5 ms·

The internet provider for my home is a true monopoly. I have no other choice. I can't click around in my browser, or futz with the cables in the walls and choos

The internet provider for my home is a true monopoly. I have no other choice. I can't click around in my browser, or futz with the cables in the walls and choose a competitive internet provider. I live in an area with moderate population density, so there could be more competition, but the local municipality negotiated exclusive rights for one provider. My provider knows it, they probably paid handsomely for the exclusive rights, and that's why they charge $95 a month for unreliable and slow service. When my uncle had a heart attack, he wasn't in a position to shop ambulances, emergency departments, surgeons, cardiologists or anesthesiologists. As with internet providers, emergency healthcare is not a competitive market, and that's reflected in extortionate pricing. It seems like reducing consumer harm should be the primary objective of regulators.

eropple 3y ago
> It seems like reducing consumer harm should be the primary objective of regulators. You're not wrong, but the definition of "consumer harm" used in practice hinges on short-termism and is price-centered right now. "This won't raise prices...for now, at least" is, by itself, an alarmingly strong argument in this arena, irrespective of market health or sustainability of competition. The Biden administration has made some steps to counter that, we'll see if it's really a thing.
- lazide 3y ago
  Personally I’d love it if companies like Comcast, AT&T, Wells Fargo, BofA, et. al would need to compete enough that they stop being extractive and manipulative assholes at a minimum. Or at least stop being periodic criminal enterprises. Perhaps even fair and honest market participants? I guess I need to cut back on the heroin.
sokoloff 3y ago
https://www.starlink.com/ https://www.starlink.com/ is not available where you are?
- azinman2 3y ago
  It’s unreliable with cloud coverage, adds latency, and may not match bandwidth with good offerings (for example my uncapped 1GBPS symmetric fiber for $60/mo thru Sonic). It also is run by Musk which can be a turnoff for many.
  - TehShrike 3y ago
    I'm using Starlink in Nebraska. It is reliable with cloud coverage. I have only lost connectivity for 5-10 minutes during the fiercest part of the worst thunderstorms.
- panarky 3y ago
  In my testing about four months ago, Starlink had between one and seven outages per day lasting more than 10 minutes each. It was not reliable, and it's even more costly than the local monopoly. My reply wasn't asking for help to find an internet service provider. There are actual monopolists extracting monopoly rents right this minute. They're causing genuine consumer harm right now, so stopping this harm should be the priority of regulators. Where there is no ability to access competitive offerings, these actual monopolists are a different league of economic pathology from markets where consumers can access competition by clicking around in their browsers.
  - BlueTemplar 3y ago
    Yes, Doctorow's article talks in the end about the exceptional nature of universal computing which means that competition is always an option. But yours isn't a hard case of monopoly either, the main thing preventing you from creating a competing ISP is your local laws, which are failing antitrust to the point one wonders how they ever came to be ?!? (We also shouldn't discount the importance of network effects.)
- giobox 3y ago
  Has anyone who ever suggests Starlink as the solution to any given fixed-line ISP problem ever actually used the service in a range of typical homes for a meaningful amount of time? I have the latest dish model, live on a one acre property with a relatively large clearing, and I still struggle with the extremely wide field of view of the clear sky (no trees, hills or other occluding items) which it needs - I simply can’t get 24hrs of uninterrupted service, and performance is extremely variable. This is even after mounting it some 25ft in the air to reduce occlusion issues as much as possible. Starlink needs an unobstructed view right down to surprisingly low on the horizon for 24 hours of solid service, which many, many homes simply won’t be able to provide. Starlink is incredible for what it is, but it’s not magic and becomes very hard to use reliably in urban areas at least with the current dishes and tech stack they are using. In many urban neighbourhoods it will be close to impossible to get a reliable 24 hrs of service unless you can knock down your neighbours homes and trees too. Starlink is best used in situations where there are almost no other options, or as a backup connection to another more reliable one, for most people. It is not a great replacement for almost any fixed line service, if you have that option. Perhaps this changes in future, but people should stop just suggesting starlink in its current form as the panacea to all ISP problems. Occlusion appears to be the single biggest enemy of starlink, and it’s super easily occluded - so much so, the app helps you measure/approximate the occlusion in your intended use space via your phones cameras before you buy.
paulddraper 3y ago
> I have no other choice There are approximately ~1 gazllion wireless internet providers where I live.
- eropple 3y ago
  1) Great! You don't live where the previous poster does, apparently. 2) For many people, wireless and wireline internet providers are not substitutable.
  - paulddraper 3y ago
    #2 what is it about those people that make it that way?
    - eropple 3y ago
      Latency. Bandwidth. The critical components of a network connection. You couldn’t get me to put up with 5G latencies because I play multiplayer video games and you couldn’t get me to put up with 5G bandwidth because I need to ship hundreds-of-gigabytes video files around and I’m not putting up with sub-gigabit upload speeds.
      - paulddraper 3y ago
        My goodness man :D Just be glad you weren't around 15 years ago
        eropple 3y ago
        I had symmetrical gigabit FiOS in 2010. (I still have it today.) Even if I didn't have symmetric gigabit, I also was working with 720p and 1080p video up until about 2013 and not 6K. Requirements shift over time.
moneywoes 3y ago
why doesn't your provider charge $200 a month then? any other examples of local monopolies
- katbyte 3y ago
  Because people would be unable to afford/pay it
BurningFrog 3y ago
The time to shop for emergency services is obviously before you need them. typically though some kind of insurance. Maybe that is not legally possible where you are, but there is nothing inherent about emergency services resulting in extortionate pricing.
- KerrAvon 3y ago
  Where in the world are you that you get to choose your emergency services provider? Certainly not the USA.
  - BlueTemplar 3y ago
    While discussion is specifically about the USA, it's worth noting that for each of these two problems, there exist plenty of places in the world that don't have one or even both of them.
  - BurningFrog 3y ago
    I'm talking about how societies can be organized, not claiming that US society in October 2023 is organized that way.

eropple 3y ago

> It seems like reducing consumer harm should be the primary objective of regulators. You're not wrong, but the definition of "consumer harm" used in practice hinges on short-termism and is price-centered right now. "This won't raise prices...for now, at least" is, by itself, an alarmingly strong argument in this arena, irrespective of market health or sustainability of competition. The Biden administration has made some steps to counter that, we'll see if it's really a thing.

lazide 3y ago
Personally I’d love it if companies like Comcast, AT&T, Wells Fargo, BofA, et. al would need to compete enough that they stop being extractive and manipulative assholes at a minimum. Or at least stop being periodic criminal enterprises. Perhaps even fair and honest market participants? I guess I need to cut back on the heroin.

sokoloff 3y ago

https://www.starlink.com/ https://www.starlink.com/ is not available where you are?

azinman2 3y ago
It’s unreliable with cloud coverage, adds latency, and may not match bandwidth with good offerings (for example my uncapped 1GBPS symmetric fiber for $60/mo thru Sonic). It also is run by Musk which can be a turnoff for many.
- TehShrike 3y ago
  I'm using Starlink in Nebraska. It is reliable with cloud coverage. I have only lost connectivity for 5-10 minutes during the fiercest part of the worst thunderstorms.
panarky 3y ago
In my testing about four months ago, Starlink had between one and seven outages per day lasting more than 10 minutes each. It was not reliable, and it's even more costly than the local monopoly. My reply wasn't asking for help to find an internet service provider. There are actual monopolists extracting monopoly rents right this minute. They're causing genuine consumer harm right now, so stopping this harm should be the priority of regulators. Where there is no ability to access competitive offerings, these actual monopolists are a different league of economic pathology from markets where consumers can access competition by clicking around in their browsers.
- BlueTemplar 3y ago
  Yes, Doctorow's article talks in the end about the exceptional nature of universal computing which means that competition is always an option. But yours isn't a hard case of monopoly either, the main thing preventing you from creating a competing ISP is your local laws, which are failing antitrust to the point one wonders how they ever came to be ?!? (We also shouldn't discount the importance of network effects.)
giobox 3y ago
Has anyone who ever suggests Starlink as the solution to any given fixed-line ISP problem ever actually used the service in a range of typical homes for a meaningful amount of time? I have the latest dish model, live on a one acre property with a relatively large clearing, and I still struggle with the extremely wide field of view of the clear sky (no trees, hills or other occluding items) which it needs - I simply can’t get 24hrs of uninterrupted service, and performance is extremely variable. This is even after mounting it some 25ft in the air to reduce occlusion issues as much as possible. Starlink needs an unobstructed view right down to surprisingly low on the horizon for 24 hours of solid service, which many, many homes simply won’t be able to provide. Starlink is incredible for what it is, but it’s not magic and becomes very hard to use reliably in urban areas at least with the current dishes and tech stack they are using. In many urban neighbourhoods it will be close to impossible to get a reliable 24 hrs of service unless you can knock down your neighbours homes and trees too. Starlink is best used in situations where there are almost no other options, or as a backup connection to another more reliable one, for most people. It is not a great replacement for almost any fixed line service, if you have that option. Perhaps this changes in future, but people should stop just suggesting starlink in its current form as the panacea to all ISP problems. Occlusion appears to be the single biggest enemy of starlink, and it’s super easily occluded - so much so, the app helps you measure/approximate the occlusion in your intended use space via your phones cameras before you buy.

paulddraper 3y ago

> I have no other choice There are approximately ~1 gazllion wireless internet providers where I live.

eropple 3y ago
1) Great! You don't live where the previous poster does, apparently. 2) For many people, wireless and wireline internet providers are not substitutable.
- paulddraper 3y ago
  #2 what is it about those people that make it that way?
  - eropple 3y ago
    Latency. Bandwidth. The critical components of a network connection. You couldn’t get me to put up with 5G latencies because I play multiplayer video games and you couldn’t get me to put up with 5G bandwidth because I need to ship hundreds-of-gigabytes video files around and I’m not putting up with sub-gigabit upload speeds.
    - paulddraper 3y ago
      My goodness man :D Just be glad you weren't around 15 years ago
      - eropple 3y ago
        I had symmetrical gigabit FiOS in 2010. (I still have it today.) Even if I didn't have symmetric gigabit, I also was working with 720p and 1080p video up until about 2013 and not 6K. Requirements shift over time.

moneywoes 3y ago

why doesn't your provider charge $200 a month then? any other examples of local monopolies

katbyte 3y ago
Because people would be unable to afford/pay it

BurningFrog 3y ago

The time to shop for emergency services is obviously before you need them. typically though some kind of insurance. Maybe that is not legally possible where you are, but there is nothing inherent about emergency services resulting in extortionate pricing.

KerrAvon 3y ago
Where in the world are you that you get to choose your emergency services provider? Certainly not the USA.
- BlueTemplar 3y ago
  While discussion is specifically about the USA, it's worth noting that for each of these two problems, there exist plenty of places in the world that don't have one or even both of them.
- BurningFrog 3y ago
  I'm talking about how societies can be organized, not claiming that US society in October 2023 is organized that way.