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

A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 354 posts

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#21

Post by thatfrenchguy »

burlesona wrote: post #8
crazygringo wrote: post #6

Seriously, I feel like I say it every time it comes up: WHY aren't people taking action against ISP monopolies? It seems like such a cut-and-dried political issue: they're utilities and they overcharge you whether you're a Republican or Democrat. And taking action doesn't require new antitrust concepts, because it's just your garden-variety utility. It's the same established principles as electric or natural gas. Yet…

It's a good question, but I think one of the issues is that physical networks are a natural monopoly in the same way as most public utilities, so it's not just about enabling more competition but about establishing a regulatory framework around that competition, much like exists with airports and railways. OR, alternatively, changing to a public sector provision model like plumbing or roads. What actually bothers me…

I mean, if it's a natural monopoly, then it should be public. Roads aren't private right ?

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#22

Post by MattGaiser »

donmcronald wrote: post #2

Canada has the same problem. I don’t have definitive data, but the promo pricing for internet plans has seemed pretty weak since COVID hit. We call our ISP every (fucking) year to ask them to give us the current promo pricing for the next year and this year everything is a solid $20-$40 per month higher than it’s been in the last 3-4 years. They’re totally price gouging IMO.

Canadians are unwilling to price shop:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlRPLBLkZK0

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#23

Post by treis »

burlesona wrote: post #8
crazygringo wrote: post #6

Seriously, I feel like I say it every time it comes up: WHY aren't people taking action against ISP monopolies? It seems like such a cut-and-dried political issue: they're utilities and they overcharge you whether you're a Republican or Democrat. And taking action doesn't require new antitrust concepts, because it's just your garden-variety utility. It's the same established principles as electric or natural gas. Yet…

It's a good question, but I think one of the issues is that physical networks are a natural monopoly in the same way as most public utilities, so it's not just about enabling more competition but about establishing a regulatory framework around that competition, much like exists with airports and railways. OR, alternatively, changing to a public sector provision model like plumbing or roads. What actually bothers me…

>physical networks are a natural monopoly in the same way as most public utilities

But ISPs are not, generally speaking, a monopoly. There's usually at least two wired options and they compete with cellular and satellite options. Profit margins generally reflect this. The large ISPs are around the average for the S&P 500.

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#24

Post by jariel »

crazygringo wrote: post #6

Seriously, I feel like I say it every time it comes up: WHY aren't people taking action against ISP monopolies? It seems like such a cut-and-dried political issue: they're utilities and they overcharge you whether you're a Republican or Democrat. And taking action doesn't require new antitrust concepts, because it's just your garden-variety utility. It's the same established principles as electric or natural gas. Yet…

It's not baffling, it's populism.

Only so many issues can be discussed at once in the commons and politicians are mostly going to react to those.

So BLM, Facebook, Twitter, the Election, Trump etc. are sucking up all the air and that's that.

There are other ugly factors: CNN is owned by AT&T. So do you think CNN is going to help 'fan the flames' of the movement? I don't think so.

'Anti Trust' is also a complicated word, almost a little to complicated for MSM cable news. It's possible for watchers to understand 'Privacy and Facebook' but it's a struggle to get the plebes to try to think about such an abstraction as 'anti trust'.

Those entities spend a fortune lobbying both sides of congress.

Without some popular focus and the press latching onto it like they did BLM, it's going to be hard to get some kind of movement going there.

Even politicians that 'care' about the issue are going to want to 'pick their battles' and it might not be a while before someone starts knocking on that door.

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#25

Post by cortesoft »

crazygringo wrote: post #6

Seriously, I feel like I say it every time it comes up: WHY aren't people taking action against ISP monopolies? It seems like such a cut-and-dried political issue: they're utilities and they overcharge you whether you're a Republican or Democrat. And taking action doesn't require new antitrust concepts, because it's just your garden-variety utility. It's the same established principles as electric or natural gas. Yet…

This is a classic example of what happens when you have concentrated benefits and diffuse costs. Everyone pays a little bit more because of the way broadband is treated, but broadband companies make a LOT because of it.

It simply doesn't reach a high enough priority for people to really push for reform, but it is high enough priority to broadband companies that they fight tooth and nail.

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#26

Post by marcus_holmes »

This is such a weird thing. After spending time in SE Asia, where bandwidth is cheap and plentiful (in the cities), it's painful coming back to Europe (and Australia). I'm in Berlin atm, and the wifi is shit, bandwidth is expensive and unreliable. And the phone plans suck. I was in Perth (Australia) before that, and access there is terrible.

In Cambodia, 120Gb (per week) of download cost me US$1 (per week) over good-quality 4G connections anywhere in the city (but almost nothing outside the cities). In Berlin, it's 40 euros a month for 5Gb, and coverage is a bit patchy, and very patchy if I go a few Km's out of the city.

In Bali, a $5 SIM card got me a month of effectively-unlimited download over decent connections. Nepal, Malaysia, all good. Phillipines was tricky to get decent coverage, but when it was there it was cheap.

Cafes in SE Asia offer free wifi with a coffee. Berlin nope.

I get the price differences are a function of relative GDP. But the performance differences should be the other way around. Tech should work better in developed countries, not worse.

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#27

Post by colejohnson66 »

thotsBgone wrote: post #16
crazygringo wrote: post #6

Seriously, I feel like I say it every time it comes up: WHY aren't people taking action against ISP monopolies? It seems like such a cut-and-dried political issue: they're utilities and they overcharge you whether you're a Republican or Democrat. And taking action doesn't require new antitrust concepts, because it's just your garden-variety utility. It's the same established principles as electric or natural gas. Yet…

This is the result of government corruption. For example: the government paid ISPs $400 billion dollars (!) to create a nationwide fiber network, and the ISPs pocketed the money and didn't do it. No investigation into what happened or anything. The money is just gone. Clearly corruption is the only explanation. Politicians have been bought. Why voters don't know/care is another issue, but it might have something to d…

It’s really down to the simple fact that most people aren’t aware. And those that are feel powerless to do anything about it; “It’s been this way for so long, it’s part of how life is now.” (see also: the NSA spying complex) Not to mention that ISP monopolies aren’t near the top of people’s “policy priority list”(TM) (contrast with, say, abortion), so even if a politician were to campaign to fix the problem, most people wouldn’t care. And because of that, most candidates don’t campaign that much about ISPs because it’s (essentially) a waste of ad money.

Take Ron Wyden (D-OR) for example. He’s been talking about the problems of “Big Tech,”[a] the NSA, etc. for years, but no one outside tech or his state have even heard of him.

[a]: Those aren’t “scare quotes.” They’re because there isn’t really a good word for it. FAANG seems too restrictive compared to how many companies are actually part of the problem.

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#28

Post by marcus_holmes »

mattferderer wrote: post #20

I am curious how Starlink will change this conversation one way or another. It adds another competitor to the mix. Could it become the monopoly if the tech were to make current ISP tech obsolete or to expensive for most areas? If it became the better method, does that mean our skies will soon be even more polluted with satellites by exponential factors?

I really hope Starlink lives up to the hype.

But if it does, how do we stop it becoming a monopoly? We don't need and can't have multiple rival fleets of satellites up there. But if it's just Starlink then how do we stop it charging more and more for less and less because no-one else is threatening it?

If it works, should the UN step in and take over the network as a service to all of humanity?

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#29

Post by jcims »

mattferderer wrote: post #20

I am curious how Starlink will change this conversation one way or another. It adds another competitor to the mix. Could it become the monopoly if the tech were to make current ISP tech obsolete or to expensive for most areas? If it became the better method, does that mean our skies will soon be even more polluted with satellites by exponential factors?

I’m curious what happens with rural terrestrial broadband. Does it dry up and die or do the telecoms try to compete at a relatively high cost per customer. Many don’t have dial tone and satellite TV bundles aren’t competitive so they will likely lose the customer completely and are left with an asset that makes no money.

They might open the local loop back up to at least get rent?

Re: A tech antitrust problem no one is talking about: US broadband providers

#30

Post by commandlinefan »

redisman wrote: post #5

It's true. I'll never stop being amazed at how in Helsinki 10 years ago I had a 500/500Mbps connection for $29/mo and in Seattle I have a 200/10Mbps connection for $59/mo. I won't even get to mobile plans since at least there it's somewhat plausible that I must subside the rural cellphone towers since it's a huge (in area) network.

And for the most part, it doesn't matter how much money you have to spend on it. If I were inclined to offer twice as much for double the bandwidth, that's just not an option. (Not that I feel like I'm getting the bandwidth I pay for in the first place...)
Post reply on HN