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

Sixteen U.S. states still ban community-owned broadband networks

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 170 posts

Re: Sixteen U.S. states still ban community-owned broadband networks

#51

Post by dv_dt »

bob1029 wrote: post #23

I am on a small fiber ISP in one of these states. I don't think it is community owned, but the distinction doesn't seem that important from a customer experience standpoint. The scale and locality of the business is what makes it great. They can care a lot about the network quality because there isn't so much of it that they need to outsource everything. All elements of their infrastructure are not only on battery ba…

That works out great until some capital pool decides to start acquiring smaller isps to roll them up into a larger corporate behemoth. As has happened in multiple other industries from groceries, animal vets, rentals, software niches, to hospitals and these days nursing homes

Then the "efficiency" becomes how much can be extracted from the business and customers

Re: Sixteen U.S. states still ban community-owned broadband networks

#53

Post by 3D30497420 »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #15
varispeed wrote: post #11

[flagged]

"Corruption" isn't a binary. It exists in the West. It's bad that it exists in the West. But it exists less in the West than in some other places, and that difference matters.

It also depends a lot on the type of corruption and how it works.

I recall an econ class from ages ago that compared two middle-income countries. In one, there was a strong central government, so the corruption was relatively organized and predictable. The economy was harmed by the corruption, but still functioned, grew, and helped to reduce poverty.

In the other country, the central and regional governments were weak, so nearly every interaction with government officials (police, judges, customs, etc.) resulted in some kind of bribe with highly variable costs. This dramatically slowed down and reduced economic activity and increased poverty.

Re: Sixteen U.S. states still ban community-owned broadband networks

#55

Post by mschuster91 »

dv_dt wrote: post #51
bob1029 wrote: post #23

I am on a small fiber ISP in one of these states. I don't think it is community owned, but the distinction doesn't seem that important from a customer experience standpoint. The scale and locality of the business is what makes it great. They can care a lot about the network quality because there isn't so much of it that they need to outsource everything. All elements of their infrastructure are not only on battery ba…

That works out great until some capital pool decides to start acquiring smaller isps to roll them up into a larger corporate behemoth. As has happened in multiple other industries from groceries, animal vets, rentals, software niches, to hospitals and these days nursing homes Then the "efficiency" becomes how much can be extracted from the business and customers

that can be made very hard to outright impossible (or prohibitively expensive) to do, if the foundational documents of the company are set up correctly. Say, a non-profit, or a cooperative-ownership model...

Yes, non-profits can be fucked up too (as we saw with "Open"AI recently) and cooperative-ownerships can be bought out if one is willing to spend enough money, but it at least raises the bar a significant amount.

Re: Sixteen U.S. states still ban community-owned broadband networks

#57

Post by toast0 »

jtbayly wrote: post #16
cj wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that happens, wouldn't it be potentially worse than the current situation? Surely your local neighborhood isn't going to deploy its own dedicated satellite constellation. If/when satelite broadband becomes widespread, it will likely be consolidated and provided by 1 provider (maybe 2?) which might end up resulting in higher costs for everyone all around.

It is very hard for me to imagine space-based internet ever being able to be competitive financially with an earth-based option outside of special circumstances.

Running an LEO satellite constellation is very expensive. But installing and maintaining a wire to everyone's house is also very expensive.

IMHO, it's a question of capacity and acceptable service levels.

Starlink monthly pricing is higher than my DSL and nearby cable as well as my local muni fiber. But it's not so much higher as to rule it out. And the install fee is a lot lower than muni fiber. It's going to take a long time to get ROI on my installation cost for the muni fiber if I compare monthly cost to Starlink. Muni fiber service level should be much better, but Starlink service would probably have been good enough.

Re: Sixteen U.S. states still ban community-owned broadband networks

#58

Post by Brian_K_White »

A hundred years ago on irc someone from Russia was describing their internet connection, which was ethernet, while I had only ever heard of dial up outside of large companies.

It was just people had set up their own hubs and switches in their appartment buildings and strung cables between buildings.

This blew my mind. They just ran themselves ethernet and everyone got a drop from a switch in their building.

It wasn't clear how it got from a neighborgood level upstream.

But just the idea that they could all just decide to give themselves internet, and ethernet no less, string ethernet outside the walls of their own appartments to other appartments, and outside the building from one building to another? Unimaginable in the US. I was boggled and jealous.

Re: Sixteen U.S. states still ban community-owned broadband networks

#59

Post by [deleted] »

jvanderbot wrote: post #36
josefresco wrote: post #30

Sixteen states (down from 21), detailed here: https://communitynets.org/content/state-state-preemption-sta... Despite this ban, many communities in these states have pushed forward.

And there's more good news. Minnesota is not on that map, but Minnesota has moved in very good directions re: ISPs. My rural neighbors have community internet, and it's _good_. High quality fiber. I have centurylink - ok not a community plan, but it competes directly with T-mobile, Xfinity (comcast), and other cell-based providers, and provides an excellent product for much cheaper. And I know for a fact that colorad…

[deleted]

Re: Sixteen U.S. states still ban community-owned broadband networks

#60

Post by tialaramex »

EGreg wrote: post #38
tialaramex wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you seeing a "decentralized solution"?

“Communities getting together and making their own broadband”? Big Telco Cartels using Big Government to shut it down? Why is this bad: https://qbix.com/blog/2017/12/18/power-to-the-people/

Oh! Yes, “Communities getting together and making their own broadband” does sound like a decentralized approach and I agree that it's worth doing and certainly shouldn't be outlawed. I didn't see allergic reactions to that - but maybe I didn't look enough yet.

This sub-thread seems to be about using StarLink, which I don't see as any sort of "decentralized" given it is literally global and in effect controlled by one billionaire so hence my question.

Post reply on HN