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

AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

cbsnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 217 posts

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#111

Post by josh2600 »

ben_w wrote: post #89
reaperducer wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You did it before for electricity and telephone. Not completely. There are still tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of Americans who never got electric, telephone, or even water service available in their homes. Every six months or so there's an article in the Navajo Times about the Navajo Tribal Utility Authority managing to hook up another couple of dozen homes to electricity, but there are still many thousands to…

> Not completely. There are still tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of Americans who never got electric, telephone, or even water service available in their homes. … > Tens of thousands of American homes have no running water. I've visited many in Texas, West Virginia, New Mexico, and even California. > Time to get out of the Silicon Valley bubble. Only 10e4-10e5? Even writing as a Brit who chose Berlin over Silicon…

I'll never forget the story of Paul Bunyan telecom out in I believe it was Montana who used federal funds to build to cabins at a cost of like $10,000+ per cabin to lay copper (back when that was a lot of money) under the right to service clauses of the FCC.

It turns out that servicing 100% of the population isn't practical when people choose to live in very remote areas. I agree that it would be onerous for carriers to have to service 100% of the population with any kind of service, but I disagree with the current standard on non-copper services which amount to something like 80% of population within a given metro zone. It biases too hard towards city living, especially as we are seeing more and more people move away from cities.

Rural broadband in America is extremely difficult in most parts of the country, way harder than it needs to be. And don't get me started on WISP vs hardwire, hardwire is the only real internet and don't let anyone fool you otherwise.

Source: 10 years in the belly of the beast of telecom.

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#112

Post by vel0city »

throwawaaarrgh wrote: post #67

It is insane how reliable landlines are, though. When the power goes out, you can make "candles" by connecting a 0.47 uF capacitor to a LED leg and connect both ends to the red and green phone wires; there's enough voltage to power a couple of them without the phone going off the hook. In an emergency, the lines don't get clogged like cell phone towers, and the Telco infrastructure is much more protected than wireles…

> In an emergency, the lines don't get clogged like cell phone tower

Back in landline days I was in a couple emergencies where my phone only gave error tones or recorded messages of being too busy. Even in the ancient circuit switched times one could have easily run into a situation where whatever destination out you were trying to go would have been totally full.

This idea POTS would never get clogged is a myth. They could handle a lot more capacity than cell phones at the time, sure, but they did still eventually get flooded.

And in one of those times, I couldn't get a POTS call out but I could send an SMS and it would eventually get through.

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#113

Post by thelastgallon »

The best thing to do is for the city to own both fiber and electricity, and let providers compete for both. With Virtual Power Plants, the grid can be reimagined and it will happen faster if competing ideas/companies battle it out in the marketplace for consumers.

Second best is for electric utility to offer fiber, like EPB of Chattanooga, TN.

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#114

Post by SoftTalker »

reaperducer wrote: post #77
sschueller wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least every home that has copper should get fiber. The excuse that the US is too big or we can't do it is bull. You did it before for electricity and telephone. It just requires competency, money and an infrastructure that isn't for profit. Don't get me wrong, the services provided on the infrastructure can definitely be for profit but not the glass itself.

You did it before for electricity and telephone. Not completely. There are still tens (maybe hundreds) of thousands of Americans who never got electric, telephone, or even water service available in their homes. Every six months or so there's an article in the Navajo Times about the Navajo Tribal Utility Authority managing to hook up another couple of dozen homes to electricity, but there are still many thousands to…

It's way higher than thousands, at least for water. Millions of people in the US have their own wells for water and septic systems for waste water.

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#115

Post by kasey_junk »

rconti wrote: post #84
h_tbob wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if that's because the USA is that stupid, or if it's just not as population dense as other countries with faster speeds? According to this statistic, it's not very dense, meaning it's super expensive to build broadband. Because it's pretty much a question of physical area covered, not number of people serviced. This stat says the USA is on the lower end of density https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.POP.…

It isn't that dense, but also, the utilities are monopolies that just print cash for shareholders because they don't have to invest.

AT&Ts stock price is at a near thirty year low, their dividends are lower than ever and they have a massive amount of debt.

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#116

Post by dcplaya »

Apes wrote: post #105
rconti wrote: post #85

I'm lucky that I am in Sonic's service area and get 10Gbps symmetric fiber service for $50/mo. It exposes the lie of the incumbents slow-walking new tech and bandwidth increases. They _just don't want to_ because they _don't have to_ compete with anyone, and they'd rather print cash for their shareholders. They have the capital to build these networks far faster than a small regional ISP can. Multi-gig speeds, FTTP a…

It's not quite that simple. Sonic focuses their fiber services only in areas that are most profitable to install fiber. As far as I know, they only install fiber on telephone poles that have free space, in areas that are high density. The cheapest install option for the highest possible revenue. I live right next to an area that has Sonic fiber, but there's no telephone poles, and an install would require an expensiv…

Sonic announced expansion to my neighborhood 2 years ago with a status tracking page and everything!

Status hasn't changed since the initial announcement 2 years ago...

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#117

Post by ProllyInfamous »

greendave wrote: post #87

I live less than. a mile from a mid-sized town (15k peopl), 25 miles from the heart of Silicon Valley. The only reliable internet access available is 8mbit DSL using copper and satellite (HughesNet). No cable, no fiber, dodgy cell service, and at last try Starlink was not remotely reliable. Last big rainstorm we lost service for 5 days. I’d love to be able to ditch copper, but if AT&T is allowed to pull the plug, it…

>will be the sole option.

I mean this sincerely: you could move.

In 2012, I left the Castro Valley part of sfEastBay and moved to a small Southern town with fiber optic 10gbps available at every electric-supplied address (I lived 8 years inside a rustic national forest with a fiber/copper jack on my ramshackle cabin's powermeter).

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#118

Post by jmspring »

thelastgallon wrote: post #113

The best thing to do is for the city to own both fiber and electricity, and let providers compete for both. With Virtual Power Plants, the grid can be reimagined and it will happen faster if competing ideas/companies battle it out in the marketplace for consumers. Second best is for electric utility to offer fiber, like EPB of Chattanooga, TN.

I would not want PG&E (northern CA power company) in charge of any more infrastructure in California. They already have shown incompetence by shifting maintenance funds into bonuses instead of actual infrastructure maintenance.

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#119

Post by ac29 »

fortran77 wrote: post #99

My 90 year old mother can't always figure out her cell phone. The land line is what she uses most. I don't care what the specific technology is, but a phone that's plugged in, and always available (no "off" switch) and just makes and receives calls with the familiar UI (lift phone off hook, enter number on keypad) is still a requirement for many people.

No particular reason that "land line" phones need wired service though. My office uses 5G service for internet and ATA VOIP adapters for the phones. The experience of using the phones is exactly the same as when they were on traditional copper circuits provided by the phone company 10 years ago.

Re: AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California

#120

Post by thelastgallon »

jmspring wrote: post #118
thelastgallon wrote: post #113

The best thing to do is for the city to own both fiber and electricity, and let providers compete for both. With Virtual Power Plants, the grid can be reimagined and it will happen faster if competing ideas/companies battle it out in the marketplace for consumers. Second best is for electric utility to offer fiber, like EPB of Chattanooga, TN.

I would not want PG&E (northern CA power company) in charge of any more infrastructure in California. They already have shown incompetence by shifting maintenance funds into bonuses instead of actual infrastructure maintenance.

Thats why the city should own lines. PG&E needs competition. There was a recent post, some small utilities are providing electricity a lot cheaper than PG&E.
Post reply on HN