6 ms·

"But they built the last mile so they should be able to do whatever they want with it..." /sarcasm You know that comment is coming to this discussion at some p

"But they built the last mile so they should be able to do whatever they want with it..." /sarcasm You know that comment is coming to this discussion at some point. Wish there was a good answer to this. Making internet connectivity a 'utility' has its downsides and upsides. It really is becoming a pressing issue though (and not just because of netflix being slowed).

ddorian43 13y ago
weren't they payed with tax money to build the infrastructure?
- talmand 13y ago
  Sort of, my understanding is that they mostly received tax breaks with possibly some subsidies. Either way, they received an incentive to do so.
  - aroch 13y ago
    Verizon got something like $10billion in cash to build FiOS out in New York...and never did
    - JTon 13y ago
      I've heard this before. How can they "get away" not building it, legally speaking? Makes no sense to me in this context
      - aroch 13y ago
        Because of how the contract was worded, they didn't have to actually provide the service just "attempt" to or something like that
      - kdragon 13y ago
        Because the bill that awarded them the funding was written in a way where there were no repercussions for not doing so.
- skywhopper 13y ago
  Varies by municipality, but pretty much everywhere the "last mile" is a local monopoly, granted by the town, county, or city with the rights to do so. And so long as that's the case there's no real competition and thus no way for Internet users to route around these abusive practices of their ISPs.
  - klipt 13y ago
    What's funny is that now the incumbents have the monopoly (paid for using taxpayer money) they're pushing to prevent new competitors like Google fiber from working with the municipalities at all: http://consumerist.com/2014/01/30/kansas-legislature-wants-to-stop-any-other-kansas-cities-from-getting-google-fiber/ http://consumerist.com/2014/01/30/kansas-legislature-wants-t...

ddorian43 13y ago

weren't they payed with tax money to build the infrastructure?

talmand 13y ago
Sort of, my understanding is that they mostly received tax breaks with possibly some subsidies. Either way, they received an incentive to do so.
- aroch 13y ago
  Verizon got something like $10billion in cash to build FiOS out in New York...and never did
  - JTon 13y ago
    I've heard this before. How can they "get away" not building it, legally speaking? Makes no sense to me in this context
    - aroch 13y ago
      Because of how the contract was worded, they didn't have to actually provide the service just "attempt" to or something like that
    - kdragon 13y ago
      Because the bill that awarded them the funding was written in a way where there were no repercussions for not doing so.
skywhopper 13y ago
Varies by municipality, but pretty much everywhere the "last mile" is a local monopoly, granted by the town, county, or city with the rights to do so. And so long as that's the case there's no real competition and thus no way for Internet users to route around these abusive practices of their ISPs.
- klipt 13y ago
  What's funny is that now the incumbents have the monopoly (paid for using taxpayer money) they're pushing to prevent new competitors like Google fiber from working with the municipalities at all: http://consumerist.com/2014/01/30/kansas-legislature-wants-to-stop-any-other-kansas-cities-from-getting-google-fiber/ http://consumerist.com/2014/01/30/kansas-legislature-wants-t...