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

Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

mikecp.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–49 of 49 posts

Re: Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

#41

Post by jarek »

oliwarner wrote: post #15
BenoitEssiambre wrote: post #11

What are the prices of competitors in the US? Here in New-Brunswick Canada, prices are: 80Mbps down & 30Mbps up: $69.95 /mo. for first 3 months then $100.95 /mo. 50Mbps down & 30Mbps up: $29.95 /mo. for first 3 months then $83.95 /mo. 20Mbps down & 15Mbps up: $29.95 /mo. for first 3 months then $68.95 /mo. Seems to be not that far from Google's prices.

Not far from their prices - miles from their product. You're comparing 110Mbps for $100/month against 1000Mbps* for $70/month and saying they're near equal. That doesn't make sense to me. *I'm judging from a speed test posted on the blog post that the line is asymmetric and down and upstream add up to 1Gbps.

The speedtest result posted in the blog post is really bad. 91.58 Mbps down and 35.01 Mbps up add up to "127 Mbps" in terms of your comparison. Of course, Google Fiber is much faster than that.

For the record, I'm currently paying $30/month (normal price $62/month) for 25/2 DSL in Vancouver, BC. If you live in a wired-up building, you can get 25/10 for $38/month, 50/10 for $62, 100/10 for $83, and 300/15 for $113 from a boutique ISP.

Re: Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

#42

Post by NPC82 »

oliwarner wrote: post #14

These short-sighted comments really annoy me. I would give parts of my reproductive system to get a fraction of a Google branded fibre and people are getting angsty about what Google gets "in return". No the sums don't add up. Tax payers will subsidise some of the costs and Google will undoubtedly analyse the traffic to deliver yet even more personalised advertising. The local government will subsidise parts of the i…

>"No the sums don't add up. Tax payers will subsidise some of the costs and Google will undoubtedly analyse the traffic to deliver yet even more personalised advertising. The local government will subsidise parts of the installation and make it legally as smooth as possible."

As much as I agree with you, this quote highlights something that cycles through my mind whenever I read about Google's ambitions. Basically, Google is doing and motivating people to do what our government should (and as we read, apparently somewhat can in some ways) do to improve our communications infrastructure. It annoys me to think that we could simply be building a new (potentially more neutral) fiber "highway" across the country with a similar model, run by the government. If only people weren't so afraid of government and hell bent on handing things off to private sector instead of the public sector. It's disappointing, and I feel in the very long run it could very well backfire on all of us if google succeeds and becomes the next AT&T.

Re: Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

#43

Post by jarek »

patrickaljord wrote: post #17
csssc wrote: post #5

It's not the "way to good to be true vibe", it's just that people in the US think that they have the best of everything so how can we have something out there so much better for the same. When in reality the US is far behind in infrastructure in a whole. So why this upgrade looks amazing the truth is its the only thing on par with the rest of the developed world.

Define "rest of the world", in most of South America, people get 100kb/s down and 20kb/s up. I guess most of Africa and Asia bar Japan, South Korea and a few others aren't fast either.

I don't know if grandparent post has been edited but it says "rest of the developed world" now.

Re: Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

#44

Post by jimrandomh »

I remember an article, way back, which claimed that YouTube was running at a loss, based on a dramatic over-estimation of its costs. This looks like the same thing again: unsupported assertion that Google's costs are going to be huge (because other telcos, which are very wasteful in ways that Google isn't, have huge costs).

I also think this article may be understating the upside, from Google's perspective. It looks like Google wants to displace cable companies not just as ISPs, but also as television distributors, replacing them with YouTube. That'd be worth a lot of money, and it's something they could reasonably achieve - but they need something like Google Fiber to put them in a good bargaining position with the content producers.

Re: Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

#45

Post by FireBeyond »

"To get that in writing, that’s 91.58 Mbps down and 35.01 Mbps up. For basically the same price, I’m lucky if I can get 9 Mbps down from Comcast here in Seattle. And that’s probably the fastest residential I’ve had in my life."

I use Comcast in Seattle. I pay $109 a month (for Business Class). Right now, I get 55mbps down, 35mbps up.

Re: Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

#46

Post by BenoitEssiambre »

oliwarner wrote: post #15
BenoitEssiambre wrote: post #11

What are the prices of competitors in the US? Here in New-Brunswick Canada, prices are: 80Mbps down & 30Mbps up: $69.95 /mo. for first 3 months then $100.95 /mo. 50Mbps down & 30Mbps up: $29.95 /mo. for first 3 months then $83.95 /mo. 20Mbps down & 15Mbps up: $29.95 /mo. for first 3 months then $68.95 /mo. Seems to be not that far from Google's prices.

Not far from their prices - miles from their product. You're comparing 110Mbps for $100/month against 1000Mbps* for $70/month and saying they're near equal. That doesn't make sense to me. *I'm judging from a speed test posted on the blog post that the line is asymmetric and down and upstream add up to 1Gbps.

I know Google mentions a "gigabit internet" but in the article they measured "91.58 Mbps down and 35.01 Mbps up".

Re: Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

#47

Post by gallerytungsten »

re:

"It seems many Kansas City taxpayers will be paying for Google Fiber whether they sign up or not. It also seems that Google has a LOT of free and unregulated access in the city. Kansas City could become a testbed for many a Google project."

[because] 'Google received stunning regulatory concessions and incentives.' [quoted within article.]

Yeah. Google got regulatory concessions not available to the 99%. Is that a surprise? This is how "business" is done with local governments across the country. Big businesses routinely get special deals in return for major investment.

Many times, these "investments" don't pan out. Local governments frequently fail to include clawback provisions for those occasions when Scam, Inc., takes the money and runs. It's a bet every time.

As to whether Kansas City taxpayers will pay: the fact is, they have already paid for the infrastructure. (Or they're still paying, via bonds.) So what? Google getting access to rights-of-way sounds like a bet that's better than average.

Proof is in the numbers. (Nice download speeds and the end user costs.) I hope the City Council of New Orleans, LA can get as good a deal.

Re: Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

#48

Post by greenyoda »

NPC82 wrote: post #42
oliwarner wrote: post #14

These short-sighted comments really annoy me. I would give parts of my reproductive system to get a fraction of a Google branded fibre and people are getting angsty about what Google gets "in return". No the sums don't add up. Tax payers will subsidise some of the costs and Google will undoubtedly analyse the traffic to deliver yet even more personalised advertising. The local government will subsidise parts of the i…

>"No the sums don't add up. Tax payers will subsidise some of the costs and Google will undoubtedly analyse the traffic to deliver yet even more personalised advertising. The local government will subsidise parts of the installation and make it legally as smooth as possible." As much as I agree with you, this quote highlights something that cycles through my mind whenever I read about Google's ambitions. Basically, G…

"It annoys me to think that we could simply be building a new (potentially more neutral) fiber 'highway' across the country with a similar model, run by the government. If only people weren't so afraid of government..."

The government has given us many reasons why we should fear a government-operated internet infrastructure. Do you really want the same government that's seizing web domains without due process to control the physical infrastructure as well? The same government that wants to vacuum up all the internet traffic of law-abiding citizens? That does warrantless wiretaps? That runs the TSA? Be careful what you wish for.

Re: Something About Google Fiber Doesn't Sit Right with Me

#49

Post by mcantelon »

jrockway wrote: post #38
mcantelon wrote: post #22

And think of the data they can mine by having full access to your Internet usage.

Please read the privacy policy before spreading misinformation: https://fiber.google.com/legal/privacy.html

Please don't pretend that privacy policies are carved in stone:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/03/googles-new-priva...

Post reply on HN