3 ms·

> Talk to Louisville, where Google put trenches in the roadways Yes, Louisville was indeed a failure. They tried something different to help speed up laying ou

> Talk to Louisville, where Google put trenches in the roadways Yes, Louisville was indeed a failure. They tried something different to help speed up laying out lines, and it didn't work. All that is not really relevant to the comment above, which still is true regardless of the issue in Louisville. > Ignore the title, Google decided not to repair anything That's misleading, they decided to instead pay the city for the repairs instead of doing it themselves. https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/04/google-fiber-exits-louisville-pays-city-3-8m-to-clean-up-the-mess-it-left/ https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2019/04/googl...

ocdtrekkie 6y ago
Originally they intended to repair the fiber lines and keep the network in Louisville, they decided to give the city money when they backed out so that the city could clean up the damage: Presumably by ripping up the fiber network entirely. Most of their other ideas were similarly discount. They bought fiber in places it was already run, and their issue with ISPs revolved around a push to demand the right to move AT&T's equipment around on AT&T's poles to make room for their own without supervision. ISPs have their problems but Google wasn't in it to build a long-term, quality infrastructure. They were trying to make a splash on the cheap, but the costs would be bound to go up anywhere they couldn't employ cheap hacks.
- pb7 6y ago
  >ISPs have their problems but Google wasn't in it to build a long-term, quality infrastructure. They were trying to make a splash on the cheap, but the costs would be bound to go up anywhere they couldn't employ cheap hacks. There is a disingenuous take. ISPs were provided $100Bs of taxpayer money to build out infrastructure in the last few decades. It is not theirs to control or monopolize. Everywhere Google Fiber was introduced, the incumbents' prices dropped and speeds increased. If they're able to operate at the reduced prices, why are they siphoning off additional profits after they were paid the aforementioned infrastructure money to provide these services? Google Fiber disrupting ISPs was exactly what people are clamoring to happen to other giants like Amazon and yet here you are bashing the initiative. For the record, Google Fiber is still well loved everywhere it has been rolled out. I had Comcast and Verizon for decades and hated every moment of it -- constant battle for reliability, price increases, and hidden fees. Ever since I got WebPass (owned by Google Fiber), it has been nothing but bliss for a fraction of the price and 0% of the bullshit. You should be deeply upset by the fact that Google Fiber is no longer expanding. It is a hit against progress and we are all worse off for it.
- ehsankia 6y ago
  > the right to move AT&T's equipment around on AT&T's poles to make room for their own without supervision. That makes it sound like Google was being pushy here, but in reality, ISPs were being intentionally as slow and obtrusive as possible to cripple Google's expansion, which is exactly why Fiber failed. If they were given X days to do something, they would do it on the (x-1)th day on purpose to waste Google's time and delay them as much as possible.
  - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    It makes sense to be very careful with this sort of thing. Comcast is infamous for "accidentally" severing other ISP's lines whilst running their own. Also, given that Google has been playing the (x-1)th day game with the EU for nearly a decade, and asking for every possible extension in order to respond to even the most basic requests... let's not act like ISPs are bad and Google is good. Google is a bad actor that was trying to edge in on another market of bad actors.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago

Originally they intended to repair the fiber lines and keep the network in Louisville, they decided to give the city money when they backed out so that the city could clean up the damage: Presumably by ripping up the fiber network entirely. Most of their other ideas were similarly discount. They bought fiber in places it was already run, and their issue with ISPs revolved around a push to demand the right to move AT&T's equipment around on AT&T's poles to make room for their own without supervision. ISPs have their problems but Google wasn't in it to build a long-term, quality infrastructure. They were trying to make a splash on the cheap, but the costs would be bound to go up anywhere they couldn't employ cheap hacks.

pb7 6y ago
>ISPs have their problems but Google wasn't in it to build a long-term, quality infrastructure. They were trying to make a splash on the cheap, but the costs would be bound to go up anywhere they couldn't employ cheap hacks. There is a disingenuous take. ISPs were provided $100Bs of taxpayer money to build out infrastructure in the last few decades. It is not theirs to control or monopolize. Everywhere Google Fiber was introduced, the incumbents' prices dropped and speeds increased. If they're able to operate at the reduced prices, why are they siphoning off additional profits after they were paid the aforementioned infrastructure money to provide these services? Google Fiber disrupting ISPs was exactly what people are clamoring to happen to other giants like Amazon and yet here you are bashing the initiative. For the record, Google Fiber is still well loved everywhere it has been rolled out. I had Comcast and Verizon for decades and hated every moment of it -- constant battle for reliability, price increases, and hidden fees. Ever since I got WebPass (owned by Google Fiber), it has been nothing but bliss for a fraction of the price and 0% of the bullshit. You should be deeply upset by the fact that Google Fiber is no longer expanding. It is a hit against progress and we are all worse off for it.
ehsankia 6y ago
> the right to move AT&T's equipment around on AT&T's poles to make room for their own without supervision. That makes it sound like Google was being pushy here, but in reality, ISPs were being intentionally as slow and obtrusive as possible to cripple Google's expansion, which is exactly why Fiber failed. If they were given X days to do something, they would do it on the (x-1)th day on purpose to waste Google's time and delay them as much as possible.
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  It makes sense to be very careful with this sort of thing. Comcast is infamous for "accidentally" severing other ISP's lines whilst running their own. Also, given that Google has been playing the (x-1)th day game with the EU for nearly a decade, and asking for every possible extension in order to respond to even the most basic requests... let's not act like ISPs are bad and Google is good. Google is a bad actor that was trying to edge in on another market of bad actors.