5 ms·

What pisses me off: It takes something like Google to compete with the entrenched oligopoly. And "we" are left waiting on their interest... or lack thereof.

What pisses me off: It takes something like Google to compete with the entrenched oligopoly. And "we" are left waiting on their interest... or lack thereof. When people finally try to self-organize (e.g. municipal development projects), the oligopoly turns to lawsuits and lobbying to beat them down. The U.S. is such a hypocritical country. We laud competition, while in actuality we beat it down with ever fewer but larger and more deadly sticks.

javajosh 14y ago
>When people finally try to self-organize (e.g. municipal development projects), the oligopoly turns to lawsuits and lobbying to beat them down. Examples? EDIT: Okay. Wow. Had no idea. Has any municipality tried to create a wireless mesh network that connected through a few high-bandwidth connections?
- martythemaniak 14y ago
  How about the first result for "Municipal Fiber Lawsuit"? http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/09/telco-to-town-were-suing-you-because-we-care/ http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/09/telco-to-town-w... There are plenty of other cases, but the OP is right. The telco incumbents will use any means necessary - propaganda ("it's anti-capitalist!"), bribes (aka, lobbying) and lawsuits - to keep extracting as much profit as possible from people while delivering the barest minimum service possible.
- nathos 14y ago
  http://stopthecap.com/2010/05/04/north-carolina-action-alert-municipal-broadband-moratorium-bill-expected-to-be-introduced-wednesday/ http://stopthecap.com/2010/05/04/north-carolina-action-alert... http://www.wilsontimes.com/greenlight/Story/Settlement-Gets-Green-Light http://www.wilsontimes.com/greenlight/Story/Settlement-Gets-... http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2328116 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2328116
- EricBurnett 14y ago
  Here's two, from a quick search: Monticello, Minnesota (2008): http://www.ilsr.org/monticello-fiber-network-fighting-frivolous-lawsuit/ http://www.ilsr.org/monticello-fiber-network-fighting-frivol... Lafayette, Louisiana (2010): http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/05/lousiana-fiber-network-running-despite-cable-telco-lawsuits/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/05/lousiana-fiber-ne...
  - dusing 14y ago
    I have friends down the road in MN and the speeds are amazing! They covered a pretty good chunk of homes at launch too.
  - 31reasons 14y ago
    This is so absurd. So basically US is not a democracy. From networks to cabs, everywhere these companies need protection from disruption. But if Uber can do it in cab services, can't all Cities group together and fight ?
    - rayiner 14y ago
      Yes, the U.S. isn't a democracy because NYC gave cab companies a service monopoly in return for agreeing to serve poor people in the Bronx.
- jseliger 14y ago
  This isn't directly related to what you're asking, but "The Great Verizon FiOS Ripoff" addresses another aspect of the basic problems in the broadband market: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/the-great-verizon-fios-ripoff_b_1529287.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/the-great-veriz... .
rayiner 14y ago
Read "Master Switch" by Tim Wu to see how we got from point A to point B. There's no beef to your argument. The telco oligopolies are the result of two simple factors: 1) Telecom is a field with almost infinite economics of scale, which means that the natural tendency is towards consolidation until there is only one company left. It's the textbook case of natural monopoly. 2) Most of the existing telecoms arose through government-sanctioned monopolies. Those monopolies didn't arise because lobbyists padded the right pockets. Those monopolies arose because rural areas dominate U.S. politics (their votes count about 2x as much when election districts are accounted for). As a result, governments go to huge lengths to make sure that utility providers don't do the most economically sensible thing of concentrating infrastructure in densely-populated areas. One of the measures is giving utilities monopoly rights in return for their servicing rural areas. The fact that it takes something like Google to take on these interests is completely unsurprising. They are one of the few companies with the dollars to address (1). They are also targeting, so far, only Kansas City (not a megalopolis, but an urban area of 1.5 million people) and thereby dodging (2).
- joezydeco 14y ago
  Don't you think Kansas City had a municipal franchise agreement in place with telecom/cable providers before Google stepped in? Surely some modifications had to be made to allow a competing company to lay fiber. In fact, that probably explains the whole "Hey kids! Get your town to enter the Google Fiber Lucky City Sweepstakes!" that was used to roll Google Fiber out. The winning city bought into the fiber idea so hard that the next step of kicking out the franchise agreements would be a snap.
  - rayiner 14y ago
    Google signed one of their own and it looks like the got a pretty sweetheart deal on it: http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Google-Can-Ditch-Kansas-City-After-Two-Years-120807 http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Google-Can-Ditch-Kansas-C... Lamenting about how political telecom can get is somewhat naive. Of course it's political. It involves digging up public/private property under municipal permission. It invokes the same contentious debates that all infrastructure projects invoke: richer neighborhoods versus poor one, urban ones versus rural ones, "not in my backyard," etc. As long as telecom involves digging up public land or using public spectrum, it will be intensely political.
theorique 14y ago
Competition is great for startups and small organizations, but not for Google, Microsoft, or the government.
- jholman 14y ago
  Google, and other healthy thriving large companies, love competition. When you already know you're the best in the world, you view competition the way Usain Bolt looks at Tyson Gay. "Come on, bring the noise. All you'll do is help me to beat my own world record, and I like that. So do your worst!" Note I don't actually know that Usain Bolt feels that way, but many top athletes do (especially in "world record" type sports like racing). And of course this is my personal assessment of the situation, not the position of my employer, etc etc.
  - theorique 14y ago
    True, Google was not the best example since it is still young and entrepreneurial despite being large. I'm thinking of companies that are hampered by (e.g.) heavy regulation, internal politics and competition, in mature and/or commodity industries.

javajosh 14y ago

>When people finally try to self-organize (e.g. municipal development projects), the oligopoly turns to lawsuits and lobbying to beat them down. Examples? EDIT: Okay. Wow. Had no idea. Has any municipality tried to create a wireless mesh network that connected through a few high-bandwidth connections?

martythemaniak 14y ago
How about the first result for "Municipal Fiber Lawsuit"? http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/09/telco-to-town-were-suing-you-because-we-care/ http://arstechnica.com/uncategorized/2008/09/telco-to-town-w... There are plenty of other cases, but the OP is right. The telco incumbents will use any means necessary - propaganda ("it's anti-capitalist!"), bribes (aka, lobbying) and lawsuits - to keep extracting as much profit as possible from people while delivering the barest minimum service possible.
nathos 14y ago
http://stopthecap.com/2010/05/04/north-carolina-action-alert-municipal-broadband-moratorium-bill-expected-to-be-introduced-wednesday/ http://stopthecap.com/2010/05/04/north-carolina-action-alert... http://www.wilsontimes.com/greenlight/Story/Settlement-Gets-Green-Light http://www.wilsontimes.com/greenlight/Story/Settlement-Gets-... http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2328116 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2328116
EricBurnett 14y ago
Here's two, from a quick search: Monticello, Minnesota (2008): http://www.ilsr.org/monticello-fiber-network-fighting-frivolous-lawsuit/ http://www.ilsr.org/monticello-fiber-network-fighting-frivol... Lafayette, Louisiana (2010): http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/05/lousiana-fiber-network-running-despite-cable-telco-lawsuits/ http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2010/05/lousiana-fiber-ne...
- dusing 14y ago
  I have friends down the road in MN and the speeds are amazing! They covered a pretty good chunk of homes at launch too.
- 31reasons 14y ago
  This is so absurd. So basically US is not a democracy. From networks to cabs, everywhere these companies need protection from disruption. But if Uber can do it in cab services, can't all Cities group together and fight ?
  - rayiner 14y ago
    Yes, the U.S. isn't a democracy because NYC gave cab companies a service monopoly in return for agreeing to serve poor people in the Bronx.
jseliger 14y ago
This isn't directly related to what you're asking, but "The Great Verizon FiOS Ripoff" addresses another aspect of the basic problems in the broadband market: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/the-great-verizon-fios-ripoff_b_1529287.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/the-great-veriz... .

rayiner 14y ago

Read "Master Switch" by Tim Wu to see how we got from point A to point B. There's no beef to your argument. The telco oligopolies are the result of two simple factors: 1) Telecom is a field with almost infinite economics of scale, which means that the natural tendency is towards consolidation until there is only one company left. It's the textbook case of natural monopoly. 2) Most of the existing telecoms arose through government-sanctioned monopolies. Those monopolies didn't arise because lobbyists padded the right pockets. Those monopolies arose because rural areas dominate U.S. politics (their votes count about 2x as much when election districts are accounted for). As a result, governments go to huge lengths to make sure that utility providers don't do the most economically sensible thing of concentrating infrastructure in densely-populated areas. One of the measures is giving utilities monopoly rights in return for their servicing rural areas. The fact that it takes something like Google to take on these interests is completely unsurprising. They are one of the few companies with the dollars to address (1). They are also targeting, so far, only Kansas City (not a megalopolis, but an urban area of 1.5 million people) and thereby dodging (2).

joezydeco 14y ago
Don't you think Kansas City had a municipal franchise agreement in place with telecom/cable providers before Google stepped in? Surely some modifications had to be made to allow a competing company to lay fiber. In fact, that probably explains the whole "Hey kids! Get your town to enter the Google Fiber Lucky City Sweepstakes!" that was used to roll Google Fiber out. The winning city bought into the fiber idea so hard that the next step of kicking out the franchise agreements would be a snap.
- rayiner 14y ago
  Google signed one of their own and it looks like the got a pretty sweetheart deal on it: http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Google-Can-Ditch-Kansas-City-After-Two-Years-120807 http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Google-Can-Ditch-Kansas-C... Lamenting about how political telecom can get is somewhat naive. Of course it's political. It involves digging up public/private property under municipal permission. It invokes the same contentious debates that all infrastructure projects invoke: richer neighborhoods versus poor one, urban ones versus rural ones, "not in my backyard," etc. As long as telecom involves digging up public land or using public spectrum, it will be intensely political.

theorique 14y ago

Competition is great for startups and small organizations, but not for Google, Microsoft, or the government.

jholman 14y ago
Google, and other healthy thriving large companies, love competition. When you already know you're the best in the world, you view competition the way Usain Bolt looks at Tyson Gay. "Come on, bring the noise. All you'll do is help me to beat my own world record, and I like that. So do your worst!" Note I don't actually know that Usain Bolt feels that way, but many top athletes do (especially in "world record" type sports like racing). And of course this is my personal assessment of the situation, not the position of my employer, etc etc.
- theorique 14y ago
  True, Google was not the best example since it is still young and entrepreneurial despite being large. I'm thinking of companies that are hampered by (e.g.) heavy regulation, internal politics and competition, in mature and/or commodity industries.