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

131–140 of 217 posts

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

#131

Post by zeroonetwothree »

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…

I mean it sounds like you don’t live in a town? I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect service providers to string an extra mile of cable just for one customer.

There’s always going to be trade offs in living location.

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

#132

Post by gessha »

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…

Stupid idea, I know, but what do you think of

Telephone-pole-as-a-service TPaaS

What are the regulations in place for putting up telephone poles and what are the associated costs?

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

#133

Post by KerrAvon »

xhkkffbf wrote: post #127
Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They won capitalism. The prize is you don't have to compete anymore, you don't have to innovate, and you get to charge more and deliver less. Getting companies to this position is foundational to the incentive structure of our economic system. Once they win, that's it. They get to stay there forever.

They won capitalism? The government regulations are entirely responsible for the lack of competition. As it stands, competition found away around the wired line regulations. The wireless devices came along. And soon the satellite networks will give the cellphone carriers a real kick in the pants.

Nope, you can’t the-free-market-will-fix-everything this one. The telco lobbyists wrote the government regulations. Wireless is slow and coverage is spotty. Satellite is unreliable, expensive, and has a fixed latency cost that can’t be eliminated.

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

#134

Post by KerrAvon »

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 is phasing out their DSL offerings.

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

#135

Post by gessha »

phpisthebest wrote: post #76
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 I huge part of Rural America Electricity is run by Coop's today, often non-profit anyway. Various attempts have been tried for these Coop's to also provide internet services including using Internet Over Power Lines technology, they all fail for some reason. Also with Telephone and electric build out we did not have the levels of regulatory capture we do today. The US Tax Payer ha…

Some of the coops are mismanaged. I saw an article about a takeover of an incompetent coop management board that resulted in service improvement.

Like everything, it takes political will and community work to keep services responsible and reliable.

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

#136

Post by KerrAvon »

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…

The point is that fiber penetration is still nowhere near copper/POTS penetration in the US. Not even close, despite decades of subsidies and tax breaks to the telcos to make universal fiber a reality.

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

#137

Post by KerrAvon »

phpisthebest wrote: post #76
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 I huge part of Rural America Electricity is run by Coop's today, often non-profit anyway. Various attempts have been tried for these Coop's to also provide internet services including using Internet Over Power Lines technology, they all fail for some reason. Also with Telephone and electric build out we did not have the levels of regulatory capture we do today. The US Tax Payer ha…

Yes; we need to address regulatory capture. That can be done. Saying ‘better things aren’t possible’ isn’t the solution.

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

#138

Post by edmundsauto »

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…

Att made around a 12% profit margin, which seems reasonable if a bit high. Would you consider 12% == “printing money”? I usually think of 25+% margins like in big tech that way.

Not arguing just trying to understand how much money these companies are actually making.

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

#139

Post by koolba »

gessha wrote: post #132
Apes wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Stupid idea, I know, but what do you think of Telephone-pole-as-a-service TPaaS What are the regulations in place for putting up telephone poles and what are the associated costs?

Fiber-to-the-curb has been a concept for decades. The last couple hundred feet would traditionally be completed with copper but short range wireless could easily fill that gap in 2024.

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

#140

Post by darkwizard42 »

edmundsauto wrote: post #138
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…

Att made around a 12% profit margin, which seems reasonable if a bit high. Would you consider 12% == “printing money”? I usually think of 25+% margins like in big tech that way. Not arguing just trying to understand how much money these companies are actually making.

12% in perpetuity with no stress the number will go down and lots of (imho insidious and customer unfriendly) ways for it to go up is in fact "printing money"

Being able to make money risk free without risk of competition always ends up being worse for the customer and bad for the overall economy (in terms of efficiency)

Post reply on HN