Harvard Study Shows Why Big Telecom Is Terrified of Community-Run Broadband

Post by mnzaki » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 8:29 PM UTC

mnzaki wrote: post #50

msla wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CJDNS[1] (protocol for encrypted p2p address allocation and routing for mesh networks, so essentially OSI layer 3) and project Hyperboria[2] (a community of local WiFi initiatives) None of this addresses the big point, which is the backhaul, the transit networks, the big networks which knit together all of the smaller community networks and make them more useful. In short: If you make a nice little mesh network in…

I believe it is already being done: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-range_Wi-Fi#Large-scale_d... We'll still need big orgs to take care of those undersea cables, for now at least; but even with that still out of reach for hobbyists or community projects, the situation can already be much better than what is being forced on us. On another note, if you are using p2p tech like scuttlebutt and DAT[1] and Beaker[2] bro…

Post by gnopgnip » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 8:32 PM UTC

gz5 wrote: post #25

walshemj wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or just unbundle the local loop as we do in the UK

yes although can be harder to retrofit, e.g. i don't believe many of the US fiber architectures were built to be multi-tenant with (n) service providers behind 1 operator. especially because the duopoly's control most of them. enter the muni-fiber and similar projects...but built to a different commercial model...

Post by pmarreck » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 8:41 PM UTC

Jemmeh wrote: post #24

bronco21016 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you’re mis-interpreting the overbooking ratios. My understanding is that a 20:1 ratio means that for 1 mbit you can serve 20 customers 1 mbit. Your point still stands though. That means if 1 mbit cost $1 then it costs $0.04/customer. The real cost is in deploying the wires and countless studies have shown the ROI on that, especially given the exorbitant rates, is typically 5 years or less per hookup. Can you…

But we taxpayers already paid $400 billion to have fiber ran throughout the US, just never happened. ISPs took payment but didn't deliver. https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/6c5e97/e...

Post by jdlyga » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 8:46 PM UTC

Post by mnzaki » Fri, Jan 12, 2018, 9:10 PM UTC

gnopgnip wrote: post #63

gz5 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes although can be harder to retrofit, e.g. i don't believe many of the US fiber architectures were built to be multi-tenant with (n) service providers behind 1 operator. especially because the duopoly's control most of them. enter the muni-fiber and similar projects...but built to a different commercial model...

For the urban, and dense suburban areas fiber is a great option and has much higher potential. But there will always be a large portion of the US that is not profitable to run fiber, and already has phone service. We already have multitenant access in the US for all phone service. Just extending the current regulation to cover DSL is all that is needed to allow for competition and improved internet speed. You can get…