4 ms·

> Huh, ISPs are far from a natural monopoly. Black is white. War is peace. Yeah, we know that. > What makes you think they are? Especially if you take mobile

> Huh, ISPs are far from a natural monopoly. Black is white. War is peace. Yeah, we know that. > What makes you think they are? Especially if you take mobile broadband, paid 'public' wifi and satellite internet into account. Neither mobile nor satellite (even Starlink) can compete for the main Internet connection for the majority of people. Around 50-70% of the US population has exactly ONE choice of a wired broadband ISP, and maaaaybe 2 if you count ADSL as broadband. Less than 10% of the population has access to 3 or more wired broadband ISPs.

eru 3y ago
Why do you restrict your comparison to wired connections only? No one cares how the internet comes into the house. Btw, you can also do ethernet-over-powerline for the last mile. And there's tv cables, and the plain-old-telephone wires already in the ground. If there's not enough competition, you should perhaps looks into regulation that's strangling that competition; instead of assuming blindly that more regulation is the answer to problems caused by too much regulation.
- cyberax 3y ago
  > Why do you restrict your comparison to wired connections only? Because wireless simply is not enough. There is a pretty fundamental limit to it, called the "sampling theorem". You simply don't have enough available bandwidth for the cell wireless to replace the wired connections, even in moderately dense environments. This is not a theory, btw. I had T-Mobile 5G "fixed wireless" connection and could immediately tell when major live games were on. It also became nearly useless during the Superbowl. And that's with T-Mobile limiting the number of subscribers (there's a waitlist for 5G home Internet in my area). > If there's not enough competition, you should perhaps looks into regulation that's strangling that competition; instead of assuming blindly that more regulation is the answer to problems caused by too much regulation. The main problem is morons who think that you can compete within the ISP market, and thus strangling regulations meant to improve it. After all, don't we all have 10 different tap water and sewage providers?
  - eru 3y ago
    > There is a pretty fundamental limit to it, called the "sampling theorem". You simply don't have enough available bandwidth for the cell wireless to replace the wired connections, even in moderately dense environments. I live in Singapore which is denser than basically any place in the US, and people are obsessed with their phones. Mobile bandwidth works just fine. I suspect your underwhelming 5G experience could be related with cells in your area being rather big, so they had many people in them? If you have a higher density of people, you need a higher density of cells. > After all, don't we all have 10 different tap water and sewage providers? Try starting up a new tap water or sewage provider. I don't think the government will let you. In any case, providing new 'last mile' connectivity whether with wires or with water pipes is hard to make work economically, if someone else is already there with an established service. (So in that sense I agree that last mile connectivity does have network effects. Though I wouldn't classify things binary into 'natural monopoly' or not; it's a spectrum.) In any case, that's why I was emphasising the different wires we already have (cable tv, plain old phone cables, power line, and in some places optical fibre, etc) and the wireless options (3G, 4G, 5G, wifi, satellite, and the more directed exotic microwave transmission, etc). I probably missed a few. If you can sort out the last mile, or you can piggy back on some already existing last mile, the tendency for what you call 'natural monopoly' drops a lot. If there's insufficient competition in the US, perhaps don't blame 'nature'.
    - cyberax 3y ago
      > I live in Singapore which is denser than basically any place in the US, and people are obsessed with their phones. Mobile bandwidth works just fine. For 4k video? No, it doesn't. Also, Singapore is probably spammed with microcells so your phone actually connects to a 5G cell that is only a bit more away than your WiFi router. I was in Singapore last week, and I'm writing this from China. And no, mobile Internet in both countries can't compete with wired broadband. > I suspect your underwhelming 5G experience could be related with cells in your area being rather big, so they had many people in them? If you have a higher density of people, you need a higher density of cells. It's both. The US favors low-density housing, as it's much more people-friendly than any other alternative. The other option is high-density Downtown hellscapes with scyscrapers. Both areas are not great for wireless. > In any case, that's why I was emphasising the different wires we already have (cable tv, plain old phone cables, power line, and in some places optical fibre, etc) and the wireless options (3G, 4G, 5G, wifi, satellite, and the more directed exotic microwave transmission, etc). I probably missed a few. Only cable is capable of 1G speeds. Phone wires realistically max out at ~30/10 Mbps up/down with VDSL. There is no Internet over powerlines in the US, and there'll never be because of RF leaks. So your realistic option is either the coaxial cable or newly laid fiber. And fiber is often owned by the same company that owns the cable. > Try starting up a new tap water or sewage provider. I don't think the government will let you. Nothing stops you. There are companies that provide alternative water service, they are often used to fill or drain swimming pools. It's just not economically feasible, unless there are special circumstances. > If there's insufficient competition in the US, perhaps don't blame 'nature'. There are no countries that are similar to the US that have competitive "last mile" Internet. None. All the more successful countries (e.g. Sweden) decouple the last mile, making it a state-owned (or a heavily regulated) utility. And then ISPs can just buy access to it and compete based on services/price.

eru 3y ago

Why do you restrict your comparison to wired connections only? No one cares how the internet comes into the house. Btw, you can also do ethernet-over-powerline for the last mile. And there's tv cables, and the plain-old-telephone wires already in the ground. If there's not enough competition, you should perhaps looks into regulation that's strangling that competition; instead of assuming blindly that more regulation is the answer to problems caused by too much regulation.

cyberax 3y ago
> Why do you restrict your comparison to wired connections only? Because wireless simply is not enough. There is a pretty fundamental limit to it, called the "sampling theorem". You simply don't have enough available bandwidth for the cell wireless to replace the wired connections, even in moderately dense environments. This is not a theory, btw. I had T-Mobile 5G "fixed wireless" connection and could immediately tell when major live games were on. It also became nearly useless during the Superbowl. And that's with T-Mobile limiting the number of subscribers (there's a waitlist for 5G home Internet in my area). > If there's not enough competition, you should perhaps looks into regulation that's strangling that competition; instead of assuming blindly that more regulation is the answer to problems caused by too much regulation. The main problem is morons who think that you can compete within the ISP market, and thus strangling regulations meant to improve it. After all, don't we all have 10 different tap water and sewage providers?
- eru 3y ago
  > There is a pretty fundamental limit to it, called the "sampling theorem". You simply don't have enough available bandwidth for the cell wireless to replace the wired connections, even in moderately dense environments. I live in Singapore which is denser than basically any place in the US, and people are obsessed with their phones. Mobile bandwidth works just fine. I suspect your underwhelming 5G experience could be related with cells in your area being rather big, so they had many people in them? If you have a higher density of people, you need a higher density of cells. > After all, don't we all have 10 different tap water and sewage providers? Try starting up a new tap water or sewage provider. I don't think the government will let you. In any case, providing new 'last mile' connectivity whether with wires or with water pipes is hard to make work economically, if someone else is already there with an established service. (So in that sense I agree that last mile connectivity does have network effects. Though I wouldn't classify things binary into 'natural monopoly' or not; it's a spectrum.) In any case, that's why I was emphasising the different wires we already have (cable tv, plain old phone cables, power line, and in some places optical fibre, etc) and the wireless options (3G, 4G, 5G, wifi, satellite, and the more directed exotic microwave transmission, etc). I probably missed a few. If you can sort out the last mile, or you can piggy back on some already existing last mile, the tendency for what you call 'natural monopoly' drops a lot. If there's insufficient competition in the US, perhaps don't blame 'nature'.
  - cyberax 3y ago
    > I live in Singapore which is denser than basically any place in the US, and people are obsessed with their phones. Mobile bandwidth works just fine. For 4k video? No, it doesn't. Also, Singapore is probably spammed with microcells so your phone actually connects to a 5G cell that is only a bit more away than your WiFi router. I was in Singapore last week, and I'm writing this from China. And no, mobile Internet in both countries can't compete with wired broadband. > I suspect your underwhelming 5G experience could be related with cells in your area being rather big, so they had many people in them? If you have a higher density of people, you need a higher density of cells. It's both. The US favors low-density housing, as it's much more people-friendly than any other alternative. The other option is high-density Downtown hellscapes with scyscrapers. Both areas are not great for wireless. > In any case, that's why I was emphasising the different wires we already have (cable tv, plain old phone cables, power line, and in some places optical fibre, etc) and the wireless options (3G, 4G, 5G, wifi, satellite, and the more directed exotic microwave transmission, etc). I probably missed a few. Only cable is capable of 1G speeds. Phone wires realistically max out at ~30/10 Mbps up/down with VDSL. There is no Internet over powerlines in the US, and there'll never be because of RF leaks. So your realistic option is either the coaxial cable or newly laid fiber. And fiber is often owned by the same company that owns the cable. > Try starting up a new tap water or sewage provider. I don't think the government will let you. Nothing stops you. There are companies that provide alternative water service, they are often used to fill or drain swimming pools. It's just not economically feasible, unless there are special circumstances. > If there's insufficient competition in the US, perhaps don't blame 'nature'. There are no countries that are similar to the US that have competitive "last mile" Internet. None. All the more successful countries (e.g. Sweden) decouple the last mile, making it a state-owned (or a heavily regulated) utility. And then ISPs can just buy access to it and compete based on services/price.