Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Friday March 11 2016, @05:17AM   Printer-friendly
from the back-to-the-early-days-of-DSL dept.

Susan Crawford, author of Captive Audience: The Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age who also ironically shares a name with a telecom fatcat, has published an analysis of the recent Google fiber deal in Huntsville Alabama. This deal differs from all previous deals in that the city will build and own the fiber network and that Google has only committed to lease capacity on it, leaving the city the option to lease to other internet service providers and thus engender competition for internet access. It is a utility model for connectivity that has had great success in other nations, but is contrary to the way American telecom corporations view their role in the broadband market.


Original Submission

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 11 2016, @05:31AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 11 2016, @05:31AM (#316922)

    AND TAKE THE MARK!

    (ps: never take the mark!)

  • (Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Friday March 11 2016, @06:10AM

    by Zz9zZ (1348) on Friday March 11 2016, @06:10AM (#316924)

    Sweet! I hope the utility model is allowed a chance. I remember the city owned wifi that was rolled out and then got hammered by corporations calling foul.

    --
    ~Tilting at windmills~
    • (Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Friday March 11 2016, @07:40AM

      by frojack (1554) Subscriber Badge on Friday March 11 2016, @07:40AM (#316941) Journal

      Muny fiber is also getting hammered by politicians at the state government level.

      Craig Settles [wordpress.com] wrote a characterization of all the laws in all the states. The summary is at the prior link and the detail is here:
      http://cjspeaks.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Snapshot-1-15.pdf [cjspeaks.com]

      Settles expects these laws to get hammered down in the coming years, especially since the Feds are offering legal help to municipalities that want to get around their state's regulations. Getting beat up by the feds a few times and even the most restrictive states will start revising their laws.

      He mentions three types of laws on the books of 21 states:
      If-Then Laws, Minefield Laws, Total Bans. They are all explained beginning on page 8 of the above PDF.

      --
      No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
      • (Score: 2) by bitstream on Friday March 11 2016, @12:47PM

        by bitstream (6144) on Friday March 11 2016, @12:47PM (#316988) Journal

        It's kind of hilarious that a country that want to be seen as at the edge of technology have these laws that fit backwater villages with miniature popes and incumbents. Perhaps it's better to just move to get things done?

      • (Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Friday March 11 2016, @09:12PM

        by Zz9zZ (1348) on Friday March 11 2016, @09:12PM (#317167)

        Thanks for that, I'm encouraged by the fact that the If they won't build it, Then the municipality can. I hope more cities are able to push through with it.

        One possible problem I see on the horizon is dealing with Tier 1 and 2 networks. If a city has its own network, it must connect to the larger net through a Tier 1, possibly Tier 2. I guess this is where Net Neutrality becomes exceedingly important, but I can see a few valid problems for private networks.

        If Cable Co. owns the Tier 1 access points into a town, then the town will have to pay Cable Co. to access the outside lines. If enough of Cable Co's customers switch to the muni connection then Cable Co won't be getting enough money to justify keeping their infrastructure in place. Hopefully market competition will actually bring prices in line, but access to internet backbones seems like a valid concern.

        --
        ~Tilting at windmills~
  • (Score: 2) by takyon on Friday March 11 2016, @06:13AM

    by takyon (881) <takyonNO@SPAMsoylentnews.org> on Friday March 11 2016, @06:13AM (#316925) Journal

    Will the local neighborly collective ISP be able to compete against Google and other giants that have more experience and greater scale?

    --
    [SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
    • (Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Friday March 11 2016, @07:32AM

      by Zz9zZ (1348) on Friday March 11 2016, @07:32AM (#316936)

      I don't see how the bigger players will have overly much more of an advantage. the ISP is a "dumb pipe" as some refer to it, and there are plenty of experts who know how to run an ISP. I'm sure it would be quite easy to poach some of the big cable co's talent, possibly even for a small pay cut!

      If my choices were between good service run by Google, or good service run by Local Techshop I would opt for the local every time. Even if Google offered a cheaper option, it would have to be ridiculously cheaper for me to entrust my privacy to them. Instead of needing to use Google's services to be tracked by them, anyone using them as an ISP would automatically have their unencrypted data vacuumed into the cloud.

      --
      ~Tilting at windmills~
      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 11 2016, @08:34AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 11 2016, @08:34AM (#316954)

        That's what I was wondering. I haven't seen any news that Google is violating people's privacy, but I wouldn't exactly trust them, given their business model. Maybe most other ISPs (mainly the big ones) can't be trusted either, but that applies to Google even more so.

  • (Score: -1, Offtopic) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 11 2016, @07:20AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 11 2016, @07:20AM (#316932)

    I just started the golden age of shitposting! Behold my future prediction with no evidence!

    Without the headline I suspect this story would have been rejected.

  • (Score: 2) by khchung on Friday March 11 2016, @07:54AM

    by khchung (457) on Friday March 11 2016, @07:54AM (#316944)

    I got 1Gbps (yes, 1000Mbps, not a typo) home internet for years already.

    So how fast is this new Golden Age "high speed"? The only numbers in the article are dollar amounts.

  • (Score: 2) by snufu on Friday March 11 2016, @08:43AM

    by snufu (5855) on Friday March 11 2016, @08:43AM (#316955)

    Our city won't even pay to fill ten year old potholes.

    • (Score: 4, Funny) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Friday March 11 2016, @12:48PM

      by GreatAuntAnesthesia (3275) on Friday March 11 2016, @12:48PM (#316989) Journal

      Perhaps they are waiting for there to be so many potholes that they form a trench along the length of the road.

      Then you lay fibre in the trench, and fill it in. Voila! Two birds, one stone.

      • (Score: 2) by snufu on Saturday March 12 2016, @12:06AM

        by snufu (5855) on Saturday March 12 2016, @12:06AM (#317231)

        ... So that's what the city meant with their "Drive for Fiber" program.

    • (Score: 1) by mgcarley on Sunday April 03 2016, @11:01AM

      by mgcarley (2753) on Sunday April 03 2016, @11:01AM (#326424) Homepage

      Filling potholes probably doesn't make them money. Muni fiber (done right) can.

      --
      Founder & COO, Hayai. We're in India (hayai.in) & the USA (hayaibroadband.com) // Twitter: @mgcarley
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 11 2016, @08:47AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 11 2016, @08:47AM (#316956)

    The neighbors' xfinitywifi is fast enough for me.

    Let me see, Comcast for free, or share Google Fee Fi Fuckery with hipsters.

    Choices, choices.

    I'll stick with Comcast.