4 ms·
In many (most?) cities in the US there is a local monopoly with just one or two high-speed providers. And this results in no real competition. I'm OK with my
by chiph 9y ago
In many (most?) cities in the US there is a local monopoly with just one or two high-speed providers. And this results in no real competition. I'm OK with my current (and only) provider but I'd like the option to change to someone else if they offered comparable speed at a lower cost.
I get that the cities don't want the poles along the road loaded down with a dozen different cables, but fiber optic is a lot thinner than copper pairs. Or perhaps they could have a couple of companies run the infrastructure at the wholesale level and resell to the "retail" broadband providers.
- rayiner 9y ago> I get that the cities don't want the poles along the road loaded down with a dozen different cables, There's plenty of space on the poles. Cities don't let companies build fiber because of politics. It costs nothing politically to vote to deny an application for a franchise. Most voters just don't care about it. But grant a franchise on non-restrictive terms and potentially end up with new fiber being built to rich neighborhoods but not poor ones? As Google learned in Kansas City, now you've stepped on a political landmine.