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

Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

motherboard.vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 333 posts

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#291

Post by benchaney »

knieveltech wrote: post #254
stcredzero wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They simply haven't developed the weapons to destroy the WISPs yet, but unless the political climate in states/cities changes, they will. Basically, authoritarianism rears its ugly head in the US once again, across corporate, national, state, and local levels. The same general kind of gaming of the system which resulted in interstates dividing white from non-white neighborhoods is now maintaining the media status quo…

It's always amusing to observe the kind of rhetorical gymnastics folks will try to employ to blame "the left" for the excesses of unregulated capitalism that the right tirelessly champions.

> excesses of unregulated capitalism

The issue being discussed in this sub-thread is regulatory capture. It is disingenuous to blame that on unregulated capitalism, when in fact it is an issue of excess regulation.

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#292

Post by twostorytower »

Today, I am able to get Gigabit fiber (1000/1000) in my area for $80/month. It's not from Google, but from a major ISP.

I am pretty confident if Google Fiber never existed, it would not have pushed other ISP's into fiber expansion at such an affordable consumer price.

Hopefully the fall of net neutrality is stopped before all this progress goes to shit.

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#293

Post by jessaustin »

adamcharnock wrote: post #84
pjc50 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure that telling the SEC that there is no absolute truth in the universe is going to fly.

You're right, I think I was just getting a bit carried away on my soap box.

GP is rather sweet, amirite?

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#294

Post by e_d_e_v_at »

theptip wrote: post #258
anigbrowl wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What of it? If you have an advantage half the time that's better than not having it, as long as benefits exceed costs.

That assumes that the marginal utility of more bandwidth doesn't decrease; personally I'd rather have 10Mb all the time, than an average of 10Mb that is sometimes 1Gb and sometimes 0.1Mb. If you can't stream Netflix when it's raining heavily outside, that's a big problem.

Man, the definition of big problems has really changed over the years.

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#295

Post by jessaustin »

stcredzero wrote: post #289
jessaustin wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are Democrats and Republicans really 180° apart? From where I sit they seem to waver between 9° and 10° apart... sometimes as much as 12° apart? Much less, of course, when there is a ruinous foreign war to pitch.

Where I'm sitting, authoritarians all look alike to me.

Then why have you always voted for one particular flavor of authoritarian?

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#296

Post by rayiner »

Rebelgecko wrote: post #283
rayiner wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Connect America Fund is funded through a special tax on telcos: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund#Connect... . It's likes taxing cell phone companies to provide free phones for low-income people. Yes, some cell phone companies will end up getting "subsidies" but companies like AT&T (or Apple) would be net payors. And whether or not you call that a "subsidy" in rural areas, everywhere outside of…

> The Connect America Fund is funded through a special tax on telcos Is this one of the taxes that they just throw straight onto my monthly bill?

One, companies can’t just pass on taxes like that. If they add a surcharge, that increases the price of the product, which reduces demand. You can’t pull yourself up by your bootstraps: you can’t increase your revenue by having the government add a tax to your product and kick it back to you, maybe unless you sell heroin or something. (But then you could just raise the price without the pretense and people would pay it.)

Two, AT&T is paying the tax, but the government is mostly kicking the subsidies back to small rural telcos and coops. Telcos with more urban footprints, like AT&T, subsidize telcos in high cost rural areas.

So calling CAF a subsidy to AT&T really makes no sense. It’s like saying Apple would love the government to slap a 5% tax on iPhones and kick the money to providers of low cost phones. Even if Apple could increase prices to compensate, and get some of those subsidies for the iPhone SE, it’d still be worse off than without the “subsidy.”

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#297

Post by stcredzero »

jessaustin wrote: post #295
stcredzero wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where I'm sitting, authoritarians all look alike to me.

Then why have you always voted for one particular flavor of authoritarian?

Because I was still naive. Because I bought into a narrative I no longer buy into. (Note to the reader: Which narrative do you think I buy into right now? Your answer is data on your biases.)

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#298

Post by jbarham »

ailideex wrote: post #151
jbarham wrote: post #13

http://www.speedtest.net/result/7112084631 is my 4G home wireless "broadband" plan's speed in suburban Melbourne, Australia. Basically 10/1 Mb which is not great, but still much better than what I was getting with ADSL, and I'll have to wait another year or two until the NBN rollout reaches my house. But by 2020 the mobile networks will be rolling out 5G. Apart from mailing out the modem to me, my wireless ISP has ba…

Is there any cap on that? Here I can get uncapped 100mbit/100mbit up/down fiber for a fraction of the cost of 100GB data over mobile/wireless broadband.

Monthly cap is 200 GB. I typically use 50 GB/month, so it's effectively unlimited.

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#299

Post by AFNobody »

stcredzero wrote: post #275
AFNobody wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Basically, authoritarianism rears its ugly head in the US once again, across corporate, national, state, and local levels. The same general kind of gaming of the system which resulted in interstates dividing white from non-white neighborhoods is now maintaining the media status quo. On one side, it's the corporatism and Crony Capitalism the left traditionally complains about, now wielded by the Far Left as a non-go…

Except this is a GOP agenda...You are just accusing anything involving regulations as "Leftist" without acknowledging it is the standard banners of your own party that enable it. I am not a Republican. I've always voted Democrat. When your expectations are 180-deg out of whack, it's time to re-visit your world view and assumptions.

So your argument now is Republicans are "Leftists"?

Re: Eight Years On, Google Fiber Is a Faint Echo of the Disruption Promised

#300

Post by rayiner »

jessaustin wrote: post #290
rayiner wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Connect America Fund is funded through a special tax on telcos: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Service_Fund#Connect... . It's likes taxing cell phone companies to provide free phones for low-income people. Yes, some cell phone companies will end up getting "subsidies" but companies like AT&T (or Apple) would be net payors. And whether or not you call that a "subsidy" in rural areas, everywhere outside of…

Oh please. Incumbents love USF, just like they love all other goofy surcharges. That's whey they invented them in the first place. Sure, their customers pay more than those of their competitors, but through their complete domination of PUCs and FCC they get to decide exactly how the programs are administered. As if they actually needed more barriers to entry for any potential competition, the rules of these programs…

Pure fantasy. AT&T got $1.3 billion from the USF in 2007-10. https://www.fiercetelecom.com/telecom/at-t-verizon-are-rolli.... About $450 million per year.

The FCC doesn’t disclose USF contributions by company, but you can guess: https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-303886A3.p.... Total reported telecom revenue is about $300 billion per year during that period. AT&T averaged $120 billion per year in revenue during that period (about 40% of the industry). (This is probably an overestimate because AT&T’s revenue includes non-telecom revenue.)

During that period, USF revenues were $7-8 billion per year. 40% of that is like $3 billion. Even if I’m wrong about AT&T’s revenue share by a factor of 4 AT&T still pays in much more than it gets out.

Post reply on HN