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

31–40 of 354 posts

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

#31

Post by muststopmyths »

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 only baffling if you didn't bother to read the party platforms. The Democratic party platform explicitly talks about removing barriers to municipal broadband as a goal, which is the only way you are going to get competition where ISPs have a monopoly. At least in the current landscape where it's cost-prohibitive for a competitor to enter a region.

Also (emphasis mine),

> Democrats will restore the Federal Communications Commission's (FCC) clear authority to take strong enforcement action against broadband providers who violate net neutrality principles through blocking, throttling, paid prioritization, or other measures that create artificial scarcity and raise consumer prices for this vital service.

Regardless of anyone's feelings broadband is not categorized as a utility. You may want it classified as such. Then ask yourself which party is likely to move in that direction.

https://www.demconvention.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/202...

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

#32

Post by briandear »

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…

Are we overpaying? I pay less in the US for fiber Internet than I paid in France for DSL. Can “overpaying” be quantified?

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

#33

Post by Robotbeat »

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?

It is odd that Starlink isn’t mentioned in the article. Starlink has impressive speed and latency and the potential to compete to some degree in every market in the US. Twitter angst aside (some of which is fair but much seems to be either dishonest or ignorant, even by those who should definitely know better), SpaceX has also done a remarkably good job of addressing the light pollution problem such that the satellites are invisible to the naked eye once in operational orbit (mitigating impact on ground astronomy is something SpaceX continues to work with astronomers on). They’ve done so well, this should probably become industry regulation. And by choosing a lower (self-clearing) orbit, they’ve mitigated a lot of the concerns about space debris as well. I think their approach to these problems shows it is scalable (although IMHO we should actually codify some of these mitigation’s instead of just relying on good faith).

And thankfully, competitors exist. OneWeb has exited bankruptcy and is starting to launch again. Project Kuiper also shows promise.

I think people are still sleeping on just how big of a deal Starlink (etc) is going to be.

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

#34

Post by 908B64B197 »

ineedasername wrote: post #7
908B64B197 wrote: post #4

I'm always surprised this isn't discussed more. Big tech is accused of being monopolistic, but there is a constant flow of new players in the field, all gaining market shares and building the Next Big Thing, while telecom providers are pretty stagnant. I'm curious why cities don't directly lay down the infrastructure work for broadband access. In some cases that might raise property value enough that the town could m…

There may be a constant flow of new players, but much of the time when they start to show a certain amount of success then one of the big players simply buys them up.

Correct except,

Microsoft should have won search. They had all the tools to execute and were pretty much at the right place at the right time.

Google should have won social networking and messaging. They had the userbase and the network. Yet it's Facebook that did.

Same goes for Phones, and yet it's Apple that captured the market.

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

#35

Post by justinclift »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #28
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?

> I really hope Starlink lives up to the hype.

The technical aspects of it seem to be:

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/11/space...

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

#36

Post by Robotbeat »

marcus_holmes wrote: post #28
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?

We do need and can have multiple fleets up there. OneWeb has already launched a bunch of satellites, and there is enough room up there for several more, particularly as operators get better at safely operating them.

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

#37

Post by Fellshard »

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…

Because Net Neutrality was the angle that brings more money their way.

Net Neutrality assumes the monopoly will stay, that no alternatives are available, and that top-down control is the best bet.

If you focus on the monopoly instead, different ISPs could offer different advantages based on the consumer's requirements: gaming, video consumption, media upload, basic light browsing - you could tailor engineering costs to meet the needs of consumers, instead of one-size-fits-all baggage.

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

#38

Post by 908B64B197 »

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.

They are pretty hostile to international players setting shops.

In such a non-competitive environment, it's no wonder rent seeking is the norm.

Edit: I see the downvotes but no explanations.

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

#39

Post by briandear »

muststopmyths wrote: post #31
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 only baffling if you didn't bother to read the party platforms. The Democratic party platform explicitly talks about removing barriers to municipal broadband as a goal, which is the only way you are going to get competition where ISPs have a monopoly. At least in the current landscape where it's cost-prohibitive for a competitor to enter a region. Also (emphasis mine), > Democrats will restore the Federal Commun…

> removing barriers to municipal broadband as a goal, which is the only way you are going to get competition

Municipal broadband is the only way you’ll get competition? A “public option” seems to invite the very opposite of competition. Less regulation is how you increase competition — by allowing more new entrants into a market, you necessarily increase competition.

Municipalities should own the wire, not the service flowing through the wire. Making capital expenditures less expensive would encourage more service providers.

Post reply on HN