The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007) • Hacker News Board

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#131

Post by derleth » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 6:35 AM UTC

gradstudent wrote: post #128

derleth wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I note you didn't respond to the fact it's illegal to dress as a Muslim in some places in Europe but it's legal everywhere in the USA.

To the best of my knowledge it is not "illegal to dress as a Muslim" anywhere in Europe. In France it is prohibited to cover one's face while in public. The argument for this law is not grounded in any religious objection, as I understand it, but rather in the fact that face coverings make identification difficult and do not fit in with the expected norms for social interaction in that country. France also has a ban…

> The argument for this law is not grounded in any religious objection, as I understand it

Wow. This is monumentally dishonest, especially given how the law came to be and how it's been applied.

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/when-did-islamop...

> but rather in the fact that face coverings make identification difficult

A poor reason to assault someone's culture and religion. Rather Big Brotherish, in fact.

> and do not fit in with the expected norms for social interaction in that country.

Back in the day, allowing blacks and whites into the same schools didn't fit in with the expected norms for social interaction in the USA. We got over it.

> France also has a ban on the display of religious symbols in public schools.

This I don't have a huge problem with, even though it seems a bit over-broad. Does it also prohibit people from wearing cross necklaces, for example? How about if someone had put ashes on their face for Ash Wednesday?

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#132

Post by VikingIV » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 6:38 AM UTC

thundara wrote: post #127

kevinalexbrown wrote: post #124

Anyone who comes up with a reasonable way of bypassing the natural local monopolies of cable companies is going to make a fortune. I would think dense wireless networks in urban areas could work. I'm not an expert, and would be interested in hearing from one, but I imagine that wireless networks could benefit from algorithmic advances in a way that might be more difficult in traditional copper/fiber networks. If you…

> I would think dense wireless networks in urban areas could work You've basically described mesh networks. There are a number in cities across America, but are normally run by enthusiasts. The trouble is, in dense urban environments, there's a lot of noise to overcome, and if you don't work around that, your network will fall apart. Especially a problem with the coming 802.11ac routers which will crowd up the 5 GHz…

Let's take that rooftop box example. Would this operate better if it weren't on any 802.11 frequency, but another with less noise... a point-to-multipoint box which can communicate with a proprietary gateway in each domicile (or open source device design for enthusiasts), which could also provide routing?

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#133

Post by zurn » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 6:46 AM UTC

This is not really an American problem. In nearly all developed countries the delivered broadband "moore's law" has been abysmal compared to what technology allows.

In an apartment building the cost of per apartment gigabit ethernet with a couple of trunked 10 gig ports for last mile would be very very low.

(And we'd have much faster tech for same money, but development stalled due to lack of deployment - 10 gig ethernet is what 12 years old now?)

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#134

Post by rational_indian » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 6:58 AM UTC

gcb0 wrote: post #92

ojbyrne wrote: post #68

The first comment on the page sums it up: "America is the only country in the world where BRIBERY is legalized and stupidly called lobbying."

and rather uninformed. lobbying may not be as efficient elsewhere as it is here, but it exists everywhere.

>but it exists everywhere

But it's not legal.

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#135

Post by dubcanada » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 7:09 AM UTC

zurn wrote: post #133

This is not really an American problem. In nearly all developed countries the delivered broadband "moore's law" has been abysmal compared to what technology allows. In an apartment building the cost of per apartment gigabit ethernet with a couple of trunked 10 gig ports for last mile would be very very low. (And we'd have much faster tech for same money, but development stalled due to lack of deployment - 10 gig ethe…

It's mostly a North American and maybe Australia thing tbh. Europe and Northern Europe and most of Asia/Africa is significantly better then NA.

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#136

Post by Moru » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 7:14 AM UTC

rational_indian wrote: post #134

gcb0 wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and rather uninformed. lobbying may not be as efficient elsewhere as it is here, but it exists everywhere.

>but it exists everywhere But it's not legal.

Lobbying is legal in the EU too. The organisation is one of the bigger employers in the EU. It's just not so known as in the US.

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#137

Post by EEGuy » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 7:15 AM UTC

I'm so glad the concept of "dial tone", video or otherwise, never crossed the demand for and rollout of content-neutral, flat-rate-billed, backbone-peering-supported Internet Service.

Having worked in voice telecom billing for 11 years, it is my observation that phone companies adore detail billing. Imagine an ISP bill which details all the websites you visit, and bills each visit according to some value the phone company might opaquely ascribe. It might have gone that way with a thankfully unimplemented evolution of the amorphous notion of "video dial tone".

Had this $200 billion boondoggle actually given us megabit access, then it would be... access to what, exactly? I can't imagine phone companies providing access to the flat-rate, always on, servers-allowed, content-neutral Internet we have now, no matter the bit rate.

The thought of all phone companies collectively coming up with a service like Netflix is, to me, as unimaginable as the thought of those same phone companies coming up with the iPhone.

Yes, $200 billion is a shameful waste of ratepayer funds and a regulatory failure. But thankfully, it neither collared nor crossed with the Internet.

In my opinion, separation of ownership of content (and applications, and platforms, and end users) from the common carriers who own some of the "plumbing" which connects routers to routers to routers becomes fundamental to a free Internet.

(Edits for grammar, clarity, tone)

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#138

Post by gametheoretic » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 7:16 AM UTC

VikingIV wrote: post #132

thundara wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would think dense wireless networks in urban areas could work You've basically described mesh networks. There are a number in cities across America, but are normally run by enthusiasts. The trouble is, in dense urban environments, there's a lot of noise to overcome, and if you don't work around that, your network will fall apart. Especially a problem with the coming 802.11ac routers which will crowd up the 5 GHz…

Let's take that rooftop box example. Would this operate better if it weren't on any 802.11 frequency, but another with less noise... a point-to-multipoint box which can communicate with a proprietary gateway in each domicile (or open source device design for enthusiasts), which could also provide routing?

>a proprietary gateway in each domicile (or open source device design for enthusiasts), which could also provide routing?

Why not bypass this and go straight to the device? Imagine paying for internet and not being limited to your house. Then you can expand your "work somewhere which is not your home and not your office" options beyond just Starbucks, et al. Plus the more different you are from the current business model, the better; you have a greater variety of ways to sell yourself, e.g. "This Internet Option, for the on-the-go professional who doesn't have time for wires!" or "Comcast wants you to have a modem. Lol, ok, Grandpa. Eyeroll.gif" or even "Gee Honey, you were right about This Internet Option. I never realized how much more alive - and sexy, and free - I feel using my laptop on the backyard swing!" Also you could compete on price (dramatically so!) with mobile carriers, if your network of boxes is, say, at least city-wide. Home, work, and between.

(Sorry about that. I was having fun.)

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#139

Post by simoncion » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 7:20 AM UTC

kevinalexbrown wrote: post #124

Anyone who comes up with a reasonable way of bypassing the natural local monopolies of cable companies is going to make a fortune. I would think dense wireless networks in urban areas could work. I'm not an expert, and would be interested in hearing from one, but I imagine that wireless networks could benefit from algorithmic advances in a way that might be more difficult in traditional copper/fiber networks. If you…

> Anyone who comes up with a reasonable way of bypassing the natural local monopolies of cable companies is going to make a fortune.

That reasonable way is for municipalities to gather some courage and run their own open-access fiber. Until municipalities realize that the monopolies that they've granted their "local" cable companies are now working fiercely against the interests of their citizenry, real change in this space won't happen.

To anyone who's thinking of trotting out the old "The US is too spread out to make that feasible!" canard: NYC, SFO, and SJC have slower, poorer, more expensive per bps residential broadband options than Chattanooga, TN does. Make sure to carefully examine the population densities and regions surrounding each of those metro areas before making your argument. :)

Re: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen (2007)

#140

Post by Moru » Wed, Jan 08, 2014, 7:22 AM UTC

gonzo wrote: post #91

fragsworth wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My broadband service is terrible My business gets 10mbps down, 2mbps up, for $90/month in Los Angeles. It also goes down frequently (5-6 times a year). I think the next best upload rate (5mbps) was $400/month or so with some bullshit "enterprise" plan. It takes way too long to do simple file transfers from my office to a remote machine. I fucking hate it and our culture of monopolies can go to hell.

My business has a redundant 10Gbps connection to our cabinet at zColo. We lease the dark fiber (but it doesn't run very far, so it's not very expensive.) The cabinet has a 1Gbps uplink for Internet. Home is 50Mbps FTTH right now. Google should start to deploy in ATX during 2014, and when they come to my neighborhood, I plan to switch to Google Fiber. I also have a Time Warner fiber service on premise, mainly for one…

I have lived in a number of places in northern Sweden. All had fiber to the house. New houses doesn't even have copper-lines for phones any more, they all go fiber. Some houses don't even have phone-outlets, only a 100 Mbit/s RJ45.

A town with 2500 people (100 Mbit/s the last 20 years, Between $60 and $30 per month)

Smaller town with 250 people (100 Mbit/s the last 15 years, $30 per month)

Small city with 100 000 people (100-1000 Mbit/s the last 15 years, $35 per month including IP-phone box and phone-account)

Been wondering how long it would take for you guys to do something about your internet connections. You keep blaming the big distances and so on but everyone I know is living in big cities and still has realy bad DSL...