3 ms·
Regulating delivery telecom as an open utility doesn't necessarily mean it is operated by the government. If you want another big-city infrastructure example f
by sethhochberg 6y ago
Regulating delivery telecom as an open utility doesn't necessarily mean it is operated by the government.
If you want another big-city infrastructure example from the US, look at Empire City Subway. This is a company which has exclusive franchise from NYC to maintain a network of underground conduit in Manhattan, which they can use for their parent company (Verizon) but must also sell access to any other carrier who needs it.
I could imagine a similar approach that actually extends to the residential consumer. I live in a building which has FiOS in the street, but the landlord doesn't care to provide access to Verizon to wire the building, so I'm stuck with the legacy cable provider (which is far worse). If by law all buildings connected to a common utility-scale fiber network and I was simply buying transit from my ISP, I'd be much happier.
- SaltyBackendGuy 6y ago> but the landlord doesn't care to provide access to Verizon Very generous words. I lived in a building once where the landlord flat out told me that we can only have Comcast because they paid him. Obviously, YMMV. In my experience it was more malicious than simply not caring.