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

Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

online.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 126 posts

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#71

Post by rayiner »

w1ntermute wrote: post #31
saosebastiao wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sprawl makes infrastructure investment orders of magnitude more expensive. For example, a small business [1] provides the fastest consumer access in the city of Seattle, but they refuse to do business outside of extremely high density buildings. There is no way a small business could do the same in McSuburbia. In the sprawly world outside of the US's dense cities, only municipal governments with a lot of political wi…

That doesn't explain why internet speeds suck in NYC.

Its a combination of density, economics, and politics. Japan/Korea are best case scenario. Not only very dense, but people believe in tech as a way forward economically. In the U.S., the places that are dense also have intractable politics. Outside the tech set, you're not going to sell San Franciscans on the idea that gigabit should be an important priority. They couldn't care less.

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#72

Post by rayiner »

reversi_online wrote: post #69
res0nat0r wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Population density in NYC and SFO actually hurt new rollouts. That is why those places and Los Angeles will probably be dead last on a Google Fiber rollout (if ever). The old NYC infrastructure and all of the physical work (and permits, contracts, everything else) means a huge overhaul would most likely not be worth doing in dense and already wired places like these. Also rayiner pointed out in another thread that ac…

Look, you can't have it both ways. Either population density helps or hinders a fiber rollout--if it helps, then why is the urban U.S.A. just as far behind as the rest? If it hinders, then why do HK and SK have it when NYC doesn't? As for the remainder--well of course they're not making use of a service that they have no way to buy in the first place...and your insinuations remind me of the people in the early 19th c…

The urbanized parts of the U.S. aren't behind in general. If the east coast states were countries, a number would be top-5 on Akamai's list for highest average bandwidth. As for HK and SK: there is only one city in the U.S. as dense as Hong Kong or Seoul, and that's NYC. And it has FIOS. So why does everywhere in NYC not have FIOS? Is it because of lobbying? No, its because building infrastructure in dense places requires coordination, and its just not a big political priority the way it is in Asian countries. Its why infrastructure projects of all kinds cost more in the U.S. from trains to telecom. In other countries, the government makes it a priority to remove roadblocks to infrastructure development, in a top down way. In the U.S., every infrastructure project becomes mired in NIMBYISM. Look in the back yard of Silicon Valley. Why isn't SF wired with gigabit. Is it because Comcast had more lobbying muscle than tech in tech's own back yard? Its an absurd proposition. The roadblock is instead the same dysfunctional government and the voters that complain about Google busses.

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#73

Post by alexeisadeski3 »

klenwell wrote: post #57
jfasi wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree in terms of regulation: there is plenty of regulation on broadband internet, except it tends to discourage competition against broadband providers. This isn't a problem that is going to be solved by placing regulations on the industry. Your example of past subsidies provides an excellent argument for this: given the political clout these entities hold and have in the past used to stilt legislation in their…

What leads me to believe we'll do better with new regulations? The belief, as chimeracoder suggests, that regulation can done right. One point that caught my attention in an NPR report[1] on this dispute last week: IHS's Broughton says there was a similar dispute in South Korea a few years ago, and it was ultimately arbitrated by the government. I don't know the details of the South Korean dispute but I understand So…

South Korea also has highly invasive internet censorship.

Would you like that as well?

Oh of course not. We want the great parts but to leave the bad parts. Sometimes it's a package deal. I'll take what we've got, thank you very much.

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#74

Post by logfromblammo »

In brief, faster network connections are rolling out slowly because practically everyone that wants to do it faster is prevented from doing so thanks to statutory or logistical roadblocks thrown up by the incumbents, who have zero incentive to do it themselves because they enjoy a territory-designated monopoly.

The logical thing for most towns to do is to use their eminent domain powers to force the sale of easements and utility poles/tunnels to the municipality, and charge all utilities a flat rate based on pole capacity used. While two wires on a line of poles doesn't seem all that wasteful, two wires on two parallel lines of poles sounds pretty stupid. Digging up the street with two parallel trenches is even worse. As a consumer, I don't want a service provider in a position where it can keep its competitors from reaching by house via the best route possible. I want that access controlled by the cartel enforcer rather than any of the cartel members.

As a bonus, the town could allow residents or HOAs to hire qualified contractors to run and maintain their own cables to anywhere the poles/tunnels go. That way, if an ISP won't come to you, you can go to anything else you can reach.

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#75

Post by alexeisadeski3 »

nextweek2 wrote: post #10

I thought the USA was the model of capitalism. However it appears the opposite, monopolies run rampant. The free market is killed rather than encouraged.

>I thought the USA was the model of capitalism.

You mean to tell me that the NYT has been lying to me all these years?

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#76

Post by foobarqux »

rayiner wrote: post #67
chimeracoder wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I view the broadband industry as a fascinating example of what happens when an infrastructure industry meets the technology industry. I don't disagree with your comment, but your argument would seem to apply to the rest of the world, whereas in fact the US is in a fairly unique situation among developed countries. Most of the current situation can be explained by the fact that broadband is currently the only unregu…

Your whole post is based on a false premise, which is that customers have a problem with the status quo. I think internet companies have a problem with the status quo. They want somebody else to build the fat pipes crucial to their business. That's why Google fiber is a marketing and lobbying tool and not a real business.[1] But I don't think consumers here are any less happy than in other places. According to Akamai…

Engineers are lead users for internet usage, they predict what others will want in several years. And even average users would become upset if they found out how much more they are paying than Swedes.

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#77

Post by dublinben »

saosebastiao wrote: post #50
dublinben wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're absolutely correct. Population density is a red herring in this issue. The broadband situation is no better in the major cities of the U.S than it is in the rest of the country. Major cities in the rest of the developed world have much better connections somehow. One of the first deployments of gigabit fiber in the U.S. was in Chatanooga TN, with a population density of 471.9/km2. New York City has a populatio…

Density is not something that can be described adequately in a single number. It is entirely possible to have high residential densities in cities with remarkably low average densities. Moscow is a great example of this...their plazas and parks drive down average density way beyond the density that the average person experiences. Everybody talks about the last mile being the most expensive part of infrastructure, but…

Density either prevents better infrastructure in the US, or it doesn't. My use of statistics was merely to show that density has no relation to the existence of fiber internet infrastructure. The US cannot be too sprawling for fiber if areas with lower density in other countries have better internet. Major cities cannot also be too dense when cities with higher densities abroad also have better internet.

This is a commonly repeated argument in favor of the status-quo in the US, and I'm just trying to refute it whenever possible.

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#78

Post by brenschluss »

alexeisadeski3 wrote: post #73
klenwell wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What leads me to believe we'll do better with new regulations? The belief, as chimeracoder suggests, that regulation can done right. One point that caught my attention in an NPR report[1] on this dispute last week: IHS's Broughton says there was a similar dispute in South Korea a few years ago, and it was ultimately arbitrated by the government. I don't know the details of the South Korean dispute but I understand So…

South Korea also has highly invasive internet censorship. Would you like that as well? Oh of course not. We want the great parts but to leave the bad parts. Sometimes it's a package deal. I'll take what we've got, thank you very much.

South Korea's internet censorship has very little to do with their internet speeds. Saying "Well, if you want fast internet, it'll have to be censored" (as if our internet isn't fully monitored) is a false equivalence of the highest order.

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#79

Post by dublinben »

res0nat0r wrote: post #65
res0nat0r wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Population density in NYC and SFO actually hurt new rollouts. That is why those places and Los Angeles will probably be dead last on a Google Fiber rollout (if ever). The old NYC infrastructure and all of the physical work (and permits, contracts, everything else) means a huge overhaul would most likely not be worth doing in dense and already wired places like these. Also rayiner pointed out in another thread that ac…

Also: I know my dissent in pointing out that gigabit internet for $30/month everywhere in the USA isn't going to magically happen isn't popular around here, but you shouldn't down vote something you disagree with.

You're being downvoted because you're wrong. Density is a red herring that can be easily demonstrated by looking at comparative examples.

Re: Why Super-Fast Internet Is Coming Super Slowly

#80

Post by rayiner »

foobarqux wrote: post #76
rayiner wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your whole post is based on a false premise, which is that customers have a problem with the status quo. I think internet companies have a problem with the status quo. They want somebody else to build the fat pipes crucial to their business. That's why Google fiber is a marketing and lobbying tool and not a real business.[1] But I don't think consumers here are any less happy than in other places. According to Akamai…

Engineers are lead users for internet usage, they predict what others will want in several years. And even average users would become upset if they found out how much more they are paying than Swedes.

The U.S. beats Sweden in Akamai's study, so are we paying more to get more?
Post reply on HN