5 ms·

When did carriers ever get anything tech based right? In fact to expect them is wrong as their business model is very different to a tech company. They are bene

When did carriers ever get anything tech based right? In fact to expect them is wrong as their business model is very different to a tech company. They are beneficiaries of law-bound limited duopolies or oligopolies. In most countries the only audience they care for are the regulators, and not consumers or their security and safety. Regulatory capture is a wonderful thing for these companies and not for consumers.

gimmedanger 7y ago
... he said, while his comment posted correctly, in the moment he wanted, because the tech behind the posting ability was Right.
- Varriount 7y ago
  Not that I agree 100% with the parent poster, but your argument is flawed. ISPs are only part of the enormous tech stack that is required for the internet to work. The fact that things do work doesn't mean that ISPs are doing everything correctly, not that there isn't reason for complaint or improvement. Just look at the state of the related infrastructure, both technological and political, in the US and elsewhere.
- allovernow 7y ago
  Statistically most likely from a ≈25-100mb US connection while developed countries the world over have had gigabit for a decade... Our internet is quite a bit behind because telcos in this country don't have to meaningfully compete. Plenty of legislation has cemented their market dominance through artificial (and unnecessary) barriers to entry with practically no accountability for shoddy service and infrastructure. Remember when Verizon received billions in subsidies to bring fiber to NY in the late 00s and ran off with the money with no penalty? https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/ https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/
  - orf 7y ago
    I’m paying the equivalent of $40 p/m for 600mbit download and 100mbit upload in Europe. I don’t think it’s even the best deal I could be getting.
    - james_white 7y ago
      I'm so jealous. I pay $55/mo for 12 down and 1 up. It's the best deal I can get.
    - Lukas_Skywalker 7y ago
      In Switzerland you can get 10Gbps down/1 Gbps up for $50 and you get an Apple TV, a TV subscription and a landline phone number.
  - grandmczeb 7y ago
    The US is 10th in the fixed broadband ranking on speedtest.net[1], ahead of counties like Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, UK, etc. [1] https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#fixed https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#fixed
  - tialaramex 7y ago
    Gigabit is not important, remember when you could finally buy a 10MW electrical feed for your home and how much it improved your quality of life... Right that didn't happen because it is not important at all. Running 100W to homes means people can have electric light, 1kW means they can have motorised appliances, and 10kW makes cooking and heating practical... But 10MW? You had no need for it, so it didn't happen. Likewise more bandwidth enabled applications only up to a point, 40Mbps DSL is perfectly good for watching TV and so on. I had Gigabit on someone else's dime back at the turn of the century and when I bought service for my current home I not only didn't enquire what it would cost to run Gigabit here, I didn't even choose the expensive 80Mbps option, I already know 40Mbps is fine. What mattered most even going from dial-up to 1Mbps DSL wasn't bandwidth, it was Always On. The Network's omnipresence is what matters. Fibre matters to some extent for infrastructure, same way it matters what a bridge is built from. Fibre coms doesn't attract thieves, not subject to RF interference, lots of benefits for infrastructure projects, but Gigabit Internet for the home? Not important.
- a1369209993 7y ago
  > because the tech behind the posting ability was Right. Yep - TCP can paper over a lot of incompetence.
  - antonvs 7y ago
    Not just TCP, but the ability to throw (tax) money at problems.
- BLanen 7y ago
  https://i.imgur.com/4KZe4UO.png https://i.imgur.com/4KZe4UO.png Your comment is the worst kind of comment. EDIT: Yea, the comment which basically boils down to "eh, by commenting on this post you showed that telecom companies provide you with the minimal amount of service they promise so you can't complain about the state of the industry". Because that's totally an argument that's worth debating.
james_white 7y ago
This hits home for me right now. I'm currently in the midst of fighting Frontier (bonded DSL 12/1) and frequent disconnects every 2-3 min. They're the only terrestrial ISP available at my home and the DSLAM has been oversold for two years per a tech lead. They have 0 incentive to upgrade the infrastructure here. The area I live in isn't even very rural, and it's one of the fastest growing towns in the Seattle area. New neighborhoods in the town are getting fiber but they're not upgrading any outdated infrastructure. Why would they?
- jcims 7y ago
  In the same situation with CenturyLink. Sounds like I'm more rural but the DSLAM has been here for over ten years and AFAICT has never been upgraded.
antonvs 7y ago
I contracted for a telecom industry company (not a carrier, but a kind of service provider to carriers), and can confirm that pretty much the only reason they survived was regulatory capture. The company's core competency was responding to government RFPs and doing the necessary lobbying to get the contracts. It was quite eye-opening. They ended up with a big investment from a private equity firm which had a taste for cash cows. On the plus side, everyone "worked" from home on Fridays.
eikenberry 7y ago
> When did carriers ever get anything tech based right? If Ericsson is considered a carrier, then I'd say Erlang is a good counter-example to this. Though it might be the classic "exception that proved the rule".

gimmedanger 7y ago

... he said, while his comment posted correctly, in the moment he wanted, because the tech behind the posting ability was Right.

Varriount 7y ago
Not that I agree 100% with the parent poster, but your argument is flawed. ISPs are only part of the enormous tech stack that is required for the internet to work. The fact that things do work doesn't mean that ISPs are doing everything correctly, not that there isn't reason for complaint or improvement. Just look at the state of the related infrastructure, both technological and political, in the US and elsewhere.
allovernow 7y ago
Statistically most likely from a ≈25-100mb US connection while developed countries the world over have had gigabit for a decade... Our internet is quite a bit behind because telcos in this country don't have to meaningfully compete. Plenty of legislation has cemented their market dominance through artificial (and unnecessary) barriers to entry with practically no accountability for shoddy service and infrastructure. Remember when Verizon received billions in subsidies to bring fiber to NY in the late 00s and ran off with the money with no penalty? https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/ https://www.wired.com/story/new-york-city-verizon-internet/
- orf 7y ago
  I’m paying the equivalent of $40 p/m for 600mbit download and 100mbit upload in Europe. I don’t think it’s even the best deal I could be getting.
  - james_white 7y ago
    I'm so jealous. I pay $55/mo for 12 down and 1 up. It's the best deal I can get.
  - Lukas_Skywalker 7y ago
    In Switzerland you can get 10Gbps down/1 Gbps up for $50 and you get an Apple TV, a TV subscription and a landline phone number.
- grandmczeb 7y ago
  The US is 10th in the fixed broadband ranking on speedtest.net[1], ahead of counties like Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, UK, etc. [1] https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#fixed https://www.speedtest.net/global-index#fixed
- tialaramex 7y ago
  Gigabit is not important, remember when you could finally buy a 10MW electrical feed for your home and how much it improved your quality of life... Right that didn't happen because it is not important at all. Running 100W to homes means people can have electric light, 1kW means they can have motorised appliances, and 10kW makes cooking and heating practical... But 10MW? You had no need for it, so it didn't happen. Likewise more bandwidth enabled applications only up to a point, 40Mbps DSL is perfectly good for watching TV and so on. I had Gigabit on someone else's dime back at the turn of the century and when I bought service for my current home I not only didn't enquire what it would cost to run Gigabit here, I didn't even choose the expensive 80Mbps option, I already know 40Mbps is fine. What mattered most even going from dial-up to 1Mbps DSL wasn't bandwidth, it was Always On. The Network's omnipresence is what matters. Fibre matters to some extent for infrastructure, same way it matters what a bridge is built from. Fibre coms doesn't attract thieves, not subject to RF interference, lots of benefits for infrastructure projects, but Gigabit Internet for the home? Not important.
a1369209993 7y ago
> because the tech behind the posting ability was Right. Yep - TCP can paper over a lot of incompetence.
- antonvs 7y ago
  Not just TCP, but the ability to throw (tax) money at problems.
BLanen 7y ago
https://i.imgur.com/4KZe4UO.png https://i.imgur.com/4KZe4UO.png Your comment is the worst kind of comment. EDIT: Yea, the comment which basically boils down to "eh, by commenting on this post you showed that telecom companies provide you with the minimal amount of service they promise so you can't complain about the state of the industry". Because that's totally an argument that's worth debating.

james_white 7y ago

This hits home for me right now. I'm currently in the midst of fighting Frontier (bonded DSL 12/1) and frequent disconnects every 2-3 min. They're the only terrestrial ISP available at my home and the DSLAM has been oversold for two years per a tech lead. They have 0 incentive to upgrade the infrastructure here. The area I live in isn't even very rural, and it's one of the fastest growing towns in the Seattle area. New neighborhoods in the town are getting fiber but they're not upgrading any outdated infrastructure. Why would they?

jcims 7y ago
In the same situation with CenturyLink. Sounds like I'm more rural but the DSLAM has been here for over ten years and AFAICT has never been upgraded.

antonvs 7y ago

I contracted for a telecom industry company (not a carrier, but a kind of service provider to carriers), and can confirm that pretty much the only reason they survived was regulatory capture. The company's core competency was responding to government RFPs and doing the necessary lobbying to get the contracts. It was quite eye-opening. They ended up with a big investment from a private equity firm which had a taste for cash cows. On the plus side, everyone "worked" from home on Fridays.

eikenberry 7y ago

> When did carriers ever get anything tech based right? If Ericsson is considered a carrier, then I'd say Erlang is a good counter-example to this. Though it might be the classic "exception that proved the rule".