3 ms·

A monopoly itself is partly a feature though too. How many copies of each piece of infrastructure do you want in your jurisdiction? The mono- in monopoly means

A monopoly itself is partly a feature though too. How many copies of each piece of infrastructure do you want in your jurisdiction? The mono- in monopoly means one copy of x cluttering up the landscape, where x might be construction project lane closure fiber vault with a manhole you get to test your shocks on trench, with its somehow always shitty pavement repair ugly pole even-uglier tower etc. This means more to people in some jurisdictions than others.

namdnay 8y ago
The solution being to differentiate the core infrastructure provider from the services provider. i.e. force the company installing the infrastructure to hire it out at a fair price to all service providers
howard941 8y ago
This is a good argument for dealing with such infrastructure as a regulated public utility.
- duckMuppet 8y ago
  That's true from the standpoint of you want everyone to have access to equally marginal service, but not the latest or greatest service. Instead, I think this is a good argument for removing regulations and stopping the cronyism that inhibits competition. It's the internet, it drives innovation. Let's stifle it by making a bazillion rules that everyone needs to follow and pay to play. Let's make sure that like most utilities, change and improvements happen at the slowest possible pace, because I like T1 and isdn, ever since they rolled back net neutrality I been stuck on these dial up lines.. Plus, making it a utility, we can ensure that none of these 5G providers can enter the marketplace.. I guess it's cool for everyone to be a socialist now, count me all in..
bogomipz 8y ago
Poles already carry the cables of both duopolies in areas that have them and fiber ducts have always carried multiple fiber providers - they are public rightaways. The cell tower infrastructure is also increasingly shared the last 10 years days as AMT and Crown and Castle own the towers and lease space on them to multiple providers. So monopolies are not really a feature in those things you mentioned.

namdnay 8y ago

The solution being to differentiate the core infrastructure provider from the services provider. i.e. force the company installing the infrastructure to hire it out at a fair price to all service providers

howard941 8y ago

This is a good argument for dealing with such infrastructure as a regulated public utility.

duckMuppet 8y ago
That's true from the standpoint of you want everyone to have access to equally marginal service, but not the latest or greatest service. Instead, I think this is a good argument for removing regulations and stopping the cronyism that inhibits competition. It's the internet, it drives innovation. Let's stifle it by making a bazillion rules that everyone needs to follow and pay to play. Let's make sure that like most utilities, change and improvements happen at the slowest possible pace, because I like T1 and isdn, ever since they rolled back net neutrality I been stuck on these dial up lines.. Plus, making it a utility, we can ensure that none of these 5G providers can enter the marketplace.. I guess it's cool for everyone to be a socialist now, count me all in..

bogomipz 8y ago

Poles already carry the cables of both duopolies in areas that have them and fiber ducts have always carried multiple fiber providers - they are public rightaways. The cell tower infrastructure is also increasingly shared the last 10 years days as AMT and Crown and Castle own the towers and lease space on them to multiple providers. So monopolies are not really a feature in those things you mentioned.