AT&T applies to end obligation to service landlines in California • Hacker News Board

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

#141

Post by gustavus » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 4:53 PM UTC

KerrAvon wrote: post #133

xhkkffbf wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Nope, you can’t the-free-market-will-fix-everything this one. The telco lobbyists wrote the government regulations

Just a point of clarification, the free market generally means independence from government regulation. This isn't the free market failing so much as incumbents using the power of government to force their advantage, part of the argument of the free market is that by not allowing the government to interfere in this manner no one can get laws written to benefit them because the government doesn't get involved in the first place. Now granted that's in a frictionless airless world with spherical cows. But to say the free market failed and the very next sentence say it is because of regulation from the government is oxymoronic.

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

#142

Post by gst » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 4:55 PM UTC

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.

> The best thing to do is for the city to own both fiber and electricity, and let providers compete for both.

Something similar is the case in the European Union, as the electricity network is usually a different company than the electricity providers. The network is often owned by some municipal company and charges customers only for the transport of energy over the network. For the energy itself customers can choose from dozens of different providers, some of them generate their own electricity, others just buy and resell electricity on the market.

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

#143

Post by phpisthebest » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 4:55 PM UTC

KerrAvon wrote: post #137

phpisthebest wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>>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.

I never said better things are not possible, this disconnect here is that despite all of recorded American history proven other ways people still believe we just need to "elect to right people" to government to fix everything wrong everywhere all problems in society

When in reality power corrupts and by giving power to government you corrupt anyone that enters the profession.

The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. --- Ronald Reagan

Better things are possible they just do not come from government, they come in-spite of government

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

#144

Post by skidd0 » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 4:56 PM UTC

KerrAvon wrote: post #133

xhkkffbf wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> The telco lobbyists wrote the government regulations.

This is the issue. There isn't a free market in this (or many) sectors because of regulatory capture. If that were gone, if competition was even possible, then we would see improvement.

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

#145

Post by gustavus » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 4:57 PM UTC

sschueller wrote: post #57

josh2600 wrote: post #30

I'm fine with AT&T no longer supporting landlines if they start supporting fiber to every household. US broadband is a joke compared to many other parts of the world.

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.

> It just requires competency, money and an infrastructure that isn't for profit.

Uhhh.... Most of the nationwide infrastructure was put into place by the railroad companies that were definitely for profit organizations.

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

#146

Post by reaperducer » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 5:01 PM UTC

josh2600 wrote: post #111

ben_w wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

It turns out that servicing 100% of the population isn't practical when people choose to live in very remote areas.

Mostly correct. However, not everyone chooses to live in a remote area. The Navajo, referenced above, are among the people who were forced to settle in a particular area, at the point of a government gun.

Moreover, if it wasn't for people living in remote areas, people in the cities wouldn't have food.

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

#147

Post by reaperducer » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 5:03 PM UTC

SoftTalker wrote: post #114

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…

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.

That's still running water. I'm talking about homes with zero options for water. Not even a well.

And sometimes (like in New Mexico), thousands of homes are cut off from water infrastructure because some rich guy doesn't want a pipe running under his golf course.

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

#148

Post by WaitWaitWha » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 5:04 PM UTC

What I have not seen here ours why I still have a landline.

Telcos are required to have five 9 uptime for landlines in the USA. (That's less than 6 minutes a year.)

None of this is promised or regulated for internet based voice solution.

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

#149

Post by iknowstuff » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 5:14 PM UTC

josh2600 wrote: post #111

ben_w wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> It biases too hard towards city living, especially as we are seeing more and more people move away from cities

Urbanization is progressing.

Suburbia are not sustainable and should not be encouraged. As you just noticed, it takes way more money to service their infrastructure, and they bring in far less tax revenue to pay for it than dense mixed use developments.

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

#150

Post by Eddy_Viscosity2 » Sat, Feb 03, 2024, 5:22 PM UTC

gustavus wrote: post #141

KerrAvon wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Nope, you can’t the-free-market-will-fix-everything this one. The telco lobbyists wrote the government regulations Just a point of clarification, the free market generally means independence from government regulation. This isn't the free market failing so much as incumbents using the power of government to force their advantage, part of the argument of the free market is that by not allowing the government to inte…

Even in this version of the free market, monopoly is still the incentive and end goal. Eventually, either a single player wins out (possibly by buying or merging with previous competitors) or a few big players agree that colluding with each other is more profitable then competing (remember there is no government interfering in this free market to prevent this). Once this happens, new players won't enter the market because they can immediately be crushed by the incumbent.

So either way, monopoly is the inevitable end point.