6 ms·

> This connection is a 100mbit consumer fiber connection with a static IP-adress. Yikes! And me here in Palo Alto, in the middle of the silicon Valley, cannot

> This connection is a 100mbit consumer fiber connection with a static IP-adress. Yikes! And me here in Palo Alto, in the middle of the silicon Valley, cannot get any fiber because of AT&T.

petters 5y ago
It's hard to get even 100Mbit in Paulo Alto? Must be hard for everyone working remotely these days....
- java-man 5y ago
  My AT&T DSL is blasting at 3 MBit/s down and 0.5 MBit/s up!
  - fer 5y ago
    And I was complaining about 15/1 from my DSL. Ironically I work for the company that won't lay fiber fast enough, yet asks me to work remotely.
  - throaway46546 5y ago
    F
driverdan 5y ago
It's not because of AT&T, it's because of government regulation.
- java-man 5y ago
  AT&T offers fiber on the other side of the road. How is this government regulation?
  - lucb1e 5y ago
    Just as a thought, that might be pretty cheap to have extended to your house. In Germany, Telekom (the formerly-government-owned provider and largest player afaik) offers to dig fiber for you for a "nice" price. But if it's literally about 5 meters it might actually be worth it.
  - driverdan 5y ago
    If CA laws weren't so restrictive there would be competition. Without competition there is nothing compelling AT&T to offer better service. The barrier to entry for ISPs is so high that it's essentially impossible in many areas.
- cure 5y ago
  Riiiiight. I'm sure it has nothing to do with a complete lack of competition (cf. how in communities where Google Fiber showed up, the incumbents were suddenly quite capable of getting gigabit fiber to households, and for a price that was competitive with Google Fiber, and a fraction of the price they were charging for inferior service before Google Fiber's arrival). I'm sure it also has nothing to do with the billions upon billions of subsidies AT&T and Verizon have received to build out broadband and make it available everywhere, which they pocketed and then didn't deliver on. Cf. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-book-of-broken-promis_b_5839394 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-book-of-broken-promis_b_5... If you really want to blame it on government, do it the right way: the government has not been keeping AT&T and the other giant telcos accountable for effectively stealing all those subsidies, and it has not enforced competition at the local level. Regulatory capture, and all that.
  - christophilus 5y ago
    Lack of competition is due to regulatory capture. Local governments often disallow competition in the ISP space.
    - adamcstephens 5y ago
      And the regulations are captured by the companies who much prefer no competition. So we’re screwed by BOTH the corporations and the government. We need new laws, and smaller companies.
      - driverdan 5y ago
        > We need new laws We need fewer laws.
        adamcstephens 5y ago
        We can have both new and fewer. The current laws allowing for massive consolidation and monopoly are strangling the competitive nature of capitalism, and destroying democracy.

> This connection is a 100mbit consumer fiber connection with a static IP-adress. Yikes! And me here in Palo Alto, in the middle of the silicon Valley, cannot get any fiber because of AT&T.

petters 5y ago

It's hard to get even 100Mbit in Paulo Alto? Must be hard for everyone working remotely these days....

java-man 5y ago
My AT&T DSL is blasting at 3 MBit/s down and 0.5 MBit/s up!
- fer 5y ago
  And I was complaining about 15/1 from my DSL. Ironically I work for the company that won't lay fiber fast enough, yet asks me to work remotely.
- throaway46546 5y ago
  F

driverdan 5y ago

It's not because of AT&T, it's because of government regulation.

java-man 5y ago
AT&T offers fiber on the other side of the road. How is this government regulation?
- lucb1e 5y ago
  Just as a thought, that might be pretty cheap to have extended to your house. In Germany, Telekom (the formerly-government-owned provider and largest player afaik) offers to dig fiber for you for a "nice" price. But if it's literally about 5 meters it might actually be worth it.
- driverdan 5y ago
  If CA laws weren't so restrictive there would be competition. Without competition there is nothing compelling AT&T to offer better service. The barrier to entry for ISPs is so high that it's essentially impossible in many areas.
cure 5y ago
Riiiiight. I'm sure it has nothing to do with a complete lack of competition (cf. how in communities where Google Fiber showed up, the incumbents were suddenly quite capable of getting gigabit fiber to households, and for a price that was competitive with Google Fiber, and a fraction of the price they were charging for inferior service before Google Fiber's arrival). I'm sure it also has nothing to do with the billions upon billions of subsidies AT&T and Verizon have received to build out broadband and make it available everywhere, which they pocketed and then didn't deliver on. Cf. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-book-of-broken-promis_b_5839394 https://www.huffpost.com/entry/the-book-of-broken-promis_b_5... If you really want to blame it on government, do it the right way: the government has not been keeping AT&T and the other giant telcos accountable for effectively stealing all those subsidies, and it has not enforced competition at the local level. Regulatory capture, and all that.
- christophilus 5y ago
  Lack of competition is due to regulatory capture. Local governments often disallow competition in the ISP space.
  - adamcstephens 5y ago
    And the regulations are captured by the companies who much prefer no competition. So we’re screwed by BOTH the corporations and the government. We need new laws, and smaller companies.
    - driverdan 5y ago
      > We need new laws We need fewer laws.
      - adamcstephens 5y ago
        We can have both new and fewer. The current laws allowing for massive consolidation and monopoly are strangling the competitive nature of capitalism, and destroying democracy.