equivalents of aircraft carriers routinely do launch metaphorical nuclear missiles despite not being intended to ever have that functionality.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#124

Post by imglorp »

andrewtbham wrote: post #24
maltalex wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, but there are still paying customers on the end of that infrastructure. Are they not profitable enough?

My understanding is rural access is often unprofitable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund

Yet we've been paying into this fund decades, which was supposed to pay for rural access. Now, Relieving the telcos of this obligation despite them not completing universal access amounts to corporate welfare for those poor starving giants. Then there's E911.

    Of a bigger concern in rural areas will be losing access to 911. A lot 
    of homes still keep landlines just for the 911 capabilities. Under the
    old rules the carriers had to demonstrate that customers would still 
    have access to reliable 911, but it seems the carriers can now walk 
    away without worrying about this.
This is also a health and safety issue.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#125

Post by chiph »

droopybuns wrote: post #33
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?

When you hear telco execs talk about “the copper plant,” they are referring to all of the underground copper. This wire is laid out in sheathed bundles of excess pairs that can be used to replace a pair that has a short. When they eventually run out of pairs, the only solution is to dig trenches and replace bundles. It is filthy, expensive work for a feature that no longer generates the revenue that funded the deploy…

> Maybe we could have afforded a national deployment of fiber.

Here's the fun part - you've already been paying for it. The 1996 Telecommunications Act set up a fund that every telecom user in the USA pays into which was supposed to build high-speed services in rural and disadvantaged areas.

> (3) ACCESS IN RURAL AND HIGH COST AREAS- Consumers in all regions of the Nation, including low-income consumers and those in rural, insular, and high cost areas, should have access to telecommunications and information services, including interexchange services and advanced telecommunications and information services, that are reasonably comparable to those services provided in urban areas and that are available at rates that are reasonably comparable to rates charged for similar services in urban areas

(PDF warning) https://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/tcom1996.pdf

What actually happened was the telcos used that money to buy their competitors and consolidate the market to where only a few large firms remain (no more "Baby Bells")

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#127

Post by learc83 »

droopybuns wrote: post #121
dashundchen wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe we could have afforded a national deployment of fiber. Verizon and other telcos already learned they can get billions in subsidies for building fiber networks, and never follow through with it with no consequences. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131012/02124724852/decad... At this point I think municipal run ISP utilities are the future we should be shooting for.

I don’t want the governments monitoring our internet access any more than they already are.

There's a difference between "the government"--the federal government--and thousands of local municipalities.

If anything, having thousands of small ISPs would make it harder for the feds to spy on everyone.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#128

Post by fencepost »

pipio21 wrote: post #73
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?

You can put tens of thousands of copper lines communications in just a single optical cable. An optical cable is extremely small, in fact, most of the cable is just mechanical reinforcement. Tens of thousands of copper fibers does not only means lots of cables with lots of devices that could fail, with lots of interference. It means that if something goes wrong, it it very hard to identify the problem or even to have…

Sure you can get tens of thousands of connections, but there aren't tens of thousands of customers along the rural roads where this will really hit. For some of the areas there may not be tens of thousands of people in that entire half of the state.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#129

Post by learc83 »

rayiner wrote: post #85
dashundchen wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe we could have afforded a national deployment of fiber. Verizon and other telcos already learned they can get billions in subsidies for building fiber networks, and never follow through with it with no consequences. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20131012/02124724852/decad... At this point I think municipal run ISP utilities are the future we should be shooting for.

Verizon never got subsidies from New York. Verizon pays the city for the right to wire it up (5% of gross revenues).

How much is ability to use the power of government to force property owners to let you build on their land worth?

It's possible that it's worth more than a 5% cut--in which case it's still a subsidy.

Re: The beginning of the end for copper wire

#130

Post by dzhiurgis »

olympus wrote: post #32
cperciva wrote: post #25

Highly relevant quote: At one time, 80% of AT&T's capital value was the copper in the local loops. AT&T was then, in effect, the world's largest copper mine. Fortunately, this fact was not widely known in the investment community. Had it been known, some corporate raider might have bought AT&T, terminated all telephone service in the United States, ripped out all the wire, and sole the wire to a copper refiner to get…

It is likely that someone did realize this, did the math on the labor costs to pull all the wire up across the country, and realized it wouldn't actually be profitable. There are guys that track individual ships across the ocean to decide what/when to trade, I doubt everyone missed the value of ATT's physical assets.

What's your take on Nickel, Cobalt, etc metal market that goes into modern batteries?
Post reply on HN