4 ms·

If you want competition, stop letting local governments make "deals" with the ISP's to bring such and such Internet or service to that area. Almost always that

by salient 13y ago

If you want competition, stop letting local governments make "deals" with the ISP's to bring such and such Internet or service to that area. Almost always that ensures the company will get a monopoly in that area. It's precisely for this reason why I'm against states making deals with ISP's even if it means bringing gigabit fiber to their areas. Will it still be fast enough 10-15 years later? Because you can bet they aren't going to upgrade it anymore after they get their local monopoly. I'm sure 1-10 Mbps seemed super-fast 10 years ago, too, when they made the first deals from which they got their current monopolies.

jessaustin 13y ago
In addition to the predictable obsolescence you cite, a problem with making deals with USA telcos is that they seldom stick to the terms of those deals. Even if some stick-in-the-mud with an excess of conscience won't play ball at the local or state level, they can always overrule that with the commissioners they've bought at the next higher level. http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070810_002683.html http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070810_0026... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/billions-in-customer-overcharging_b_1958875.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/billions-in-cus...
mindslight 13y ago
> I'm sure 1-10 Mbps seemed super-fast 10 years ago It's plenty fast now, too. Good-quality 1080p H.264 video is 3Mbps. 6Mbps is 50GB/day. If this is not enough, you most likely have a software problem. Not that we shouldn't strive for progress, but most of the complains in these comments are completely different from the rural horror stories of the article - they're taking for granted development that isn't actually there. Signing up for the cable company because it has the highest advertised speeds and then complaining about the implications of a shared medium provided by an unregulated monopoly is myopic entitled whining. Look into competing DSL options, really. Your new provider may even have warm-blooded people answering the phone.
- Jtsummers 13y ago
  So we can saturate our internet connections with one video stream. That means it's not fast enough. Presently living alone so this is mostly a nonissue for me, but what about people with 2+ users at home? One wants to watch the latest Doctor Who, the other wants to check their email and browse the web, someone is losing out.
  - mindslight 13y ago
    This is exactly the kind of knee-jerk entitlement I'm talking about. I'm guessing if connection speeds were 10x higher, you'd still be making similar arguments for why the slower one was also completely unacceptable. I'd love a 100mbit home connection as well, but we don't have those and signing up for cable is a very stressful way to pretend. As for the current practicalities - first, two of these streams would fit in 6Mbps. Second, streaming is unnecessary for tv/movies, and I'm guessing you don't watch 24 hours of a day - upgrade to a non-streaming setup.
    - Jtsummers 13y ago
      I probably wouldn't, my service is around 12Mbit, it is fast enough for me and I've rarely saturated it. I fully understand that (like CPUs and memory) the tech will grow to fill the space provided. You claimed a 1-10Mbit/second data connection was fast enough but essentially made the argument from the standpoint of a single user of that connection. Home connections are often multi-user so by your calculations they are not fast enough for most users. Second: "upgrade to a non-streaming setup" What services are comparable to Hulu/Netflix in terms of variety of content (though Netflix streaming seems to have poorer coverage these days, lost some contracts?) that is not a streaming service?
      - mindslight 13y ago
        I saturate my 10/1Mbit all the time. I've had a 16GB disk image uploading for the past few days, and it will be going for a few more. It would be great if it was done in a few hours, but current consumer connections simply won't do that. If I had cable, I'm sure Time Warner would have throttled the transfer right down and it would have taken a similarly-stymieing amount of time. Either way I have to wait, but this way I'm not also tearing my hair out hating my ISP and wondering when they're going to jack my price or send me a nastygram. As for entertainment, torrents seem to work for me. If you're looking for a branded service to contribute money to the destruction of the Internet, then I've got to wonder why you'd have any issue with the cable companies besides price.

by salient 13y ago

jessaustin 13y ago

In addition to the predictable obsolescence you cite, a problem with making deals with USA telcos is that they seldom stick to the terms of those deals. Even if some stick-in-the-mud with an excess of conscience won't play ball at the local or state level, they can always overrule that with the commissioners they've bought at the next higher level. http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070810_002683.html http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_20070810_0026... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/billions-in-customer-overcharging_b_1958875.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/billions-in-cus...

mindslight 13y ago

> I'm sure 1-10 Mbps seemed super-fast 10 years ago It's plenty fast now, too. Good-quality 1080p H.264 video is 3Mbps. 6Mbps is 50GB/day. If this is not enough, you most likely have a software problem. Not that we shouldn't strive for progress, but most of the complains in these comments are completely different from the rural horror stories of the article - they're taking for granted development that isn't actually there. Signing up for the cable company because it has the highest advertised speeds and then complaining about the implications of a shared medium provided by an unregulated monopoly is myopic entitled whining. Look into competing DSL options, really. Your new provider may even have warm-blooded people answering the phone.

Jtsummers 13y ago
So we can saturate our internet connections with one video stream. That means it's not fast enough. Presently living alone so this is mostly a nonissue for me, but what about people with 2+ users at home? One wants to watch the latest Doctor Who, the other wants to check their email and browse the web, someone is losing out.
- mindslight 13y ago
  This is exactly the kind of knee-jerk entitlement I'm talking about. I'm guessing if connection speeds were 10x higher, you'd still be making similar arguments for why the slower one was also completely unacceptable. I'd love a 100mbit home connection as well, but we don't have those and signing up for cable is a very stressful way to pretend. As for the current practicalities - first, two of these streams would fit in 6Mbps. Second, streaming is unnecessary for tv/movies, and I'm guessing you don't watch 24 hours of a day - upgrade to a non-streaming setup.
  - Jtsummers 13y ago
    I probably wouldn't, my service is around 12Mbit, it is fast enough for me and I've rarely saturated it. I fully understand that (like CPUs and memory) the tech will grow to fill the space provided. You claimed a 1-10Mbit/second data connection was fast enough but essentially made the argument from the standpoint of a single user of that connection. Home connections are often multi-user so by your calculations they are not fast enough for most users. Second: "upgrade to a non-streaming setup" What services are comparable to Hulu/Netflix in terms of variety of content (though Netflix streaming seems to have poorer coverage these days, lost some contracts?) that is not a streaming service?
    - mindslight 13y ago
      I saturate my 10/1Mbit all the time. I've had a 16GB disk image uploading for the past few days, and it will be going for a few more. It would be great if it was done in a few hours, but current consumer connections simply won't do that. If I had cable, I'm sure Time Warner would have throttled the transfer right down and it would have taken a similarly-stymieing amount of time. Either way I have to wait, but this way I'm not also tearing my hair out hating my ISP and wondering when they're going to jack my price or send me a nastygram. As for entertainment, torrents seem to work for me. If you're looking for a branded service to contribute money to the destruction of the Internet, then I've got to wonder why you'd have any issue with the cable companies besides price.