3 ms·

> New York isn't about to let every ISP in the nation run independent lines over all of the poles in the state. Why not? I would expect the barrier to entry th

by mmt 8y ago

> New York isn't about to let every ISP in the nation run independent lines over all of the poles in the state. Why not? I would expect the barrier to entry there to be the expense of doing so, not regulatory refusal. It makes sense for a regulator to require "universal" coverage and prohibit cherry-picking only the profitable areas, which brings the cost barrier back into focus. However, encouraging a monopology would seem to encourage a similar result. Has the state actually expressed or implied such a policy?

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
reaperducer 8y ago
Why not? I would expect the barrier to entry there to be the expense of doing so, not regulatory refusal. A quick GIS of telephone poles in India or Thailand will provide you an answer.
- mmt 8y ago
  No, it does not, unless you're asserting that India and/or Thailand have comparable regulatory structures for utilities, other than the one detail of which ISPs are permitted on poles. To whit, I believe you're presenting a false dichotomy between monopoly and completely unregulate free-for-all.
  - reaperducer 8y ago
    You're thinking about it too hard. People don't want massive bunches of cable lines running through their neighborhoods. Most people don't even like the few they have unless they're underground and there aren't access pillars every hundred feet. Voters aren't going to let regulators ugly up their neighborhoods and drive their home values down.
    - mmt 8y ago
      > You're thinking about it too hard. Mostly, I'm trying to determine if your assertion was a speculation based on, say, evidence (either from NYS previous behavior or from another jurisdiction), or strictly your intuition or guesswork. So far, I've only seen the latter. My own intuition is this has nothing to do with voters and everything to do with legislators and administrative regulators, over whom voters have only a vague influence and only after deals like this are already done. Even so, do you even have anything to back up your claim that voters (and most of them, at that) care about additional cables on utility poles, especially in New York State (and not just something that shows people merely prefer underground utilities to pole-mounted, which is undisputed)?

by mmt 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

reaperducer 8y ago

Why not? I would expect the barrier to entry there to be the expense of doing so, not regulatory refusal. A quick GIS of telephone poles in India or Thailand will provide you an answer.

mmt 8y ago
No, it does not, unless you're asserting that India and/or Thailand have comparable regulatory structures for utilities, other than the one detail of which ISPs are permitted on poles. To whit, I believe you're presenting a false dichotomy between monopoly and completely unregulate free-for-all.
- reaperducer 8y ago
  You're thinking about it too hard. People don't want massive bunches of cable lines running through their neighborhoods. Most people don't even like the few they have unless they're underground and there aren't access pillars every hundred feet. Voters aren't going to let regulators ugly up their neighborhoods and drive their home values down.
  - mmt 8y ago
    > You're thinking about it too hard. Mostly, I'm trying to determine if your assertion was a speculation based on, say, evidence (either from NYS previous behavior or from another jurisdiction), or strictly your intuition or guesswork. So far, I've only seen the latter. My own intuition is this has nothing to do with voters and everything to do with legislators and administrative regulators, over whom voters have only a vague influence and only after deals like this are already done. Even so, do you even have anything to back up your claim that voters (and most of them, at that) care about additional cables on utility poles, especially in New York State (and not just something that shows people merely prefer underground utilities to pole-mounted, which is undisputed)?