3 ms·
> a government ISP has inherent anti-competitive properties That's the point - as a natural monopoly, ISPs are inherently anti-competitive. They should be gove
by pdkl95 10y ago
> a government ISP has inherent anti-competitive properties
That's the point - as a natural monopoly, ISPs are inherently anti-competitive. They should be government (or quasi-government) entities just like every other utilities.
> Imagine trying to compete with a competitor that everyone has to pay for
Imagine trying to compete for last-mile water or electric service.
- JoshTriplett 10y ago> That's the point - as a natural monopoly, ISPs are inherently anti-competitive. No, last-mile fiber is a natural monopoly; connectivity through that fiber is incredibly competitive. I'm not arguing that last-mile fiber shouldn't be a utility; it especially makes sense to put it in when building new infrastructure, ideally along with conduits to allow for future expansion or maintenance. But that shouldn't imply acting as an ISP.
- techsupporter 10y ago> Imagine trying to compete for last-mile water or electric service. It is funny that you write that. As you probably know, but to inform others, electric service in several states is competitive. Customers choose a supplier and that supplier puts enough power on the grid to serve their needs. Suppliers are generally unregulated in terms of pricing and customer selection. The last mile poles and wires are owned by a regulated company with that company's rates subject to oversight and a requirement to serve every subscriber. That's how we should do internet connectivity.