5 ms·

We need to move to a system where a tightly-regulated utility owns the wired infrastructure only, and leases access to a wide variety of ISPs, video services, e

by readams 10y ago

We need to move to a system where a tightly-regulated utility owns the wired infrastructure only, and leases access to a wide variety of ISPs, video services, etc. This solves the problem that the infrastructure costs involved create a natural monopoly while avoiding Comcast misbehavior. Otherwise I think it's safe to assume that once the caps are entrenched, they won't ever be increased and they'll try to move everyone into a regime like cell phone data is currently: high prices, tightly metered, innovation dead.

bigdubs 10y ago
T-Mobile is an example of cellular companies responding to tight competition and differentiating by removing caps / usage fees. The key is competition though, as you've pointed out.
- LeoPanthera 10y ago
  The new T-Mobile "One" plans are T-Mobile rapidly trying to "re-carrier" itself after the briefly exciting Uncarrier days. There are indeed no caps, but only at the expense of streaming video, which is throttled and restricted to SD resolutions, unless you pay extra to get HD, which seems to me to be a blatant disregard of net neutrality.
- kuschku 10y ago
  You do realize T-Mobile is on a full EEE trip there? Look at Germany, where they existed for a while already, and have pushed against net neutrality, refuse to peer with companies unless they get paid, replace ads in websites with their own with MitM proxies and so on. T-Online/T-Mobile are the worst of the worst.
  - bogomipz 10y ago
    What is EEE? Unfortunately paid peering is pretty much the norm these days unless you are part of the exclusive club of Tier 1 ISPs, not that I'm defending it. I don't have much great to say about any of the wireless carriers but I feel like T-Mobile is at least trying new things. The T Mobile One plan for instance is really great if you travel internationally. I don't know of any other carrier that is doing that.
    - l1n 10y ago
      "Embrace, extend, and extinguish", also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate", is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found that was used internally by Microsoft to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace_extend_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace_extend_extinguish
- eli 10y ago
  T-Mobile favors content from certain providers and in certain formats by exempting their traffic from data caps. A very anti-net neutrality move cleverly positioned as a customer benefit. I like T-Mobile and dislike Comcast, but IMHO violating net neutrality by billing for data differently based on who I'm exchanging packets with is much worse than being a dumb pipe that happens to have a monthly download cap.
rhino369 10y ago
The problem with that for cable systems is that you don't have a private circuit. You and all your neighbors are sharing a circuit. So I'm not sure how you'd lease that a house by house basis. Telecoms have individual circuits going to each house that can be leased. The problem is that the majority of those need massive upgrades to go beyond adsl speeds. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
- Symbiote 10y ago
  There must be something individual to each customer on cable, otherwise Internet access wouldn't work. In the proposed system, either the government would pay for the upgrade to ADSL, or the network operator would recoup the investment through the access fees. (Probably both, depending on the area's expected ROI.)
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - Mindless2112 10y ago
    > There must be something individual to each customer on cable, otherwise Internet access wouldn't work. The modem MAC address. The cable company associates your modem with your account so that you can have access to the Internet.
- wmf 10y ago
  Comcast has admitted that the cap does not reduce congestion and they use a separate system to manage congestion. https://www.publicknowledge.org/assets/uploads/documents/UBP_paper_FINAL.pdf https://www.publicknowledge.org/assets/uploads/documents/UBP... https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6057 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6057
toomanybeersies 10y ago
New Zealand has moved to such a system. We went from having essentially one ISP, with shit data limits and high prices, to having a huge amount of ISPs, with more reasonable prices and the vast majority of them offer unlimited plans.
peckrob 10y ago
This is kind of what we're building in Huntsville, Ala. right now. The local city owned utility, Huntsville Utilities, is building out the fiber network and other ISPs will operate the actual service. So far the only one announced is Google Fiber, but the long term plan I've heard is for choice.
tedd4u 10y ago
Agree wholeheartedly! The jargon for this is "open access network." In the US, Ammon, Idaho sets a great example for a system like this. The town invested in the "municipal" fiber network, and ISPs compete for residents, who can switch ISPs whenever they like. Ars Technica story from earlier this year: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-if-switching-fiber-isps-was-as-easy-as-clicking-a-mouse/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-i...
- bogomipz 10y ago
  Chatanooga, TN has had success with this model as well: http://chattanoogagig.com/ http://chattanoogagig.com/ And of course they were sued by AT&T: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/03/tennessee-kills-muni-broadband-expansion-bill-after-att-opposition/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/03/tennessee-kills-m...
bogomipz 10y ago
What you are talking about happened with the incumbent telcos in the US. Google "unbundled loop" or "UNE unbundled network element. It worked decently for DSL for a while. The provision was overturned in the early 2000s though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbundled_network_element https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbundled_network_element https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling I agree with everything you are saying but my cynical side says that this unlikely to happen again.

by readams 10y ago

bigdubs 10y ago

T-Mobile is an example of cellular companies responding to tight competition and differentiating by removing caps / usage fees. The key is competition though, as you've pointed out.

LeoPanthera 10y ago
The new T-Mobile "One" plans are T-Mobile rapidly trying to "re-carrier" itself after the briefly exciting Uncarrier days. There are indeed no caps, but only at the expense of streaming video, which is throttled and restricted to SD resolutions, unless you pay extra to get HD, which seems to me to be a blatant disregard of net neutrality.
kuschku 10y ago
You do realize T-Mobile is on a full EEE trip there? Look at Germany, where they existed for a while already, and have pushed against net neutrality, refuse to peer with companies unless they get paid, replace ads in websites with their own with MitM proxies and so on. T-Online/T-Mobile are the worst of the worst.
- bogomipz 10y ago
  What is EEE? Unfortunately paid peering is pretty much the norm these days unless you are part of the exclusive club of Tier 1 ISPs, not that I'm defending it. I don't have much great to say about any of the wireless carriers but I feel like T-Mobile is at least trying new things. The T Mobile One plan for instance is really great if you travel internationally. I don't know of any other carrier that is doing that.
  - l1n 10y ago
    "Embrace, extend, and extinguish", also known as "Embrace, extend, and exterminate", is a phrase that the U.S. Department of Justice found that was used internally by Microsoft to describe its strategy for entering product categories involving widely used standards, extending those standards with proprietary capabilities, and then using those differences to disadvantage its competitors. [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace_extend_extinguish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embrace_extend_extinguish
eli 10y ago
T-Mobile favors content from certain providers and in certain formats by exempting their traffic from data caps. A very anti-net neutrality move cleverly positioned as a customer benefit. I like T-Mobile and dislike Comcast, but IMHO violating net neutrality by billing for data differently based on who I'm exchanging packets with is much worse than being a dumb pipe that happens to have a monthly download cap.

rhino369 10y ago

The problem with that for cable systems is that you don't have a private circuit. You and all your neighbors are sharing a circuit. So I'm not sure how you'd lease that a house by house basis. Telecoms have individual circuits going to each house that can be leased. The problem is that the majority of those need massive upgrades to go beyond adsl speeds. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Symbiote 10y ago
There must be something individual to each customer on cable, otherwise Internet access wouldn't work. In the proposed system, either the government would pay for the upgrade to ADSL, or the network operator would recoup the investment through the access fees. (Probably both, depending on the area's expected ROI.)
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- Mindless2112 10y ago
  > There must be something individual to each customer on cable, otherwise Internet access wouldn't work. The modem MAC address. The cable company associates your modem with your account so that you can have access to the Internet.
wmf 10y ago
Comcast has admitted that the cap does not reduce congestion and they use a separate system to manage congestion. https://www.publicknowledge.org/assets/uploads/documents/UBP_paper_FINAL.pdf https://www.publicknowledge.org/assets/uploads/documents/UBP... https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6057 https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6057

toomanybeersies 10y ago

New Zealand has moved to such a system. We went from having essentially one ISP, with shit data limits and high prices, to having a huge amount of ISPs, with more reasonable prices and the vast majority of them offer unlimited plans.

peckrob 10y ago

This is kind of what we're building in Huntsville, Ala. right now. The local city owned utility, Huntsville Utilities, is building out the fiber network and other ISPs will operate the actual service. So far the only one announced is Google Fiber, but the long term plan I've heard is for choice.

tedd4u 10y ago

Agree wholeheartedly! The jargon for this is "open access network." In the US, Ammon, Idaho sets a great example for a system like this. The town invested in the "municipal" fiber network, and ISPs compete for residents, who can switch ISPs whenever they like. Ars Technica story from earlier this year: http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-if-switching-fiber-isps-was-as-easy-as-clicking-a-mouse/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-i...

bogomipz 10y ago
Chatanooga, TN has had success with this model as well: http://chattanoogagig.com/ http://chattanoogagig.com/ And of course they were sued by AT&T: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/03/tennessee-kills-muni-broadband-expansion-bill-after-att-opposition/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/03/tennessee-kills-m...

bogomipz 10y ago

What you are talking about happened with the incumbent telcos in the US. Google "unbundled loop" or "UNE unbundled network element. It worked decently for DSL for a while. The provision was overturned in the early 2000s though. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbundled_network_element https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbundled_network_element https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local-loop_unbundling I agree with everything you are saying but my cynical side says that this unlikely to happen again.