21 ms·

The War on Upstart Fiber Internet Providers

553 points by joecool1029 6y ago

client4 6y ago
This is 100% accurate. Add in hostile/lazy city utility offices, litigious competitors with infinite pockets, and people who just hate change and you're starting to understand the uphill battle that is bettering internet infrastructure.
- zahma 6y ago
  There’s also intergenerational change. Many older folks don’t care about the benefits of high speed internet and fiber. Add in resistance to change and that can create some startling traction against progress.
alexchamberlain 6y ago
I think we need to make it a lot cheaper to run cables like this: I don't understand why we have to dig up roads to lay cables. Why can't there be a shared conduit for cables underneath or beside a road? It can be included in the initial construction of the road, for example.
- monocasa 6y ago
  > I don't understand why we have to dig up roads to lay cables. Why can't there be a shared conduit for cables underneath or beside a road? Because the city doesn't want to pay for it. And the companies, having the money to dig the road up don't want to make their competitor's jobs easier. So pretty classic market failure. What needs to happen, IMO, is that the last mile should be utility infrastructure, and ISPs should connect to that. Then the ISPs pay the city for use of the last mile on a endpoint by endpoint basis. Lowers the barrier for new ISPs since they don't have to dig up new last mile, and the city is encouraged to upkeep the last mile since it's a revenue stream with a few high paying representatives of customers (so no tragedy of the commons), but the low barrier to entry for ISPs means that the city won't get too connected to individual ISPs.
  - rayiner 6y ago
    Okay but who is going to do that? My county is still working on bringing water and sewer to most places, and I’m less than 10 minutes outside Annapolis. Especially places that already have cable or fiber that was privately installed?
    - monocasa 6y ago
      When there's a clear revenue source coming out of it, bonds make sense to pay for it. And yeah, if you're in barely first world conditions where you're struggling to hook sewer up to your residents near a major municipality, you obviously have systemic issues that get in the way of proper utility work of nearly any scale.
      - rayiner 6y ago
        20% of the country doesn’t have public water or sewer, including many fairly wealth areas. In vastly more of the country, existing water and sewer infrastructure is crumbling and needs replacement. Sure, you can pass bonds, but how do you get people to vote for those bonds when you also need to issue bonds for all this other higher priority infrastructure?
        monocasa 6y ago
        > 20% of the country doesn’t have public water or sewer, including many fairly wealth areas Almost entirely rural. These people aren't digging up roads, but it's purely a right of way issue on the poles (if they're getting real high speed internet either way). > In vastly more of the country, existing water and sewer infrastructure is crumbling and needs replacement. Yes, the united states is devolving into a third world country when it comes to infrastructure. My scheme is obviously predicated on not being in one of the municipalities that are actively trying to run the concept of government into the ground. > Sure, you can pass bonds, but how do you get people to vote for those bonds when you also need to issue bonds for all this other higher priority infrastructure? So you don't get to have works like this until you have the basics of potable water covered. Like for real, 10 minutes outside of Annapolis should be able to have sewer covered.
lwhalen 6y ago
This is what is preventing my move from suburban Washington State to rural Montana or even Idaho. Getting ANY information from wired ISPs is like pulling teeth. Each address has to be called in, and no ISP can say something helpful like "we don't service that, but try ISP X", they all say "that's not on our service area... today". I have high hopes for Starlink, personally, but my first choice would absolutely be gigabit fiber to the homestead.
- alteria 6y ago
  Funnily enough, I was doing research one day and came across a local ISP co-op in one of the Dakotas that was selling rural, symmetric 1/1 for $70 per month. Much better service at a lower cost than in SF (been trying to get ATT to finish their fiber install for the past 2 months). Unfortunately I don't remember the name, but you could probably find it on one of the FCC maps.
  - andrewnicolalde 6y ago
    I’m guessing they didn’t mean 1 gigabit :(
    - alteria 6y ago
      They did, which was the shocking part! If you believe their claims about profit distributions (which you probably shouldn't), the total cost might even average less than $70/mo.
  - proverbialbunny 6y ago
    Sonic in SF is a better deal, no?
    - CliffStoll 6y ago
      You betcha! I live in the East bay and Sonic gigabit fiber to the house delivers 1Gb/s up and down. No data caps. $62 per month includes taxes, fees, and a VOIP phone line. Dynamic IP address, but you can't have everything.
ethagknight 6y ago
In Memphis, TN, we have hideous overhead power lines running along most streets, usually with a combination of high voltage, low voltage, communication lines, and untold abandoned cabling. Im amazed that citizens will tolerate a very poorly maintained network of power poles vs arguing with cities and utilities to begin the admittedly long, expensive, and slow work to clean ups the more egregious and prominent locations, like along major thoroughfares. These overhead distribution networks require significant mutilation of trees (ugly) and are vulnerable to a variety of accidents including cars striking poles, trees falling on wires, squirrels exploding, etc. A city-led effort to install underground conduit duct banks could be federally funded while also allow new ISPs to come along and lease empty conduit. Thats where I would focus my grass roots efforts. In Memphis, its rumored to cost some $3B to bury all overhead power lines (estimated by the local public utility), therefore infeasible. I say, excellent, get to work on the easiest 50% of the scoop that over the next decade!
- jrockway 6y ago
  New York City looked like that in the late 19th century. A blizzard destroyed everything and the wires moved underground: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_City_Subway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_City_Subway
- toomuchtodo 6y ago
  I would strongly encourage you to run for local office. You're on the right track, and the path to success is more leverage.
  - pottertheotter 6y ago
    More people need to do this! There is so much that can be done by getting involved in local office. Earlier this year I successfully got a seat on the board overseeing my city's public utilities. One of my goals is to get municipal broadband.
    - toomuchtodo 6y ago
      Thank you for your efforts!
seph-reed 6y ago
So, right now is a terrible time for this logic given we live in an oligarchy with very little representation, but if we lived in an actual functional government, services like this seem like they should be socialized. I don't want 3 different sewage companies ripping up my block to put in 3 different sewage lines. Similarly, I don't want a bunch of different internet providers having to do that. Once again, this only makes sense in a functional government. Not in a lobbyist hacked representative democracy turned oligarchy.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  Most of the policies like this are set at the state and local levels. You absolutely can make a difference at this level by showing up. Especially if you can show up with some like-minded people in the same jurisdiction, and keep after it until the change has actually happened and is too late for the incumbents to undo.
  - seph-reed 6y ago
    While I really appreciate the democratic aspect of showing up at meetings, I would much prefer proper representation. Representation such that someone says: "Hey what about people who are too busy to show up to these meetings? How do we get their input?" At this point, the lobbyists have very, very, very obviously gotten root. The steps involved with reversing this (without beheadings) are unprecedented afaik.
    - mulmen 6y ago
      That's exactly how it works? You show up, make a bunch of noise about what you want and eventually everyone can vote on it. The value of representative democracy is that you don't need to take the time to go to every meeting.
      - 1_person 6y ago
        Yes, I find it very convenient for legislators to represent my interests for me by professing their platform to be whatever is electorally expedient at the moment while gerrymandering districts and rigging elections in a couple key counties then legislating whatever gets them paid the most with no regard for their professed platform or my interests whatsoever. It's great that I don't even have to be aware of how my rights are being gradually eroded and sold off to the highest bidder. It allows me to fully abdicate responsibility for the atrocities and enjoy my carefree lifestyle of mindless consumerism. Fuck me harder, daddy!
jrockway 6y ago
One of my secret fantasies is an "Uber for ISPs". That is where someone ignores all the laws, rules, and regulations, and just builds a fiber ISP without anyone's permission. String fiber in through people's windows. Instead of burying them, put them in those temporary cable trenches (that you see all the time for construction or film crews), or run them beside sidewalks and cover them with cement. Hell, maybe a really sticky piece of duct tape is enough. It would be totally illegal and you'd probably go to prison forever if you started a company to do it. And annoying people with scissors would be cutting them every day (not to mention glass-eating wasps! a real thing!). But I'd pay for it.
- MartijnBraam 6y ago
  This would be a great test for how reliable you can make a network if you add in a lot of redundancy. if you have enough routes it shouldn't matter if a few fibers get cut or destroyed.
- g_p 6y ago
  I've seen something not too far from this done in rural areas in the UK. It's not illegal - in fact, it receives public money via broadband vouchers! Direct-burying of fibre in the countryside is cheap, doesn't require permission (beyond getting access to the land etc.) Landowners are generally hugely supportive, as they get better internet too (and being rural, have useless connectivity to begin with). You can get street works permits fairly easily, for the "last half-mile", through access to "code powers" [1]. That also helps you bypass certain planning rules. And you can just do a regular premises installation - nothing cloak and dagger here! [1] https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/policy/electronic-comm-code https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-telecoms-and-internet/inform...
  - smoyer 6y ago
    In Nebraska we could direct-bury fiber up to eight feet underground with what was essentially a vibrating knife (pulled through the earth by two large Caterpillers) along the gravel paved county roads that were established when the railroads sold off land to finance their grade/track construction. It's incredibly cheap compared to any other means of installation and the right-of-ways are consistently available - https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vibration+cable+plough&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vibration+cable+plough&t=ffab&iar=.... A tiny fraction of our fiber was mounted above ground (eight miles out of over 700 IIRC) but it was taken down by tornados/wind shear twice in the first three years after it was lit.
radicaldreamer 6y ago
In San Francisco, everyone along streets with underground utilities are denied fiber due to Public Works disallowing microtrenching. Additionally, AT&T has not upgraded their lines in these areas, so we're stuck with Comcast or DSL...
- driverdan 6y ago
  Also the NIMBYs and ridiculous permitting requirements, such as needing environmental studies to add distribution boxes.
  - parineum 6y ago
    How do NIMBYs play into this?
    - driverdan 6y ago
      NIMBYs put laws in place that makes it harder to install fiber.
    - kitteh 6y ago
      They've fought the installation of CEVs (controlled environment vaults) which are used to put in network/telecom gear to extend broadband services. One town decided they didn't like this beige box on a main street so they painted over it with a color that fit better. Turns out, that paint was important for cooling it: within a few days gear overheated and hundreds were out of service.
- slater 6y ago
  If you can get it, monkeybrains is pretty good
  - cosmojg 6y ago
    What speeds are you getting with them?
- chrishacken 6y ago
kayoone 6y ago
Reading this I am very happy that my hometown state in Germany runs a state funded fiber project now. My mom had max 3Mbps for the last 18 years or so and will soon have 1Gbps for the same money.
- ChuckNorris89 6y ago
  Which state/city is that?
  - kayoone 6y ago
    I realised the correct term in english is rather County than state though Kreis Minden Lübbecke https://standort-minden-luebbecke.de/Standort/Breitband-Ausbau https://standort-minden-luebbecke.de/Standort/Breitband-Ausb...
mjevans 6y ago
The "last mile" (couple KM) of physical infrastructure should be owned by the people. This is the way that it works best for walkways, roads, and even utilities like power and water where (at least I've only ever seen) one single option exists and is highly regulated. In the case of power that's true for 'transmission' but there have been times I've had options for generation. IMO laws like the ones in Washington State that were put in place by entrenched and abusive commercial monopolies (like the cable companies and telephone companies) harm competition, by restricting existing and new utilities from partnering with the people to create these last mile platforms, and allow competition on top of them. Just as how there is competition in package delivery service on top of the roadways.
- knjoy 6y ago
  Totally agree here. I live in a building that only has Time Warner (ya, didn't think about the ISP before renting my apartment.....). Every week I lose internet for a day or two. Internet is a public good and should be treated as such...
  - freeopinion 6y ago
    I don't think internet is a public good. But I do think there is a public interest. This is how I see it: Communication must be transported through some medium. That could be air, copper, fiber, etc. For the sake of this discussion, let's focus on fiber. To connect everybody with fiber, the utility has to bury fiber under property it doesn't own. (Or it could run it arial over property it doesn't own.) For the little section that runs from the street through my property to the network interface device attached to my house, I am more than happy to give the utility permission to trench and bury fiber. But they own the fiber and are responsible for its maintenance. If there is ever any maintenance issue with that small portion buried in my yard, they don't have an easement to dig it up and service it. They need my permission. Because it is directly affecting my internet connection, I'm usually happy to grant permission. But when it runs under my driveway, I don't want them digging up my driveway. We work together to find some option that isn't too expensive, but doesn't involve the destruction of my driveway. Let's say I want to switch providers. The new provider can't just reuse the fiber in my yard because it doesn't belong to them, nor to me. So each potential provider has to bury their own across my yard without disturbing the others. Because this seems suboptimal to me and because I take the long view, I have my network interface device moved to the curb, and I own the fiber in my yard. But now the burden is on me to have the right kind of fiber and the right type of fiber connects and to fix any issues. Now let's say that my neighbor's connection also runs through my yard. Neither my neighbor nor the utility want to be beholden to me for maintenance. They will want an easement that gives them the right to do whatever it takes to fix the fiber in my yard. But if my neighbor ever wants to switch providers, the new provider will need another easement. Generally most of the property across which the fiber is installed is publicly owned. Each utility has their own easements through that property. Aside from the obvious duplication of infrastructure with its associated price inflation, there is another problem. There is only a limited space for easements. If there are multiple water utilities and multiple power utilities and multiple gas utilities and multiple telecom utilities, the easement corridor gets pretty crowded and could conceivably even be exhausted. How do you decide which private company gets a free easement and which doesn't. Should we start charging for the easements? Also, it stands to reason that if there are 25 utility easements under main street, there is a much higher probability on any given day that one of them will dig up main street for maintenance than if there were only 5 utility easements. So in the end, I think all private utilities should have equal access to easements on public land. You can do that by auctioning those easements every set interval. Kind of like we do with spectrum. But I'm not very satisfied with how that has worked in the past. It is impossible for any little guy to get a foot over that hurdle. The only acceptable alternative I have encountered is to deny easements to them all. We still need transmission lines and those will still need easements on public property. One obvious solution is to have those lines be publicly owned. Just like I took ownership of that hypothetical fiber running through my yard. In the case of fiber, you could run 144 x 144 fiber in very nearly the same space it takes one utility to run 144 fiber. So you could conceivably rent out fiber to utilities. But that doesn't work as well for water utilities. With telecom, we can mingle data on the same fiber. That doesn't work so great for water. It is probably practical to have a different solution for water or gas than for telecom. Power may require a solution of its own. Through this line of reasoning I have come to believe that public ownership of transmission lines across public property is the best arrangement for telecom. Any provider that wants to buy up private property or buy up easements across private property is still free to do so.
smoyer 6y ago
> Recently, the FCC and USDA, among others, have created massive funds in an effort to deploy broadband in underserved areas. The Universal Service Fund was established mid-'90s to get fund telecommunications connections to schools and libraries in rural areas (in the same way the Rural Electrification Act did in the early 1900s). Funds were paid out through 2000 or so but I haven't heard of any contracts being built using USF funds since then. I will however point out that you can still see this surcharge on your phone bill. I also agree that these contracts tended to favor huge CLECs (versus huge cable companies back then) and that more consideration should be given to "mom and pop" shops. EDIT: The focus on schools and libraries was an effort to get service into these geographic areas with the idea that once it was there, consumers would be targeted as customers who could then "just connect". That's when we also learned that the "last mile" was way more expensive (often politically) than anticipated. In the cable industry, the response was to upgrade plant equipment and create/adopt the DOCSIS standard for data transmission over coax. DISCLAIMER: I was a member of two of the committees that helped write specific portions of the DOCSIS 2.0 specification.
MangoCoffee 6y ago
i have two choices in my area. ATT DSL or Comcast cable. the phone line system is so old in my neighborhood. it just barely better than dial up so i'm left with Comcast as the only option for high speed. i'm hoping Elon Musk's Starlink will give us the high speed that we hope for that is not control by monopoly like Comcast and ATT.
- lotsofpulp 6y ago
  This is the situation in most areas of the US. A few lucky people are in new developments where the phone company has run fiber wire and offers a real fiber to the home connection, but most are stuck with a crappy connection via coaxial wires.
  - ProZsolt 6y ago
    Coax is not that bad. In theory you can get 10Gbps down and 6Gbps up.[1] The problem is cable companies with monopoly in the US. In Hungary you can get 1Gbps down 200Mbps up for less than 25 USD, and they rolling out DOCSIS 3.1 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS
cnorthwood 6y ago
In the UK, I have a "full fibre" provider (Hyperoptic) which pretty much exclusively serve apartment blocks. They run fibre to a switch they install in the building, and then ethernet cabling from that switch to every apartment. Targetting dense buildings I suspect gives them a really good cost/customer upfront ratio (in some cities they own their own fibre, in others they use other commercial providers, including Openreach which was spun out of the former state monopoly BT and has to provide fair rates to competitors). The latter seems like a reasonable trade off of government regulation and free market to encourage competition, I suspect the lobbying culture in the US wouldn't allow it though.
swiley 6y ago
Am I weird for not wanting fiber run into my apartment? Sure it makes sense for ISPs to use it for infrastructure but the link from their switch to my equipment should be made of copper. It’s so easy to mess those cables up and having a contracted fish around in your walls just so you can have your <1Gig connection back is stupid. When I first got a connection here it took the guy an extra few hours to deal with exactly this kind of problem.
- maxsilver 6y ago
  The problem is that your going to have a contractor fish around in your walls and mess cables up anyway. If they aren't doing it for fiber, they'll be doing it for coax or ancient copper DSL lines. So, if you have to have a person punch holes and fish around in walls anyway, you might as well get a nice fiber connection out of it, right?
- 1_person 6y ago
  Weird? No. Objectively wrong? Yes. The link from their switch to your equipment should not be made of copper, because copper does not provide electrical isolation between the endpoints and is susceptible to interference. Fiber does provide electrical isolation between endpoints and is not susceptible to interference. Fiber also supports significantly higher throughput.
TrackerFF 6y ago
With 5G, I think there's even less motivation for ISPs to provide fiber to those out of range. To the point where they'll just jack up the installation prices until no-one bothers them anymore. At least that's the feeling I'm getting now. A friend of mine recently moved into a new building, which isn't too far from a fiber central. It's also out in the suburbs, so no extensive infrastructure like you'd find in the middle of a city...well, he requested a quote, and the company said - "hey, it'll cost you around $20k for [short stretch], but we're also offering wireless broadband for only [2-3 times the price of fiber, and 1/5th the speed)"
- driverdan 6y ago
  5G requires more fiber runs since towers have to be closer together. Less fiber than running to every home but more than we have now.
- Tagbert 6y ago
  What is the price of an unlimited 5G connection? If it is being provided by a telco I imagine that it will expensive and have limited data caps.
  - onionjake 6y ago
    Verizon's is $70/month with no datacaps yet. Speed and ability to get the service varies greatly by distance and LOS to the tower. Source: https://www.verizon.com/support/5g-home-faqs/ https://www.verizon.com/support/5g-home-faqs/
- tracker1 6y ago
  How long is "[short trench]" specifically? You may be able to find a third party contractor that can run the trunk cheaper, but it will vary by city/state. If it's even a mile in a city, $20k is probably about right. If it's a block with no intersections, it may be overpriced... that will really vary a lot.
snisarenko 6y ago
The writer forgot to mention the most important barrier - Basic economics. Last mile infrastructure is always a winner takes all market. Even if all the barriers to entry are removed, you won't have 20 different providers competing in a single city. Only 1 or 2 providers will survive. This is because operational costs for running your own lines will be constant, but you will always have only a fraction of the customers if you are competing with 20 other providers. I've commented on this topic in a previous HN thread. But I believe the solution to the problem is a bidding system. Companies bid to build infrastructure. And companies bid to maintain it for short period of time (3 years).
- knjoy 6y ago
  I think the solution is what the developing countries have done: the national government just install the cables, then rent out the infrastructure to private companies to compete/service.
  - snisarenko 6y ago
    I think the government involvement should be minimal. They should create a law that requires bidding on local infrastructure, and enforce that the bidding process is fair, and the selection/voting process is fair.
    - iptrans 6y ago
      The bidding process is easily rigged. See redlining.
      - snisarenko 6y ago
        Hey. I looked up redlining, but I am not sure how it relates to bidding. Could you explain your point in a bit more detail. I am kinda curious.
        iptrans 6y ago
rayiner 6y ago
> Last year we were installing conduit for our fiber optic network. There were countless instances where people would literally stop their cars, roll down their windows, and yell profanities at us. In what world is that acceptable behavior for an adult? People hate infrastructure. That’s the only explanation.
- jessaustin 6y ago
  Another possibility is that it's just Pennsylvania...
- saagarjha 6y ago
  Many people dislike construction.
surajs 6y ago
The answer is a no, now and forever so get it over with at your own sweet pace.
grecy 6y ago
> Last year we were installing conduit for our fiber optic network. There were countless instances where people would literally stop their cars, roll down their windows, and yell profanities at us. In what world is that acceptable behavior for an adult? In a world that highlights individuals, and where everyone has been taught their time is more valuable than other people's.
8ytecoder 6y ago
- I live in a building with 180 units. Our options are AT&T and Comcast. Copper is mandatory and old. Want to guess how Comcast is them the only option for fast broadband? - When I upgraded my plan the first person to notice it was my mom in India. Her internet is so much better that the increase in my upload speed was visibly apparent to her. I realised I was the bottleneck. - I appreciated the local control in the US a lot. But I now know it’s a huge detriment to develop and improve basic infrastructure. The goal is to keep things the way they are. In that sense even San Francisco is extremely conservative.
edraferi 6y ago
House Democrats just proposed $100B to fund last mile fiber. The bill includes thinks like a "Dig Once" provision and supersedes state laws against municipal fiber. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/100-billion-universal-fiber-plan-proposed-by-democrats-in-congress/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/100-billion-univ... https://www.majoritywhip.gov/?press=clyburn-rural-broadband-task-force-and-house-democrats-introduce-accessible-affordable-internet-for-all-act https://www.majoritywhip.gov/?press=clyburn-rural-broadband-...
- tryptophan 6y ago
  ugh, that bill is horrible. 0 talk of deregulating things which allow the ISP monopolies(which are responsible for the terrible service) to exist. Literally just another tax-payer handout to private companies.
  - xenospn 6y ago
    If I remember correctly, in Israel they forced the telcos to open up their infrastructure to everyone and the sky didn't fall down.
    - proverbialbunny 6y ago
      In most of Europe too.
    - everybodyknows 6y ago
      Here in the US, AT+T was ordered to allow independent DSL operators to share its twisted pair to households. Worked okay for a while, but AT+T found ways to get the shared equipment e.g. at the local office, misconfigured for those customers. Source: I was such a one, with a year and a half of intermittent service. My fear for open access is where the open market ISPs and the natural monopoly fiber demux meet -- we should fear attempts at collusion and market manipulation.
      - kitteh 6y ago
kelvin0 6y ago
I think it really sucks when you try to do good by everyone (community, business owners, ordinary citizens) and encounter so much friction. I think I can understand the author's point of view. Many areas seem to have dismal internet access in the US (I live in Canada). However it seems to be a much better outcome for all compared to the 'wild-west-shoot-from-the-hip' method where anyone digs anywhere with minimal regulation and oversight. Not having an infrastructure and building it slowly is better in my opinion than degrading public infrastructure and then having citizen foot the bill to clean up the mess left by some fast and loose startups. I mention this in this particular context of building and transforming physical installations who affect the general public.
whatsmyusername 6y ago
> I remember my brother and I fighting over the computer day in and day out to play games like Wolfenstein - Enemy Territory, which was released in 2003. (I'm convinced that this will be the all-time best FPS game ever created.) The author is correct.
whatsmyusername 6y ago
Yeah PA this doesn't surprise me. It's Pittsburgh and Philly with a 3rd world country in between. The entire state is basically those two islands, and 4 highways to get back and forth from the northeast. The rest is mountains and nothing filled with people fighting over scraps while getting snooty about the, 'dangerous high tax cities.' Source, grew up in the nothing part of the state. Hit the road for Pittsburgh as soon as I could afford it and never looked back.
greesil 6y ago
There's a good Planet Money podcast on this https://www.npr.org/2020/05/29/865908114/small-america-vs-big-internet https://www.npr.org/2020/05/29/865908114/small-america-vs-bi...
pyryt 6y ago
There's probably a good explanation, but let me ask the question: why do we need to have men cutting hard road surfaces? If a city extends their subway network, they dont demolish all buildings on top, lay the tracks, and then rebuild. They do it without any major interference to the surface. Similarly for mountain tunnels, you dont start by demolishing a mile of rock. We just dig the tunnel. Couldn't someone invent a robot to dig fibre tunnels? Then we wouldnt need to bother any shop owners or neighbours with noise and inconvenience?
- agakshat 6y ago
  I would guess it’s a matter of cost and how deep the tunnel needs to be dug.
  - pyryt 6y ago
    It could be. Otoh, if you were able to have less workers on the job, avoid having to repave entire streets, and avoid having to wait for 6 months to get started... youd think itd be worth it
- chrishacken 6y ago
  How do you plan for these things to get into buildings? Sewer, water, and power utilities are anywhere from 20’ deep to 2’ deep, so unless you want these robots aimlessly digging into utilities, you still need to disturb the ground above. Subway tunnels are generally very deep... 40’+ And verrrrry expensive.
- jessaustin 6y ago
  When Charter hooked up a building for me, they used a horizontal bore to get from their pedestal at the corner of the lot to the wall I wanted them to come in. I've also seen horizontal boring used to lay new fiber along a highway right-of-way, because they wanted to switch back and forth from one side of the highway to the other. You've probably seen these machines before. [0] [0] https://www.ditchwitch.com/directional-drills https://www.ditchwitch.com/directional-drills
ggm 6y ago
Public utility functions are best run by regulated processes and it's just rubbish to say market forces help here. Prices for internet are now decoupled from true underlying cost in almost all markets. Fibre is a fifty year plus investment in the ground. Do it once.
vikramkr 6y ago
Who owns these poles? Are these municipalities or corporations? If the latter, who owns the land these poles are on?
johnklos 6y ago
Interesting, but it's painful to read. It's as if someone is paying Chris per apostrophe.
alex_young 6y ago
I spent the last 2 years living in the south of Switzerland. Wages are very high, costs of goods are high, but telecom services are inexpensive and very high quality. In Lugano, I was paying $40 / month for 10 GB symmetric fiber to the home, and another $40 / month for truly unlimited 4G cell service. They gave me a $10 discount for bundling. Fiber is universally wired to new buildings, and you have your choice of ISPs. There were cheaper options. Whatever the reason, the US has been unable to figure this out. It’s not the urban nature of Europe. Small villages have the same setup.
llsf 6y ago
Is a typical thing (i.e. infrastructure) that the government (federal, state and local combined) should pay and maintain ? Clearly letting private companies doing it is not working in US. Dig once, lay enough municipal fiber, and rent it to any ISP that want to reach houses/buildings. Use that opportunity to properly lay the phone, cable, and electricity, and rent them out as well to the local provider of voice, TV and electricity. And the nice bonus would be uncluttered street, no more poles and wires going from building to building. Yes, it is expensive to lay down fiber, phone, cable, electricity. But if we had done the investment 20 years ago, it would likely be ahead now, with lower cost for customers, and a thriving environment with more innovation...
product50 6y ago
I feel so lucky that I live in an area with fiber internet and 1000mbps speeds. I remember when we were house hunting, this was one of my criteria. While leads to my point - if enough people want fast internet speeds, they should/could plan their house buying/renting strategies accordingly. Nothing like incenting local municipalities to take action based on a community of people motivated by money.
r_singh 6y ago
I work for a company that provides BSS/OSS software to small ISPs in India. I'm so glad that the legal system in India is so weak that it is not possible for monopolies to enforce ownership of last mile infrastructure as smaller local players can just throw wires over buildings and give consumers the service at a low cost. Our software is as cheap as 0.1 USD per user per month and has a large list of features and we're provisioning over a million connections all over India from villages to large cities like Mumbai.
- iptrans 6y ago
  Email me (see profile) or posts a link to your BSS/OSS. Inquiring minds want to know if it is usable outside India.
  - r_singh 6y ago
    Sure, just emailed you (from address in my profile) with a link to our BSS/OSS and login credentials for you. Would love to hear from you if you have any feedback or questions.
akg_67 6y ago
What is the point of having advanced technologies, products, and services that are largely inaccessible to large segment of the population? There is something inherently structurally broken how US operates. I pay about same amount for an unreliable 50Mbps cable internet connection at my home in US, and for 1Gbps Fibre internet connection at my home in Japan.
gregors 6y ago
Chattanooga's EPB - 300mbps up/down 57.99, 1Gps up/down 67.99 10Gps up/down 299.00 https://epb.com/home-store/internet https://epb.com/home-store/internet https://www.reddit.com/r/Chattanooga/comments/hfeu38/epb_representing_im_proud_to_call_chatt_my_home https://www.reddit.com/r/Chattanooga/comments/hfeu38/epb_rep...
- RNCTX 6y ago
  I was pleasantly surprised last time I stayed in Chattanooga ;). I was flying a private airplane (am a pilot) and the monthly GIS database updates and PNG map tiles required to fly with an app rather than paper maps go well into the tens of gigs, which is usually quite painful on hotel wifi. I set the update going on my iPad one night in the hotel before going to bed, took a shower, and was pleasantly surprised after coming out of the bathroom a few minutes later to see that it was done! Proof that private ownership of infrastructure is bullshit, and utilities (including internet lines) should not be owned by profit-seeking organizations.
qserasera 6y ago
I believe the strategy is to frustrate tax payers into footing the bill allowing telecoms access to the enormous teat of the American government and others. Rent seeking delenda est

553 points by joecool1029 6y ago

This is 100% accurate. Add in hostile/lazy city utility offices, litigious competitors with infinite pockets, and people who just hate change and you're starting to understand the uphill battle that is bettering internet infrastructure.

zahma 6y ago
There’s also intergenerational change. Many older folks don’t care about the benefits of high speed internet and fiber. Add in resistance to change and that can create some startling traction against progress.

alexchamberlain 6y ago

I think we need to make it a lot cheaper to run cables like this: I don't understand why we have to dig up roads to lay cables. Why can't there be a shared conduit for cables underneath or beside a road? It can be included in the initial construction of the road, for example.

monocasa 6y ago
> I don't understand why we have to dig up roads to lay cables. Why can't there be a shared conduit for cables underneath or beside a road? Because the city doesn't want to pay for it. And the companies, having the money to dig the road up don't want to make their competitor's jobs easier. So pretty classic market failure. What needs to happen, IMO, is that the last mile should be utility infrastructure, and ISPs should connect to that. Then the ISPs pay the city for use of the last mile on a endpoint by endpoint basis. Lowers the barrier for new ISPs since they don't have to dig up new last mile, and the city is encouraged to upkeep the last mile since it's a revenue stream with a few high paying representatives of customers (so no tragedy of the commons), but the low barrier to entry for ISPs means that the city won't get too connected to individual ISPs.
- rayiner 6y ago
  Okay but who is going to do that? My county is still working on bringing water and sewer to most places, and I’m less than 10 minutes outside Annapolis. Especially places that already have cable or fiber that was privately installed?
  - monocasa 6y ago
    When there's a clear revenue source coming out of it, bonds make sense to pay for it. And yeah, if you're in barely first world conditions where you're struggling to hook sewer up to your residents near a major municipality, you obviously have systemic issues that get in the way of proper utility work of nearly any scale.
    - rayiner 6y ago
      20% of the country doesn’t have public water or sewer, including many fairly wealth areas. In vastly more of the country, existing water and sewer infrastructure is crumbling and needs replacement. Sure, you can pass bonds, but how do you get people to vote for those bonds when you also need to issue bonds for all this other higher priority infrastructure?
      - monocasa 6y ago
        > 20% of the country doesn’t have public water or sewer, including many fairly wealth areas Almost entirely rural. These people aren't digging up roads, but it's purely a right of way issue on the poles (if they're getting real high speed internet either way). > In vastly more of the country, existing water and sewer infrastructure is crumbling and needs replacement. Yes, the united states is devolving into a third world country when it comes to infrastructure. My scheme is obviously predicated on not being in one of the municipalities that are actively trying to run the concept of government into the ground. > Sure, you can pass bonds, but how do you get people to vote for those bonds when you also need to issue bonds for all this other higher priority infrastructure? So you don't get to have works like this until you have the basics of potable water covered. Like for real, 10 minutes outside of Annapolis should be able to have sewer covered.

lwhalen 6y ago

This is what is preventing my move from suburban Washington State to rural Montana or even Idaho. Getting ANY information from wired ISPs is like pulling teeth. Each address has to be called in, and no ISP can say something helpful like "we don't service that, but try ISP X", they all say "that's not on our service area... today". I have high hopes for Starlink, personally, but my first choice would absolutely be gigabit fiber to the homestead.

alteria 6y ago
Funnily enough, I was doing research one day and came across a local ISP co-op in one of the Dakotas that was selling rural, symmetric 1/1 for $70 per month. Much better service at a lower cost than in SF (been trying to get ATT to finish their fiber install for the past 2 months). Unfortunately I don't remember the name, but you could probably find it on one of the FCC maps.
- andrewnicolalde 6y ago
  I’m guessing they didn’t mean 1 gigabit :(
  - alteria 6y ago
    They did, which was the shocking part! If you believe their claims about profit distributions (which you probably shouldn't), the total cost might even average less than $70/mo.
- proverbialbunny 6y ago
  Sonic in SF is a better deal, no?
  - CliffStoll 6y ago
    You betcha! I live in the East bay and Sonic gigabit fiber to the house delivers 1Gb/s up and down. No data caps. $62 per month includes taxes, fees, and a VOIP phone line. Dynamic IP address, but you can't have everything.

ethagknight 6y ago

In Memphis, TN, we have hideous overhead power lines running along most streets, usually with a combination of high voltage, low voltage, communication lines, and untold abandoned cabling. Im amazed that citizens will tolerate a very poorly maintained network of power poles vs arguing with cities and utilities to begin the admittedly long, expensive, and slow work to clean ups the more egregious and prominent locations, like along major thoroughfares. These overhead distribution networks require significant mutilation of trees (ugly) and are vulnerable to a variety of accidents including cars striking poles, trees falling on wires, squirrels exploding, etc. A city-led effort to install underground conduit duct banks could be federally funded while also allow new ISPs to come along and lease empty conduit. Thats where I would focus my grass roots efforts. In Memphis, its rumored to cost some $3B to bury all overhead power lines (estimated by the local public utility), therefore infeasible. I say, excellent, get to work on the easiest 50% of the scoop that over the next decade!

jrockway 6y ago
New York City looked like that in the late 19th century. A blizzard destroyed everything and the wires moved underground: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_City_Subway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_City_Subway
toomuchtodo 6y ago
I would strongly encourage you to run for local office. You're on the right track, and the path to success is more leverage.
- pottertheotter 6y ago
  More people need to do this! There is so much that can be done by getting involved in local office. Earlier this year I successfully got a seat on the board overseeing my city's public utilities. One of my goals is to get municipal broadband.
  - toomuchtodo 6y ago
    Thank you for your efforts!

seph-reed 6y ago

So, right now is a terrible time for this logic given we live in an oligarchy with very little representation, but if we lived in an actual functional government, services like this seem like they should be socialized. I don't want 3 different sewage companies ripping up my block to put in 3 different sewage lines. Similarly, I don't want a bunch of different internet providers having to do that. Once again, this only makes sense in a functional government. Not in a lobbyist hacked representative democracy turned oligarchy.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago
Most of the policies like this are set at the state and local levels. You absolutely can make a difference at this level by showing up. Especially if you can show up with some like-minded people in the same jurisdiction, and keep after it until the change has actually happened and is too late for the incumbents to undo.
- seph-reed 6y ago
  While I really appreciate the democratic aspect of showing up at meetings, I would much prefer proper representation. Representation such that someone says: "Hey what about people who are too busy to show up to these meetings? How do we get their input?" At this point, the lobbyists have very, very, very obviously gotten root. The steps involved with reversing this (without beheadings) are unprecedented afaik.
  - mulmen 6y ago
    That's exactly how it works? You show up, make a bunch of noise about what you want and eventually everyone can vote on it. The value of representative democracy is that you don't need to take the time to go to every meeting.
    - 1_person 6y ago
      Yes, I find it very convenient for legislators to represent my interests for me by professing their platform to be whatever is electorally expedient at the moment while gerrymandering districts and rigging elections in a couple key counties then legislating whatever gets them paid the most with no regard for their professed platform or my interests whatsoever. It's great that I don't even have to be aware of how my rights are being gradually eroded and sold off to the highest bidder. It allows me to fully abdicate responsibility for the atrocities and enjoy my carefree lifestyle of mindless consumerism. Fuck me harder, daddy!

jrockway 6y ago

One of my secret fantasies is an "Uber for ISPs". That is where someone ignores all the laws, rules, and regulations, and just builds a fiber ISP without anyone's permission. String fiber in through people's windows. Instead of burying them, put them in those temporary cable trenches (that you see all the time for construction or film crews), or run them beside sidewalks and cover them with cement. Hell, maybe a really sticky piece of duct tape is enough. It would be totally illegal and you'd probably go to prison forever if you started a company to do it. And annoying people with scissors would be cutting them every day (not to mention glass-eating wasps! a real thing!). But I'd pay for it.

MartijnBraam 6y ago
This would be a great test for how reliable you can make a network if you add in a lot of redundancy. if you have enough routes it shouldn't matter if a few fibers get cut or destroyed.
g_p 6y ago
I've seen something not too far from this done in rural areas in the UK. It's not illegal - in fact, it receives public money via broadband vouchers! Direct-burying of fibre in the countryside is cheap, doesn't require permission (beyond getting access to the land etc.) Landowners are generally hugely supportive, as they get better internet too (and being rural, have useless connectivity to begin with). You can get street works permits fairly easily, for the "last half-mile", through access to "code powers" [1]. That also helps you bypass certain planning rules. And you can just do a regular premises installation - nothing cloak and dagger here! [1] https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-telecoms-and-internet/information-for-industry/policy/electronic-comm-code https://www.ofcom.org.uk/phones-telecoms-and-internet/inform...
- smoyer 6y ago
  In Nebraska we could direct-bury fiber up to eight feet underground with what was essentially a vibrating knife (pulled through the earth by two large Caterpillers) along the gravel paved county roads that were established when the railroads sold off land to finance their grade/track construction. It's incredibly cheap compared to any other means of installation and the right-of-ways are consistently available - https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vibration+cable+plough&t=ffab&iar=images&iax=images&ia=images https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vibration+cable+plough&t=ffab&iar=.... A tiny fraction of our fiber was mounted above ground (eight miles out of over 700 IIRC) but it was taken down by tornados/wind shear twice in the first three years after it was lit.

radicaldreamer 6y ago

In San Francisco, everyone along streets with underground utilities are denied fiber due to Public Works disallowing microtrenching. Additionally, AT&T has not upgraded their lines in these areas, so we're stuck with Comcast or DSL...

driverdan 6y ago
Also the NIMBYs and ridiculous permitting requirements, such as needing environmental studies to add distribution boxes.
- parineum 6y ago
  How do NIMBYs play into this?
  - driverdan 6y ago
    NIMBYs put laws in place that makes it harder to install fiber.
  - kitteh 6y ago
    They've fought the installation of CEVs (controlled environment vaults) which are used to put in network/telecom gear to extend broadband services. One town decided they didn't like this beige box on a main street so they painted over it with a color that fit better. Turns out, that paint was important for cooling it: within a few days gear overheated and hundreds were out of service.
slater 6y ago
If you can get it, monkeybrains is pretty good
- cosmojg 6y ago
  What speeds are you getting with them?
chrishacken 6y ago

kayoone 6y ago

Reading this I am very happy that my hometown state in Germany runs a state funded fiber project now. My mom had max 3Mbps for the last 18 years or so and will soon have 1Gbps for the same money.

ChuckNorris89 6y ago
Which state/city is that?
- kayoone 6y ago
  I realised the correct term in english is rather County than state though Kreis Minden Lübbecke https://standort-minden-luebbecke.de/Standort/Breitband-Ausbau https://standort-minden-luebbecke.de/Standort/Breitband-Ausb...

mjevans 6y ago

The "last mile" (couple KM) of physical infrastructure should be owned by the people. This is the way that it works best for walkways, roads, and even utilities like power and water where (at least I've only ever seen) one single option exists and is highly regulated. In the case of power that's true for 'transmission' but there have been times I've had options for generation. IMO laws like the ones in Washington State that were put in place by entrenched and abusive commercial monopolies (like the cable companies and telephone companies) harm competition, by restricting existing and new utilities from partnering with the people to create these last mile platforms, and allow competition on top of them. Just as how there is competition in package delivery service on top of the roadways.

knjoy 6y ago
Totally agree here. I live in a building that only has Time Warner (ya, didn't think about the ISP before renting my apartment.....). Every week I lose internet for a day or two. Internet is a public good and should be treated as such...
- freeopinion 6y ago
  I don't think internet is a public good. But I do think there is a public interest. This is how I see it: Communication must be transported through some medium. That could be air, copper, fiber, etc. For the sake of this discussion, let's focus on fiber. To connect everybody with fiber, the utility has to bury fiber under property it doesn't own. (Or it could run it arial over property it doesn't own.) For the little section that runs from the street through my property to the network interface device attached to my house, I am more than happy to give the utility permission to trench and bury fiber. But they own the fiber and are responsible for its maintenance. If there is ever any maintenance issue with that small portion buried in my yard, they don't have an easement to dig it up and service it. They need my permission. Because it is directly affecting my internet connection, I'm usually happy to grant permission. But when it runs under my driveway, I don't want them digging up my driveway. We work together to find some option that isn't too expensive, but doesn't involve the destruction of my driveway. Let's say I want to switch providers. The new provider can't just reuse the fiber in my yard because it doesn't belong to them, nor to me. So each potential provider has to bury their own across my yard without disturbing the others. Because this seems suboptimal to me and because I take the long view, I have my network interface device moved to the curb, and I own the fiber in my yard. But now the burden is on me to have the right kind of fiber and the right type of fiber connects and to fix any issues. Now let's say that my neighbor's connection also runs through my yard. Neither my neighbor nor the utility want to be beholden to me for maintenance. They will want an easement that gives them the right to do whatever it takes to fix the fiber in my yard. But if my neighbor ever wants to switch providers, the new provider will need another easement. Generally most of the property across which the fiber is installed is publicly owned. Each utility has their own easements through that property. Aside from the obvious duplication of infrastructure with its associated price inflation, there is another problem. There is only a limited space for easements. If there are multiple water utilities and multiple power utilities and multiple gas utilities and multiple telecom utilities, the easement corridor gets pretty crowded and could conceivably even be exhausted. How do you decide which private company gets a free easement and which doesn't. Should we start charging for the easements? Also, it stands to reason that if there are 25 utility easements under main street, there is a much higher probability on any given day that one of them will dig up main street for maintenance than if there were only 5 utility easements. So in the end, I think all private utilities should have equal access to easements on public land. You can do that by auctioning those easements every set interval. Kind of like we do with spectrum. But I'm not very satisfied with how that has worked in the past. It is impossible for any little guy to get a foot over that hurdle. The only acceptable alternative I have encountered is to deny easements to them all. We still need transmission lines and those will still need easements on public property. One obvious solution is to have those lines be publicly owned. Just like I took ownership of that hypothetical fiber running through my yard. In the case of fiber, you could run 144 x 144 fiber in very nearly the same space it takes one utility to run 144 fiber. So you could conceivably rent out fiber to utilities. But that doesn't work as well for water utilities. With telecom, we can mingle data on the same fiber. That doesn't work so great for water. It is probably practical to have a different solution for water or gas than for telecom. Power may require a solution of its own. Through this line of reasoning I have come to believe that public ownership of transmission lines across public property is the best arrangement for telecom. Any provider that wants to buy up private property or buy up easements across private property is still free to do so.

smoyer 6y ago

> Recently, the FCC and USDA, among others, have created massive funds in an effort to deploy broadband in underserved areas. The Universal Service Fund was established mid-'90s to get fund telecommunications connections to schools and libraries in rural areas (in the same way the Rural Electrification Act did in the early 1900s). Funds were paid out through 2000 or so but I haven't heard of any contracts being built using USF funds since then. I will however point out that you can still see this surcharge on your phone bill. I also agree that these contracts tended to favor huge CLECs (versus huge cable companies back then) and that more consideration should be given to "mom and pop" shops. EDIT: The focus on schools and libraries was an effort to get service into these geographic areas with the idea that once it was there, consumers would be targeted as customers who could then "just connect". That's when we also learned that the "last mile" was way more expensive (often politically) than anticipated. In the cable industry, the response was to upgrade plant equipment and create/adopt the DOCSIS standard for data transmission over coax. DISCLAIMER: I was a member of two of the committees that helped write specific portions of the DOCSIS 2.0 specification.

MangoCoffee 6y ago

i have two choices in my area. ATT DSL or Comcast cable. the phone line system is so old in my neighborhood. it just barely better than dial up so i'm left with Comcast as the only option for high speed. i'm hoping Elon Musk's Starlink will give us the high speed that we hope for that is not control by monopoly like Comcast and ATT.

lotsofpulp 6y ago
This is the situation in most areas of the US. A few lucky people are in new developments where the phone company has run fiber wire and offers a real fiber to the home connection, but most are stuck with a crappy connection via coaxial wires.
- ProZsolt 6y ago
  Coax is not that bad. In theory you can get 10Gbps down and 6Gbps up.[1] The problem is cable companies with monopoly in the US. In Hungary you can get 1Gbps down 200Mbps up for less than 25 USD, and they rolling out DOCSIS 3.1 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DOCSIS

cnorthwood 6y ago

In the UK, I have a "full fibre" provider (Hyperoptic) which pretty much exclusively serve apartment blocks. They run fibre to a switch they install in the building, and then ethernet cabling from that switch to every apartment. Targetting dense buildings I suspect gives them a really good cost/customer upfront ratio (in some cities they own their own fibre, in others they use other commercial providers, including Openreach which was spun out of the former state monopoly BT and has to provide fair rates to competitors). The latter seems like a reasonable trade off of government regulation and free market to encourage competition, I suspect the lobbying culture in the US wouldn't allow it though.

swiley 6y ago

Am I weird for not wanting fiber run into my apartment? Sure it makes sense for ISPs to use it for infrastructure but the link from their switch to my equipment should be made of copper. It’s so easy to mess those cables up and having a contracted fish around in your walls just so you can have your <1Gig connection back is stupid. When I first got a connection here it took the guy an extra few hours to deal with exactly this kind of problem.

maxsilver 6y ago
The problem is that your going to have a contractor fish around in your walls and mess cables up anyway. If they aren't doing it for fiber, they'll be doing it for coax or ancient copper DSL lines. So, if you have to have a person punch holes and fish around in walls anyway, you might as well get a nice fiber connection out of it, right?
1_person 6y ago
Weird? No. Objectively wrong? Yes. The link from their switch to your equipment should not be made of copper, because copper does not provide electrical isolation between the endpoints and is susceptible to interference. Fiber does provide electrical isolation between endpoints and is not susceptible to interference. Fiber also supports significantly higher throughput.

TrackerFF 6y ago

With 5G, I think there's even less motivation for ISPs to provide fiber to those out of range. To the point where they'll just jack up the installation prices until no-one bothers them anymore. At least that's the feeling I'm getting now. A friend of mine recently moved into a new building, which isn't too far from a fiber central. It's also out in the suburbs, so no extensive infrastructure like you'd find in the middle of a city...well, he requested a quote, and the company said - "hey, it'll cost you around $20k for [short stretch], but we're also offering wireless broadband for only [2-3 times the price of fiber, and 1/5th the speed)"

driverdan 6y ago
5G requires more fiber runs since towers have to be closer together. Less fiber than running to every home but more than we have now.
Tagbert 6y ago
What is the price of an unlimited 5G connection? If it is being provided by a telco I imagine that it will expensive and have limited data caps.
- onionjake 6y ago
  Verizon's is $70/month with no datacaps yet. Speed and ability to get the service varies greatly by distance and LOS to the tower. Source: https://www.verizon.com/support/5g-home-faqs/ https://www.verizon.com/support/5g-home-faqs/
tracker1 6y ago
How long is "[short trench]" specifically? You may be able to find a third party contractor that can run the trunk cheaper, but it will vary by city/state. If it's even a mile in a city, $20k is probably about right. If it's a block with no intersections, it may be overpriced... that will really vary a lot.

snisarenko 6y ago

The writer forgot to mention the most important barrier - Basic economics. Last mile infrastructure is always a winner takes all market. Even if all the barriers to entry are removed, you won't have 20 different providers competing in a single city. Only 1 or 2 providers will survive. This is because operational costs for running your own lines will be constant, but you will always have only a fraction of the customers if you are competing with 20 other providers. I've commented on this topic in a previous HN thread. But I believe the solution to the problem is a bidding system. Companies bid to build infrastructure. And companies bid to maintain it for short period of time (3 years).

knjoy 6y ago
I think the solution is what the developing countries have done: the national government just install the cables, then rent out the infrastructure to private companies to compete/service.
- snisarenko 6y ago
  I think the government involvement should be minimal. They should create a law that requires bidding on local infrastructure, and enforce that the bidding process is fair, and the selection/voting process is fair.
  - iptrans 6y ago
    The bidding process is easily rigged. See redlining.
    - snisarenko 6y ago
      Hey. I looked up redlining, but I am not sure how it relates to bidding. Could you explain your point in a bit more detail. I am kinda curious.
      - iptrans 6y ago

rayiner 6y ago

> Last year we were installing conduit for our fiber optic network. There were countless instances where people would literally stop their cars, roll down their windows, and yell profanities at us. In what world is that acceptable behavior for an adult? People hate infrastructure. That’s the only explanation.

jessaustin 6y ago
Another possibility is that it's just Pennsylvania...
saagarjha 6y ago
Many people dislike construction.

surajs 6y ago

The answer is a no, now and forever so get it over with at your own sweet pace.

grecy 6y ago

> Last year we were installing conduit for our fiber optic network. There were countless instances where people would literally stop their cars, roll down their windows, and yell profanities at us. In what world is that acceptable behavior for an adult? In a world that highlights individuals, and where everyone has been taught their time is more valuable than other people's.

8ytecoder 6y ago

- I live in a building with 180 units. Our options are AT&T and Comcast. Copper is mandatory and old. Want to guess how Comcast is them the only option for fast broadband? - When I upgraded my plan the first person to notice it was my mom in India. Her internet is so much better that the increase in my upload speed was visibly apparent to her. I realised I was the bottleneck. - I appreciated the local control in the US a lot. But I now know it’s a huge detriment to develop and improve basic infrastructure. The goal is to keep things the way they are. In that sense even San Francisco is extremely conservative.

edraferi 6y ago

House Democrats just proposed $100B to fund last mile fiber. The bill includes thinks like a "Dig Once" provision and supersedes state laws against municipal fiber. https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/100-billion-universal-fiber-plan-proposed-by-democrats-in-congress/ https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/06/100-billion-univ... https://www.majoritywhip.gov/?press=clyburn-rural-broadband-task-force-and-house-democrats-introduce-accessible-affordable-internet-for-all-act https://www.majoritywhip.gov/?press=clyburn-rural-broadband-...

tryptophan 6y ago
ugh, that bill is horrible. 0 talk of deregulating things which allow the ISP monopolies(which are responsible for the terrible service) to exist. Literally just another tax-payer handout to private companies.
- xenospn 6y ago
  If I remember correctly, in Israel they forced the telcos to open up their infrastructure to everyone and the sky didn't fall down.
  - proverbialbunny 6y ago
    In most of Europe too.
  - everybodyknows 6y ago
    Here in the US, AT+T was ordered to allow independent DSL operators to share its twisted pair to households. Worked okay for a while, but AT+T found ways to get the shared equipment e.g. at the local office, misconfigured for those customers. Source: I was such a one, with a year and a half of intermittent service. My fear for open access is where the open market ISPs and the natural monopoly fiber demux meet -- we should fear attempts at collusion and market manipulation.
    - kitteh 6y ago

kelvin0 6y ago

I think it really sucks when you try to do good by everyone (community, business owners, ordinary citizens) and encounter so much friction. I think I can understand the author's point of view. Many areas seem to have dismal internet access in the US (I live in Canada). However it seems to be a much better outcome for all compared to the 'wild-west-shoot-from-the-hip' method where anyone digs anywhere with minimal regulation and oversight. Not having an infrastructure and building it slowly is better in my opinion than degrading public infrastructure and then having citizen foot the bill to clean up the mess left by some fast and loose startups. I mention this in this particular context of building and transforming physical installations who affect the general public.

whatsmyusername 6y ago

> I remember my brother and I fighting over the computer day in and day out to play games like Wolfenstein - Enemy Territory, which was released in 2003. (I'm convinced that this will be the all-time best FPS game ever created.) The author is correct.

whatsmyusername 6y ago

Yeah PA this doesn't surprise me. It's Pittsburgh and Philly with a 3rd world country in between. The entire state is basically those two islands, and 4 highways to get back and forth from the northeast. The rest is mountains and nothing filled with people fighting over scraps while getting snooty about the, 'dangerous high tax cities.' Source, grew up in the nothing part of the state. Hit the road for Pittsburgh as soon as I could afford it and never looked back.

greesil 6y ago

There's a good Planet Money podcast on this https://www.npr.org/2020/05/29/865908114/small-america-vs-big-internet https://www.npr.org/2020/05/29/865908114/small-america-vs-bi...

pyryt 6y ago

There's probably a good explanation, but let me ask the question: why do we need to have men cutting hard road surfaces? If a city extends their subway network, they dont demolish all buildings on top, lay the tracks, and then rebuild. They do it without any major interference to the surface. Similarly for mountain tunnels, you dont start by demolishing a mile of rock. We just dig the tunnel. Couldn't someone invent a robot to dig fibre tunnels? Then we wouldnt need to bother any shop owners or neighbours with noise and inconvenience?

agakshat 6y ago
I would guess it’s a matter of cost and how deep the tunnel needs to be dug.
- pyryt 6y ago
  It could be. Otoh, if you were able to have less workers on the job, avoid having to repave entire streets, and avoid having to wait for 6 months to get started... youd think itd be worth it
chrishacken 6y ago
How do you plan for these things to get into buildings? Sewer, water, and power utilities are anywhere from 20’ deep to 2’ deep, so unless you want these robots aimlessly digging into utilities, you still need to disturb the ground above. Subway tunnels are generally very deep... 40’+ And verrrrry expensive.
jessaustin 6y ago
When Charter hooked up a building for me, they used a horizontal bore to get from their pedestal at the corner of the lot to the wall I wanted them to come in. I've also seen horizontal boring used to lay new fiber along a highway right-of-way, because they wanted to switch back and forth from one side of the highway to the other. You've probably seen these machines before. [0] [0] https://www.ditchwitch.com/directional-drills https://www.ditchwitch.com/directional-drills

ggm 6y ago

Public utility functions are best run by regulated processes and it's just rubbish to say market forces help here. Prices for internet are now decoupled from true underlying cost in almost all markets. Fibre is a fifty year plus investment in the ground. Do it once.

vikramkr 6y ago

Who owns these poles? Are these municipalities or corporations? If the latter, who owns the land these poles are on?

johnklos 6y ago

Interesting, but it's painful to read. It's as if someone is paying Chris per apostrophe.

alex_young 6y ago

I spent the last 2 years living in the south of Switzerland. Wages are very high, costs of goods are high, but telecom services are inexpensive and very high quality. In Lugano, I was paying $40 / month for 10 GB symmetric fiber to the home, and another $40 / month for truly unlimited 4G cell service. They gave me a $10 discount for bundling. Fiber is universally wired to new buildings, and you have your choice of ISPs. There were cheaper options. Whatever the reason, the US has been unable to figure this out. It’s not the urban nature of Europe. Small villages have the same setup.

llsf 6y ago

Is a typical thing (i.e. infrastructure) that the government (federal, state and local combined) should pay and maintain ? Clearly letting private companies doing it is not working in US. Dig once, lay enough municipal fiber, and rent it to any ISP that want to reach houses/buildings. Use that opportunity to properly lay the phone, cable, and electricity, and rent them out as well to the local provider of voice, TV and electricity. And the nice bonus would be uncluttered street, no more poles and wires going from building to building. Yes, it is expensive to lay down fiber, phone, cable, electricity. But if we had done the investment 20 years ago, it would likely be ahead now, with lower cost for customers, and a thriving environment with more innovation...

product50 6y ago

I feel so lucky that I live in an area with fiber internet and 1000mbps speeds. I remember when we were house hunting, this was one of my criteria. While leads to my point - if enough people want fast internet speeds, they should/could plan their house buying/renting strategies accordingly. Nothing like incenting local municipalities to take action based on a community of people motivated by money.

r_singh 6y ago

I work for a company that provides BSS/OSS software to small ISPs in India. I'm so glad that the legal system in India is so weak that it is not possible for monopolies to enforce ownership of last mile infrastructure as smaller local players can just throw wires over buildings and give consumers the service at a low cost. Our software is as cheap as 0.1 USD per user per month and has a large list of features and we're provisioning over a million connections all over India from villages to large cities like Mumbai.

iptrans 6y ago
Email me (see profile) or posts a link to your BSS/OSS. Inquiring minds want to know if it is usable outside India.
- r_singh 6y ago
  Sure, just emailed you (from address in my profile) with a link to our BSS/OSS and login credentials for you. Would love to hear from you if you have any feedback or questions.

akg_67 6y ago

What is the point of having advanced technologies, products, and services that are largely inaccessible to large segment of the population? There is something inherently structurally broken how US operates. I pay about same amount for an unreliable 50Mbps cable internet connection at my home in US, and for 1Gbps Fibre internet connection at my home in Japan.

gregors 6y ago

Chattanooga's EPB - 300mbps up/down 57.99, 1Gps up/down 67.99 10Gps up/down 299.00 https://epb.com/home-store/internet https://epb.com/home-store/internet https://www.reddit.com/r/Chattanooga/comments/hfeu38/epb_representing_im_proud_to_call_chatt_my_home https://www.reddit.com/r/Chattanooga/comments/hfeu38/epb_rep...

RNCTX 6y ago
I was pleasantly surprised last time I stayed in Chattanooga ;). I was flying a private airplane (am a pilot) and the monthly GIS database updates and PNG map tiles required to fly with an app rather than paper maps go well into the tens of gigs, which is usually quite painful on hotel wifi. I set the update going on my iPad one night in the hotel before going to bed, took a shower, and was pleasantly surprised after coming out of the bathroom a few minutes later to see that it was done! Proof that private ownership of infrastructure is bullshit, and utilities (including internet lines) should not be owned by profit-seeking organizations.

qserasera 6y ago

I believe the strategy is to frustrate tax payers into footing the bill allowing telecoms access to the enormous teat of the American government and others. Rent seeking delenda est