7 ms·

I am all for locally based ISPs. It would be amazing if local municipalities could create incentives for financing the last mile of connectivity exclusively to

I am all for locally based ISPs. It would be amazing if local municipalities could create incentives for financing the last mile of connectivity exclusively to local ISPs. I absolutely abhor the idea of government supplied Internet. I’m too cynical to believe that there is some magical force field that differentiates local government ethics from federal level ethics. If Snowden tells us our internet habits are snooped at a National level, I expect it at a local level. The current proposals are binary in a stupid way. Incentives local ISPs, not municipal ISPs.

sshumaker 9y ago
I think it's easy to make this mistake and to associate government == bad ethics, when it's clear that you see similar misbehavior in government AND business. The problem is size, not public vs. private. Size equals power and that is usually the heart of the problem.
- droopybuns 9y ago
  Businesses are accountable to local government. While local government is accountable in elections, I don’t think that is a reasonable stick for day to day operations. I find your contexting my comment as a “mistake” to be arrogant to the point of almost irredeemability. Are you trying to be that obnoxious?
  - dang 9y ago
    We've warned you repeatedly about posting uncivil comments to Hacker News. If you keep doing it, we're going to ban you. Could you please fix this? The idea on HN is: if you have a substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; if you don't, please don't comment until you do. And personal attacks are right out. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
EGreg 9y ago
In that case I recommend this :) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ1O_gmPneI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ1O_gmPneI
rootusrootus 9y ago
How does that really address the problem? Or are you suggesting incentivizing multiple ISPs running cable for the last mile? There is a physical plant problem here. Why not let the gov't or a quasi-gov't utility run the last mile cable with a charter that prohibits them from shining light down it? Then let ISPs compete to over service. Kinda like we had ever so briefly after we forced telcos to offer unbundled loops.
- droopybuns 9y ago
  Because government overreach is always a risk. It is easier to throw business people in jail than it is government employees.
  - ohashi 9y ago
    Doesn't happen. Where are all these business people in the jail?
  - rootusrootus 9y ago
    I haven't ever seen any real repercussions for businesses acting against the interest of their customers, aside from high profile scandals. And even then the penalty is usually a tiny fraction of what would be appropriate. At least the gov't has some plausible accountability to the citizens every time an election rolls around. Especially local gov't.
c12 9y ago
Always assume anything travelling over the internet is compromised unless its both signed and competently encrypted.
LonelyStapler 9y ago
If Snowden is telling us that our internet habits are snooped on at a national level, then what makes you believe they didn't already use local connectivity to perform such a thing without the local government's authority? Who says they didn't use private connections without authority? I don't think the government had a monopoly on connectivity then. Why would it be different now no matter who controls what? There is a small city in my area that provides internet service to the citizens living in city limits. At one time, it was twice as cheap as Time Warner (Spectrum) and had faster speeds with more reliable connections. I am not against government provided internet service so long as it operates like this. The entire situation comes down to how one uses the power they have been given. It is evident that an ex-Verizon lawyer should not be the poster child of the future for obvious reasons. I don't know who he thinks he is fooling with his statements either.

sshumaker 9y ago

I think it's easy to make this mistake and to associate government == bad ethics, when it's clear that you see similar misbehavior in government AND business. The problem is size, not public vs. private. Size equals power and that is usually the heart of the problem.

droopybuns 9y ago
Businesses are accountable to local government. While local government is accountable in elections, I don’t think that is a reasonable stick for day to day operations. I find your contexting my comment as a “mistake” to be arrogant to the point of almost irredeemability. Are you trying to be that obnoxious?
- dang 9y ago
  We've warned you repeatedly about posting uncivil comments to Hacker News. If you keep doing it, we're going to ban you. Could you please fix this? The idea on HN is: if you have a substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; if you don't, please don't comment until you do. And personal attacks are right out. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

EGreg 9y ago

In that case I recommend this :) https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ1O_gmPneI https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pZ1O_gmPneI

rootusrootus 9y ago

How does that really address the problem? Or are you suggesting incentivizing multiple ISPs running cable for the last mile? There is a physical plant problem here. Why not let the gov't or a quasi-gov't utility run the last mile cable with a charter that prohibits them from shining light down it? Then let ISPs compete to over service. Kinda like we had ever so briefly after we forced telcos to offer unbundled loops.

droopybuns 9y ago
Because government overreach is always a risk. It is easier to throw business people in jail than it is government employees.
- ohashi 9y ago
  Doesn't happen. Where are all these business people in the jail?
- rootusrootus 9y ago
  I haven't ever seen any real repercussions for businesses acting against the interest of their customers, aside from high profile scandals. And even then the penalty is usually a tiny fraction of what would be appropriate. At least the gov't has some plausible accountability to the citizens every time an election rolls around. Especially local gov't.

c12 9y ago

Always assume anything travelling over the internet is compromised unless its both signed and competently encrypted.

LonelyStapler 9y ago

If Snowden is telling us that our internet habits are snooped on at a national level, then what makes you believe they didn't already use local connectivity to perform such a thing without the local government's authority? Who says they didn't use private connections without authority? I don't think the government had a monopoly on connectivity then. Why would it be different now no matter who controls what? There is a small city in my area that provides internet service to the citizens living in city limits. At one time, it was twice as cheap as Time Warner (Spectrum) and had faster speeds with more reliable connections. I am not against government provided internet service so long as it operates like this. The entire situation comes down to how one uses the power they have been given. It is evident that an ex-Verizon lawyer should not be the poster child of the future for obvious reasons. I don't know who he thinks he is fooling with his statements either.