4 ms·

Yes -- if they are a regulated monopoly, that is the best way to allow some bits to be "premium". I think CDNs would likely also put servers in those places, s

by rdl 10y ago

Yes -- if they are a regulated monopoly, that is the best way to allow some bits to be "premium". I think CDNs would likely also put servers in those places, so smaller sites would have the ability to use them as well. Competition > Regulated Monopoly > Unregulated Monopoly. (A duopoly which decides not to compete isn't really competition.)

acdha 10y ago
Some CDNs already do but this would at least make that more open and less of a back-room deal, too, so someone like Fastly doesn't suffer because the Akamai negotiator was in the same frat as the Comcast person they're negotiating with. I think the regulated monopoly model makes the most sense for the last mile connection: make it like what we had with DSL where anyone can rent the wire and competition happens at the service level. I wouldn't mind Verizon offering a ton of bundled services over FIOS if I could simply buy only internet from someone else.
- rdl 10y ago
  The downside of removing competitive pressure on the physical last mile is it removes the incentive to invest in building it. Fiber to the Home is an extremely marginal economic proposition today. It's not deployed today. Without strong economic drivers for it, it won't get built. I'd accept that once FTTH exists (bringing fiber back to a neighborhood point), that might be good enough to not require more competition at that level (as long as maintenance can be done.) I'd in principle be fine with any solution to get that built -- a regulated monopoly, direct government buildout, whatever.
  - acdha 10y ago
    Regulated monopolies are profitable, just capped to prevent abuse, and I'd be surprised if there was trouble finding investors for a guaranteed return even if it's not as big as it could be. Also, not sure you've looked at FTTH recently enough: Verizon alone has 32 million customers according to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises_in_the...

by rdl 10y ago

acdha 10y ago

Some CDNs already do but this would at least make that more open and less of a back-room deal, too, so someone like Fastly doesn't suffer because the Akamai negotiator was in the same frat as the Comcast person they're negotiating with. I think the regulated monopoly model makes the most sense for the last mile connection: make it like what we had with DSL where anyone can rent the wire and competition happens at the service level. I wouldn't mind Verizon offering a ton of bundled services over FIOS if I could simply buy only internet from someone else.

rdl 10y ago
The downside of removing competitive pressure on the physical last mile is it removes the incentive to invest in building it. Fiber to the Home is an extremely marginal economic proposition today. It's not deployed today. Without strong economic drivers for it, it won't get built. I'd accept that once FTTH exists (bringing fiber back to a neighborhood point), that might be good enough to not require more competition at that level (as long as maintenance can be done.) I'd in principle be fine with any solution to get that built -- a regulated monopoly, direct government buildout, whatever.
- acdha 10y ago
  Regulated monopolies are profitable, just capped to prevent abuse, and I'd be surprised if there was trouble finding investors for a guaranteed return even if it's not as big as it could be. Also, not sure you've looked at FTTH recently enough: Verizon alone has 32 million customers according to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiber_to_the_premises_in_the...