Live data from Hacker News

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

pbs.org

141–150 of 246 posts

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

#141
post #74
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should be subject to regulation; they should not be granted monopolies. These are two entirely different concepts. The current system grants them monopolies, and fails to regulate them appropriately. This is exactly the wrong way round. But this is the problem with politicians: monopoly provides concentration of cash, and this can be tapped into far more efficiently from the perspective of political exploitation…

Actually , campaigns nowadays run on the concept of "bundlers," who are rich people who act as a funnel for their rich friends. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_in_the_United_...

You mean they used to, until the limits on secret donations from one rich guy were gotten rid of.

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

#142

It took fierce competition to even get broadband companies to advertise what they are offering. I had to deal with a very small local monopoly in Western Maryland that just advertised "faster than dial up," had typical pings of over 200. It was thick on the local board, had a deal with local government as the sole authorized supplier in the county. Now I'm in a different part of the country, can get FiOS, but while V…

Garrett or Allegany?

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

#143
post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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.

Lobbying bribery.

There's a difference between buying a politician diner and talking to them and writing a big fat check.

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

#144

It took fierce competition to even get broadband companies to advertise what they are offering. I had to deal with a very small local monopoly in Western Maryland that just advertised "faster than dial up," had typical pings of over 200. It was thick on the local board, had a deal with local government as the sole authorized supplier in the county. Now I'm in a different part of the country, can get FiOS, but while V…

> Now I'm in a different part of the country, can get FiOS, but while Verizon's service always delivers over 50 Mbps on speedtest sites, it often chokes on Youtube or Netflix. When that happens, there's no simple way to determine if it's the provider or some random provisioner in the middle.

If you have shell access to a Linux machine in a College of Engineering attached to some university somewhere [0], try this:

1) Use youtube-dl to get the actual URL of the video that Youtube is sending to your machine that's slow as balls. [1]

2a) Wget that url on your home machine.

2b) Wget that url on the machine attached to that university.

3) Notice the discrepancy between download speeds of those two machines. In particular, notice if your home download starts at full speed, but is throttled to super slow speeds after a couple minutes of video have been downloaded.

4) Run a traceroute (I love using mtr for this) to ensure that the route to Youtube from your home machine goes directly from your ISP's network to Google's network. If this is the case, then there's noone to blame for poor performance other than your ISP and Youtube.

Comcast used to severely throttle Youtube videos downloaded on my connection here in SF. Using the method outlined above, I discovered that:

* I had a direct path from Comcast to Youtube at both my house and at the university.

* At my house, the first minute or two of the video file was fetched at full link speed (~6MB/s), the remainder of the video (even when downloading a 1080p MP4) was fetched at ~100KB/s.

* The very same file when downloaded at a university across the country was fetched at full link speed (14MB/s) and never slowed down.

[0] To lessen the chance that the campus network admins will be artificially throttling your connection, natch.

[1] You will notice that this URL is super-long and appears to encode all sorts of fun stuff in the domain name. This (along with a traceroute) leads me to believe that accessing this URL at another physical location won't give you a file from another CDN that's closer to that other physical location.

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

#145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 fac…

I agree with your entire comment, but the "Rather Big Brotherish" part made me laugh, considering the recent NSA scandal, and the fact that the entire public is basically carrying around a 'telescreen' for all intents and purposes.

Off-topic but funny in and of itself. Also a small note, but even in America some places view face coverings with extreme caution, wearing one in a bank for instance is a big no-no. Not a religious issue in those sorts of cases, really an identification, wariness that you might rob the place issue.

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

#146

My Charter High Speed internet went from $60 to $40 a month on the spot just by threatening to leave them and go with AT&T U-Verse. And I did it all through their chat with a sales rep online without calling anyone. They even gave me a free cable modem. Moral of the Story: Shop around and make threats, you are the customer they need you and your money. They'd rather lose $20 a month than lose $40 so you can almost al…

That's because you have two options to choose between. Many have none, so it's either pay the price or have no home internet. Where the only choices are Comcast and Verizon, which offer near-identical packages and pricing in most markets, Comcast's retention department no longer negotiates. If you threaten to switch, they'll tell you to go ahead, and send a door-to-door sales rep to your home every 6 months.

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

#147
post #74
post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They should be subject to regulation; they should not be granted monopolies. These are two entirely different concepts. The current system grants them monopolies, and fails to regulate them appropriately. This is exactly the wrong way round. But this is the problem with politicians: monopoly provides concentration of cash, and this can be tapped into far more efficiently from the perspective of political exploitation…

Actually , campaigns nowadays run on the concept of "bundlers," who are rich people who act as a funnel for their rich friends. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_in_the_United_...

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/08/obama-golfs-with...

http://deneenborelli.com/2013/08/msnbc-boss-comcast-ceo-bria...

http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0811/into_the_woods_...

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/obamas-daughters-join-familys...

http://www.mediabistro.com/tvnewser/pres-obama-drops-by-mart...

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

#148

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?

> Would this operate better if it weren't on any 802.11 frequency, but another with less noise

Well, there main unlicensed bands used by hardware today are 2.4 (Full up), 5.8 (Filling), and 24.1 GHz (Relatively clear). If you want to get into other frequencies, you're going to need to license them ($$$). If you want to work with the frequencies already available, you're going to need to plan a little, since different frequencies have different speeds and penetrance.

Wirless meshs are neat in some aspects, a more guerilla approach to internet for sure, but you're definitely going to have an easier time dealing with bandwidth and noise if you just roll out your service over insulated wires.

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

#149
PacBell had built one of these next gen networks, it was even in limited deployments, as soon as SBC bought them, they killed it. It was an HFC network (hybrid fiber/coax)and was a commercial ready product. I'm not in a position to find citations right now, but if you google Pacific Bell and Hybrid Fiber Coax, you'll find the cites.

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

#150
post #59
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The health care system is fine if you can afford it. The main problem with American health care is financial, and if you have good insurance (which should come with any good job) it's fine. Not great, but on par with the rest of the first world. Limited annual leave depends on the job. If you're in software engineering or similar, you're unlikely to have a problem. If you get offered a job that doesn't offer the annu…

Murder rate thing is probably because an Australian national named Christopher Lane, in the US playing Baseball at college, was randomly murdered in Oklahoma this year. He was out jogging when a couple of teenagers ran up and shot him in the back for no obvious reason. Australian politicians immediately started telling people not to visit the US because it's so full of guns.

I've never heard of Christopher Lane before.

Wait, actually, on second thought, I have. But that didn't have any impact on my opinion of the US.

The murder rate statistic "thing" (as you described it) is based on the actual murder rate statistics. And my knowledge of US gun control.

Post reply on HN