I had Google Fiber installed in my crapbox Barton Hills duplex (Austin, Texas)... I want to say 2015? It was cool, a then-neat-gimmick that I had to wait years for installation. I now have Chattanooga's public utility fiber, provided by the local electricity provider (EPBfiber, part of the electric fiber board) to EVERY SINGLE ADDRESS SERVICED BY THE POWER COMPANY. The latter scenario is SO MUCH BETTER that the state…
When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
101–110 of 121 posts
Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
#102Summary: Google tried to "nano"-trench Louisville, KY using 2" deep trenches (by comparison micro-trenching is typically 6" deep) then use epoxy to cover the trench. The epoxy didn't stand up to tires. Google tried to replace the epoxy with asphalt but that damaged the fiber. Google determined at that point that nano-trenching wouldn't work and didn't want to spend additional money to remedy the situation, so they ab…
Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
#103Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I get annoyed as much as anyone with Google's "shiny object" penchants, but this isn't one of those cases. The article is literally about them abandoning it in a given city because an idea that doesn't pass the sniff test worked out terribly. This is very much Google abandoning a shiny object just because.
"This isn't one of those areas" wasn't referring to Google yet again abandoning a shiny object, it was referring to me getting annoyed about them doing it. Look, we all know, Google abandoning shit is a meme at this point. But there are literally no downsides to the consumer of going with the better product of Google Fiber even if they do abandon it. It's like you and other people want to be mad at Google just becaus…
Sure, if your time is worth nothing, then there are no downsides.
If you value your time and end up in a scenario like the article describes, you're looking at (a) service interruptions because they wanted to cheap out on the installation, followed by (b) service cancellation because they couldn't be bothered to rectify the problem they caused by cheaping out.
Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> $70/month for 1 Gbps. I'm paying $7 / month for 0.5 Gbps. I'd say it's worth the tradeoff.
That is stunning it is so cheap. Same city? If not, where and how? I don't know how any ISP could make money.
Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
#105Summary: Google tried to "nano"-trench Louisville, KY using 2" deep trenches (by comparison micro-trenching is typically 6" deep) then use epoxy to cover the trench. The epoxy didn't stand up to tires. Google tried to replace the epoxy with asphalt but that damaged the fiber. Google determined at that point that nano-trenching wouldn't work and didn't want to spend additional money to remedy the situation, so they ab…
I'm guessing Google's presence is also what keeps your AT&T bill at $70/mo.
Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
#106Earlier quoted context omitted.
the state of Tennessee effectively has banned [still cat-and-mouse] other cities from implementing Chattanooga's beloved solution It's bleakly hilarious that politicians of a certain stripe fall over themselves to pass laws against policies that deliver value to the public.
Can I make a health insurance company that only insures healthy people?
Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
#107Earlier quoted context omitted.
It fails basic civil engineering on so many levels. Imagine doing that in a city with an active frost line well below 2". How many pothole-related outages would you expect to obviously experience if you were to try such an experiment? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frost_line
Is cold weather bad for fiber? I'm confused by this post. It fails basic civil engineering on so many levels. This is classic HN armchair engineering. I'm sure Google didn't put any thought into their physical rollout.
> Is cold weather bad for fiber?
Both the Frost Line wikipedia page I included and the Frost Heaving page that has been also posted paint a picture, but if you really want a lay description, here's a rough one:
The frost line is about how far down groundwater seeps into the soil (and even most types of asphalt) and generally remains there in some proportion throughout the year. One way to think of it is that the ground can be considered some form of "moist" at and above that line at just about all times of year. That hugely comes into play in cold weather which is why it is called the "frost line": water expands as it freezes, it takes up more space in the ground and in the asphalt. This expansions causes "frost heaving", the expansion of cold water causes things in the ground to sometimes not stay in the ground, chunks of asphalt don't stay concreted to the rest of the road (potholes), etc.
So the frost line is something of the line of "if you want a thing to stay buried, you must bury at least this below the frost line". That includes buildings as the frost line even determines some of the safety requirements for the foundations of buildings as they too can get frost heaved out of the ground in worst cases.
There's never a case where "nano-trenching" 2" into roads makes sense when 2" (or more) potholes are common naturally in cold weather. That's why civil engineers have used terms like "frost line" for centuries at this point. Just one pothole and the wire is at the very least exposed to the elements. At that point it is running through the middle of a pothole in the middle of a road so you should be able to guess what the most likely next outcome is, even in the best case that the wire survived the frost heaving.
(This is also before you add in the fact that burying under 2" of asphalt wasn't even their first attempt, but their second. Their first attempt was burying under 2" of epoxy or as more commonly named: glue. Their terrible epoxy melted in warm weather, creating warm weather potholes in the streets. Their terrible epoxy mixed worse with water and turned city streets into nothing but potholes in the cold weather.)
On its own, it's really hard to give Google any credit for forethought in their rollout because potholes in cold weather is such common sense, no shit, Sherlock it shouldn't have ever needed to be said up front.
That said, I'm sure it was said up front a lot that the city was "untrenchable". Most of the city, especially the urban core and several major neighborhoods, isn't a good candidate for any sort of trenching. Not just because the city has a low frost line (which it does), but also because the city is in the middle of what is referred to as "karst country". The city is on top of giant limestone deposits which are full of caves both man-made and natural. Dig too deep (which is not far below the frost line of the city) in many neighborhoods and you risk sinkholes and cave-ins and worse.
A civil engineer I'm not allowed to name because they were under NDA at the time and Google would sue them said to me once, and I paraphrase because there was a lot more cursing and foul language over beers "What part of untrenchable did those idiots not understand?"
Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
#108Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you run home servers and like having complete control, I recommend staying away from AT&T Fiber. They play lots of network games (port remapping/takeover, routing issues, no limits but limits!). Google Fiber, on the other hand, has been clean and clear.
That's quite a shame, our area recently got AT&T fiber and I was excited to move off Comcast with the maximum of 35mbps up I get.
I bypass the AT&T router: https://github.com/jaysoffian/eap_proxy
(I'm a crazy person so I also relocated their ONT to inside my home to keep it out of the summer temperatures.)
Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
#109Summary: Google tried to "nano"-trench Louisville, KY using 2" deep trenches (by comparison micro-trenching is typically 6" deep) then use epoxy to cover the trench. The epoxy didn't stand up to tires. Google tried to replace the epoxy with asphalt but that damaged the fiber. Google determined at that point that nano-trenching wouldn't work and didn't want to spend additional money to remedy the situation, so they ab…
> So yeah, Google got AT&T to get off their butts, but it took Google 8 years to get to my address. Meanwhile, AT&T is still $70/mo, includes HBO (er, Max), and is reliable, so I don't really have any reason to switch. I'm guessing Google's presence is also what keeps your AT&T bill at $70/mo.
Re: When Google Fiber abandons your city as a failed experiment (2019)
#110Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is cold weather bad for fiber? I'm confused by this post. It fails basic civil engineering on so many levels. This is classic HN armchair engineering. I'm sure Google didn't put any thought into their physical rollout.
With the benefits of hindsight, no it didn't look Google put any thought into their physical rollout. They had years of good planning with a rollout plan (electrical poles) with lots of city buy in that they tossed at the literal last minute to "move fast" (the rollout they did do was slower than the original plan, lol) and "break things" (city streets), with much less city buy-in and a lot fewer civil engineers even…
Isn't it just that traditional trenching would have been too expensive for Google to justify?
Google apparently didn't even want to spend the expense running it on utility poles, which frankly, I would naively think would be the cheapest option.