4 ms·

Sure -- let's say free market is a solution? Free market only works if I have choice. Right now, my only choice for internet service is Comcast. Free market won

Sure -- let's say free market is a solution? Free market only works if I have choice. Right now, my only choice for internet service is Comcast. Free market won't do a thing until I have actual choices here.

jpadkins 9y ago
and why do you only have comcast as a choice? Government granted monopolies. Void all local contracts with ISPs (cable or telco), and you will have choices.
- stdgy 9y ago
  Rewind. Why did the government grant monopolies to these companies in the first place? To entice them to invest in their area because nobody else would. Infrastructure isn't software development. It requires billions of dollars of capital investment. That investment isn't going to go to many areas unless it's nearly guaranteed a return, hence the labyrinth of monopolistic guarantees bestowed upon ISPs. It's not clear to me that consumer options would flourish if you were to roll back all ISP related regulations and void existing contracts. I suspect the current system would just become more entrenched.
  - KZeillmann 9y ago
    Not to mention that big-name ISPs like Comcast will litigate their smaller competitors out of existence.
- Dirlewanger 9y ago
  >you will have choices. No, companies will go with the cheaper route i.e. continue the comfy collusions they have now. You're insane if you think they'll magically start sharing their own infrastructures with each other.
  - jpadkins 9y ago
    no, I expect them to build redundant connections to homes / neighood POPs. Especially for cities that plan well and design for easily pulling new wire through existing conduit. The first build out of fiber to the curb is expensive. 2-N is cheap if you do it right.
    - stdgy 9y ago
      Outside of large cities, most of America can't even afford the upkeep associated with their existing infrastructure. I'm not sure how you think they'll be able to afford large scale fiber deployments. Or maybe you're saying that private ISPs will perform the deployment and then share their fiber? Which seems wildly unrealistic.
      - jpadkins 9y ago
        Rural flat areas: I expect fixed point wireless to be more prevalent. firms specialize, it's an important attribute of a functioning free market. If there is demand for running fiber through conduits, local firms might specialize in that type of construction, especially if local knowledge and working with local governments can be leveraged across customers. Many industries are not vertically integrated where specialization is more efficient than vertical integration. (i.e. Ford stopped making tires and glass)
billions 9y ago
Government handed comcast monopoly over the wire to your door. Now we're sweeping the problem under the rug by policing what goes down the wire. The way to get more choices is to let anyone compete to be your ISP, by liberating the wire. Remember how long distance phone service improved in the 90's?
- Chaebixi 9y ago
  > Government handed comcast monopoly over the wire to your door. Now we're sweeping the problem under the rug by policing what goes down the wire. > The way to get more choices is to let anyone compete to be your ISP, by liberating the wire. While he's killing net neutrality, Pai is also doing what he can to limit broadband competition. So, thanks to him, we're getting the worst of both worlds: less consumer-friendly regulation AND less competition. * FCC removes competition requirement from Charter-TWC merger conditions (https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/3/15161456/fcc-charter-merger-condition-overbuild-reversed https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/3/15161456/fcc-charter-merge...) * ISPs who don’t want competition get good news from FCC chair: FCC to kill merger condition that required competition in 1 million locations (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/isps-who-dont-want-competition-get-good-news-from-fcc-chair/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/isps-who-dont-wa...) * One broadband choice counts as “competition” in new FCC proposal (https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/one-broadband-choice-counts-as-competition-in-new-fcc-proposal/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/one-b...)
- rhino369 9y ago
  Comcast is the big ISP in most areas because it was unregulated. DSL was regulated under title II and cable wasn't. So capital flowed to cable companies who weren't subject to invasive regulations. That's why cable internet is so popular in America compared to the rest of the world. It wasn't until telecom ISPs were classified title I that Verizon and ATT decided to upgrade their dsl services.
  - Chaebixi 9y ago
    > That's why cable internet is so popular in America compared to the rest of the world. I'm not so sure about that. The coax used for cable is a higher-bandwidth cabling than the POTS twisted-pair lines used for telephone service, so the cable companies started out with better infrastructure. DSL also has distance/bandwidth limits ("distance from the central office") that cable internet doesn't have, so many people are unable to get DSL that rus at acceptable speeds. Cable television has also been widespread and popular in the US since the 80s, at least. I'm not sure if that's true in countries were DSL has been popular. I, personally, would attribute cable internet's popularity (in the US) to the technical superiority of the legacy infrastructure it is built on.

jpadkins 9y ago

and why do you only have comcast as a choice? Government granted monopolies. Void all local contracts with ISPs (cable or telco), and you will have choices.

stdgy 9y ago
Rewind. Why did the government grant monopolies to these companies in the first place? To entice them to invest in their area because nobody else would. Infrastructure isn't software development. It requires billions of dollars of capital investment. That investment isn't going to go to many areas unless it's nearly guaranteed a return, hence the labyrinth of monopolistic guarantees bestowed upon ISPs. It's not clear to me that consumer options would flourish if you were to roll back all ISP related regulations and void existing contracts. I suspect the current system would just become more entrenched.
- KZeillmann 9y ago
  Not to mention that big-name ISPs like Comcast will litigate their smaller competitors out of existence.
Dirlewanger 9y ago
>you will have choices. No, companies will go with the cheaper route i.e. continue the comfy collusions they have now. You're insane if you think they'll magically start sharing their own infrastructures with each other.
- jpadkins 9y ago
  no, I expect them to build redundant connections to homes / neighood POPs. Especially for cities that plan well and design for easily pulling new wire through existing conduit. The first build out of fiber to the curb is expensive. 2-N is cheap if you do it right.
  - stdgy 9y ago
    Outside of large cities, most of America can't even afford the upkeep associated with their existing infrastructure. I'm not sure how you think they'll be able to afford large scale fiber deployments. Or maybe you're saying that private ISPs will perform the deployment and then share their fiber? Which seems wildly unrealistic.
    - jpadkins 9y ago
      Rural flat areas: I expect fixed point wireless to be more prevalent. firms specialize, it's an important attribute of a functioning free market. If there is demand for running fiber through conduits, local firms might specialize in that type of construction, especially if local knowledge and working with local governments can be leveraged across customers. Many industries are not vertically integrated where specialization is more efficient than vertical integration. (i.e. Ford stopped making tires and glass)

billions 9y ago

Government handed comcast monopoly over the wire to your door. Now we're sweeping the problem under the rug by policing what goes down the wire. The way to get more choices is to let anyone compete to be your ISP, by liberating the wire. Remember how long distance phone service improved in the 90's?

Chaebixi 9y ago
> Government handed comcast monopoly over the wire to your door. Now we're sweeping the problem under the rug by policing what goes down the wire. > The way to get more choices is to let anyone compete to be your ISP, by liberating the wire. While he's killing net neutrality, Pai is also doing what he can to limit broadband competition. So, thanks to him, we're getting the worst of both worlds: less consumer-friendly regulation AND less competition. * FCC removes competition requirement from Charter-TWC merger conditions (https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/3/15161456/fcc-charter-merger-condition-overbuild-reversed https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/3/15161456/fcc-charter-merge...) * ISPs who don’t want competition get good news from FCC chair: FCC to kill merger condition that required competition in 1 million locations (https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/isps-who-dont-want-competition-get-good-news-from-fcc-chair/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/02/isps-who-dont-wa...) * One broadband choice counts as “competition” in new FCC proposal (https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/one-broadband-choice-counts-as-competition-in-new-fcc-proposal/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/04/one-b...)
rhino369 9y ago
Comcast is the big ISP in most areas because it was unregulated. DSL was regulated under title II and cable wasn't. So capital flowed to cable companies who weren't subject to invasive regulations. That's why cable internet is so popular in America compared to the rest of the world. It wasn't until telecom ISPs were classified title I that Verizon and ATT decided to upgrade their dsl services.
- Chaebixi 9y ago
  > That's why cable internet is so popular in America compared to the rest of the world. I'm not so sure about that. The coax used for cable is a higher-bandwidth cabling than the POTS twisted-pair lines used for telephone service, so the cable companies started out with better infrastructure. DSL also has distance/bandwidth limits ("distance from the central office") that cable internet doesn't have, so many people are unable to get DSL that rus at acceptable speeds. Cable television has also been widespread and popular in the US since the 80s, at least. I'm not sure if that's true in countries were DSL has been popular. I, personally, would attribute cable internet's popularity (in the US) to the technical superiority of the legacy infrastructure it is built on.