3 ms·
That leaves nothing for those "service providers" to do except skim profit. Why should they get a cut? Because they have a router?
by otakucode 9y ago
That leaves nothing for those "service providers" to do except skim profit. Why should they get a cut? Because they have a router?
- otakucode 9y agoMy question is an honest one. A modern ISP needs to only run a router, really. They don't need to provide email accounts. They don't need to provide a Usenet server. They don't need to provide free web hosting space. They don't need to provide hardly any of the things ISPs once did. They don't even need to provide DNS servers. They need to provide DHCP and a route to the Internet. That's it. Where is competition going to occur? Wherever an open network that honestly permits competition exists, one would hope to expect the establishment of such a barebones ISP offering simple access at speed only limited by the customers equipment, with no throttling or restriction (since we're splitting that fiber amongst a potentially infinite number of ISP companies, this will work out great), for maybe 1% over the price they have to pay to the muni for access to the network. And then who competes with them and how?
- KozmoNau7 9y agoThe trend has been going more towards OTT services, because there's more profit to be made.
- amazon_not 9y agoI'm going to take a wild guess and say you have never run an ISP. The answer is people. You need people to "provide a route to the Internet". To answer phones. To fix things when they break. Running an ISP is far from glamorous and far from just leaning back and skimming the profit.