Live data from Hacker News

Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

arstechnica.com

41–50 of 76 posts

Re: Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

#41
post #15

>Of course, not everyone's home Internet is terrible. I dispute this. Is Google Fiber all right? Do you Silicon Valley folks get decent service? Because out here in the real world, ISPs are uniformly horrible. I haven't met or talked to anyone on the entire Internet who is satisfied, or simply not constantly enraged, by their ISP. It seems every single one is corrupt and incompetent at the same time.

Our primary ISP is crown-owned (it's basically a public utility, just like our power, water, gas, etc). They also provide phone service and cellular service.

Their prices are not the best in the world, but they're reasonable and the best around here. While every other ISP is trying to find ways to get people to use less data to avoid infrastructure upgrades, they're rolling out FTTH. $160/mo get's you 200/60.

Everywhere I've ever lived and every connection I've ever tested as been the speed sold +/-3%. There are no monthly caps (not even soft caps). When the CRTC allowed charging for bandwidth overages, they came out and simply said "Our mandate is not to make money, it is to provide a service to the public. We will not charge for overages as it does not further our mandate."

We have surprisingly close to full coverage of the province even though there are a lot of rural locations.

On the cellular side of things, it's thanks to them our province gets better deals from all of the carriers (even national ones). Our crown corp had been offering deals that were worlds better than every other carrier, forcing the others to try and compete.

At the end of the year, they still generally drop money back in the province's coffers.

Guess what? I'm pretty much satisfied (a little sad my neighbourhood is so far down the list for the FTTH rollout is all) and not constantly enraged.

We have this strange hybrid between market competition and a public utility. I don't know if going fully to a utility would be a benefit for us - the way it's structured now there are still incentives/requirements for the utility to remain competitive and keep prices low. I hesitate to see how this would be bastardized should those requirements go away.

Re: Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

#42
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not agree more for this specific case. Really wish Internet was just another utility that we paid for and not worry about the monopoly these ISPs have specially in some remote areas.

Remote areas? I had remarkably little choice in New York City . I lived in Brooklyn and had Optimum Online. I was happy with it, but then moved to Queens and now I had to switch to RCN, because they were in my building and Optimum wasn't. Moved to Manhattan, and had to get TWC, until FiOS was installed in the building.

You probably had a choice to opt out. I must pay $50/month to Comcast for TV service in my apartment in the DC suburbs, whether I use it or not (and I don't). I then pay them $80 more for Internet. The only other option is wireless.

Re: Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is some parallel, but ISPs are not commoditized like electricity utilities are. Once consumer-level data is pretty even across the board and companies are only competing for lock-in and price, those kinds of regulations make much more sense. In other words, let's wait until use cases like uploading multiple HD video streams are trivial before we freeze the current technical expectations and business models.

Why would regulation freeze technical expectations? IP transit pretty much boils down to cables and switches. A regulatory model that mandates specific speeds could probably even specify allowed tariffs. In theory it should be fine. I'm not sure there's a whole lot of "business models" for such a simple thing as transit. Most of those models are just trying to find breakage so you can market services you hopefully do…

I don't think transit is an apt analog to data provider services. I also don't think transit is regulated to the degree that you would like to regulate data.

We don't have omnibus shipping/commuting/travelling utilities, and many of the constituent parts of this hypothetical megautility (USPS, AmTrak) are money pits that fail to adapt to the changing needs of the population. In other words, I don't think transit is a commodity either.

Electricity, water, garbage, sewage... those are commodity utilities, for the most part. I would also mention phones, but landlines are quickly becoming redundant, which underscores my point if anything.

Re: Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remote areas? I had remarkably little choice in New York City . I lived in Brooklyn and had Optimum Online. I was happy with it, but then moved to Queens and now I had to switch to RCN, because they were in my building and Optimum wasn't. Moved to Manhattan, and had to get TWC, until FiOS was installed in the building.

You probably had a choice to opt out. I must pay $50/month to Comcast for TV service in my apartment in the DC suburbs, whether I use it or not (and I don't). I then pay them $80 more for Internet. The only other option is wireless.

... how does that work? Was it a part of your lease agreement, or a mandatory part of your ISP's offer?

Re: Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

#46
I worked for a major ISP - Two of them, one being the largest suppliers of DSL nationwide and the other, their largest reseller.

There are some horror stories out there - in truth, the majority of customers get what they pay for monthly without the plethora of stupids presented here.

On the other hand, when I set up service with Comcast, my bill had 4-5 mystery charges monthly for 4 months, no one could explain what they were, and they got credited. But still, it was an hour of my time each time it happened.

Re: Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

#47
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could not agree more for this specific case. Really wish Internet was just another utility that we paid for and not worry about the monopoly these ISPs have specially in some remote areas.

Remote areas? I had remarkably little choice in New York City . I lived in Brooklyn and had Optimum Online. I was happy with it, but then moved to Queens and now I had to switch to RCN, because they were in my building and Optimum wasn't. Moved to Manhattan, and had to get TWC, until FiOS was installed in the building.

I hear you. I used to live in NYC (queens) a long time ago and remember the only option in our building was TWC. But when I say remote area, I mean the entire area. We only have comcast or nothing. So now I am forced to pay for the "bundle" of TV and Internet even though all I want is Internet. Yes I called them to only get Internet and even then, you have to pay for the basic cable package. Leave it or take it.

Re: Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

#48

It's time to make Internet access a public utility, just like water and electricity. In this day and age, Internet access is as much an essential part of life as both of the above. Remember that the cables that they use were paid for with public tax money . The private companies are selling back to us the infrastructure that we already paid to build. This is one issue on which neither progressives (who tend to favor…

And then they don't even provide internet access. They go out of their way to not peer with anyone, to their ultimate goal where net neutrality is abolished and they can charge you to access Google and Google to serve you.

It would be half reasonable if they just didn't bother to invest in infrastructure, you know like in public transport, but instead they are actively working to make it worse.

Re: Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

#49
Interesting article for me, being that I have no experience with the ISP industry in America at all.

"The best solution, I think, is to lay fiber in all the municipalities and have consumers choose their ISP, with service delivered on the municipal fiber lines..."

This is exactly what has been happening where I live - Christchurch, New Zealand. A number of years ago, a city-owned LLC called Christchurch City Networks Limited (now known as Enable Networks[1]) began rolling out an extensive fibre network in the downtown/city-centre area. Initially, for about $700 (NZD) per month, you could lease a dark pair between your premises and your ISP of choice (or even directly between two arbitrary premises, plugging directly into your own equipment at each end, with no ISP involved).

You'd then negotiate arbitrary speed/bandwidth/caps with your chosen ISP. We were paying something like $3000 per month for a 1000 mbit/sec internet connection with (IIRC) a 2TB cap. This was probably 8 years ago or something, it doesn't cost anything like this now.

Latterly, they've been rolling out a GPON-based (passive) fibre network. If you are connected to this part of the network, there are highly standardised plans available from multiple ISPs. You can choose one of two speeds: 30 mbit/sec symmetric, or 100 mbit/sec symmetric. Different ISPs have different usage plans available. Any public (government-funded) school can sign up for a 30 mbit/sec plan, with unlimited traffic, for something like $200/month.

Amongst home users, ADSL2+ and VDSL2 are both still popular choices (and our pricing there seems similar enough to the US, with stupidly low caps and high prices), but fibre continues to gain traction.

[1] http://www.enable.net.nz

Re: Internet horror stories: How ISPs screwed over users

#50

It's time to make Internet access a public utility, just like water and electricity. In this day and age, Internet access is as much an essential part of life as both of the above. Remember that the cables that they use were paid for with public tax money . The private companies are selling back to us the infrastructure that we already paid to build. This is one issue on which neither progressives (who tend to favor…

> Remember that the cables that they use were paid for with public tax money. The private companies are selling back to us the infrastructure that we already paid to build.

Actually unless I was misinformed, they are selling back the unimproved infrastructure that we paid them to improve. The whole situation makes me so furious and there's nothing I can do. Mesh networks, I guess. I need to make some friends along a line from here to a backbone.

Post reply on HN