4 ms·

- Why does the water supplied to my home come in clear and polluted varieties? - Why does the electricity supplied to my office come in normal power and brown

- Why does the water supplied to my home come in clear and polluted varieties? - Why does the electricity supplied to my office come in normal power and brown power versions? Oh, wait.

rickyc091 12y ago
Why do business services always cost more! Cable Internet for Residential / Cable Internet for Business...
- masklinn 12y ago
  > Why do business services always cost more! Because SLA.
rayiner 12y ago
Those examples are funny, because, e.g. our water infrastructure is the subject of underinvestment to the tune of $55 billion a year: http://geospatial.blogs.com/geospatial/2011/12/asce-report-on-the-impact-of-under-investment-in-water-infrastructure-in-the-us-.html http://geospatial.blogs.com/geospatial/2011/12/asce-report-o... When you make an industry a public utility, and eliminate market-rate profit incentives, you get underinvestment, which is exactly what we see in water, power, etc: http://www.asce.org/failuretoact http://www.asce.org/failuretoact. You can talk all you want about making internet service into "dumb pipes" but you can't make investors and shareholders pour billions of dollars a year into the "dumb pipe" business. They'll just dump their regulated business lines and shift the money to something more profitable, like Goldman is encouraging Verizon to do: http://stopthecap.com/2012/01/09/wall-street-encourages-verizon-to-get-completely-out-of-landlinefios-business http://stopthecap.com/2012/01/09/wall-street-encourages-veri....
- politician 12y ago
  Investors and shareholders are not in favor of pouring billions of dollars a year into infrastructure either. That's why we're seeing this rent seeking behavior, and one reason why we have slower speeds than other modern nations. Yes, I am in favor of municipal fiber-to-the-home solutions paid for with public dollars given the critical importance of these "dumb pipes".
  - rayiner 12y ago
    > Investors and shareholders are not in favor of pouring billions of dollars a year into infrastructure either. Comcast spent $5.4 billion on capital expenditures in 2013: http://www.cmcsa.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=821438 http://www.cmcsa.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=821438. TWC spent $3.2 billion: http://ir.timewarnercable.com/investor-relations/investor-news/financial-release-details/2014/Time-Warner-Cable-Reports-2013-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-Results/default.aspx http://ir.timewarnercable.com/investor-relations/investor-ne.... Verizon and AT&T regularly top the list of companies with the highest U.S. capital expenditures, and Comcast and TWC are usually in the top 25: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-25-companies-investing-most-in-america-2012-7?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-25-companies-investing-mo.... > That's why we're seeing this rent seeking behavior, and one reason why we have slower speeds than other modern nations. Like? We compare quite favorably to countries like Canada and Australia, which have similar problems as we do with lack of density. According to Akamai's testing, we're in the top 10 worldwide for measured average connection speeds: http://www.akamai.com/dl/akamai/akamai-soti-q413.pdf?WT.mc_id=soti_Q413 http://www.akamai.com/dl/akamai/akamai-soti-q413.pdf?WT.mc_i... (page 19, Figure 20). Ookla's NetIndex puts us ahead of Canada and Australia, and only slightly behind the UK and Germany: http://www.netindex.com http://www.netindex.com. Our Northeastern states, like New Jersey and Pennsylvania, which have density comparable to continental Europe, have average connection speeds comparable to France, the EU standout. > Yes, I am in favor of municipal fiber-to-the-home solutions paid for with public dollars given the critical importance of these "dumb pipes". You don't, because when public dollars are involved, you get "lowest common denominator" levels of investment. Comcast's average user uses 2-5 GB/month. If telecom infrastructure was provisioned according to these people voting, do you think the resulting level of investment would be at a level that would make the folks on HN happy?
    - politician 12y ago
      > Comcast spent... Absolute dollars isn't as interesting as a trend. According to the National Cable Telecommunications Association, expenditure on broadband infrastructure has declined over the past 5 years. http://www.vox.com/2014/5/12/5711082/big-cable-says-broadband-investment-is-flourishing-but-their-own-data http://www.vox.com/2014/5/12/5711082/big-cable-says-broadban... > We compare quite favorably to countries like Canada and Australia. According to a 2013 report by Ookla, US ranks 31st in download speeds. http://venturebeat.com/2013/11/26/america-falls-a-dismal-31st-on-ranking-of-consumer-download-speeds-report/ http://venturebeat.com/2013/11/26/america-falls-a-dismal-31s... > You don't, because when public dollars are involved, you get "lowest common denominator" levels of investment. That must explain why Comcast and other monopoly providers fight municipalities tooth and nail against local broadband projects. I respect your opinion, but I disagree that communication infrastructure is not a public good.
grandalf 12y ago
Are you making the argument that the existing QoS for power and water are both optimal? If so, for whom are they optimal? Many people purchase bottled drinking water via delivery service b/c they deem the quality of tap water unacceptable for consumption. Many people invest in UPS units, backup generators, etc. b/c they deem the reliability of power from the grid unacceptable. Imagine if the power grid had an additional 9 of reliability -- it would save hospitals tens of millions of dollars on redundant power backup systems, significantly reducing the cost of healthcare. From this vantage-point, the poor quality of grid power is subsidized by those who need life support systems... this seems horribly unfair.
- politician 12y ago
  Many people purchase Google Fiber for 900Gb/s down b/c they deem the quality of Comcast's 25Gb/s down as unacceptable. Are you making the counter argument that 25Gb/s is optimal given the reality that we're living in a time where 900Gb/s down is attainable except for the lack of shareholder will preventing its deployment? I've built my own modems. I witnessed the stagnation around 2400 baud. I'm unimpressed by your suggestion that commercially-available bandwidth is at an "optimal" speed.
  - grandalf 12y ago
    I think you misunderstood my argument, b/c you are making the same one.

- Why does the water supplied to my home come in clear and polluted varieties? - Why does the electricity supplied to my office come in normal power and brown power versions? Oh, wait.

rickyc091 12y ago

Why do business services always cost more! Cable Internet for Residential / Cable Internet for Business...

masklinn 12y ago
> Why do business services always cost more! Because SLA.

rayiner 12y ago

Those examples are funny, because, e.g. our water infrastructure is the subject of underinvestment to the tune of $55 billion a year: http://geospatial.blogs.com/geospatial/2011/12/asce-report-on-the-impact-of-under-investment-in-water-infrastructure-in-the-us-.html http://geospatial.blogs.com/geospatial/2011/12/asce-report-o... When you make an industry a public utility, and eliminate market-rate profit incentives, you get underinvestment, which is exactly what we see in water, power, etc: http://www.asce.org/failuretoact http://www.asce.org/failuretoact. You can talk all you want about making internet service into "dumb pipes" but you can't make investors and shareholders pour billions of dollars a year into the "dumb pipe" business. They'll just dump their regulated business lines and shift the money to something more profitable, like Goldman is encouraging Verizon to do: http://stopthecap.com/2012/01/09/wall-street-encourages-verizon-to-get-completely-out-of-landlinefios-business http://stopthecap.com/2012/01/09/wall-street-encourages-veri....

politician 12y ago
Investors and shareholders are not in favor of pouring billions of dollars a year into infrastructure either. That's why we're seeing this rent seeking behavior, and one reason why we have slower speeds than other modern nations. Yes, I am in favor of municipal fiber-to-the-home solutions paid for with public dollars given the critical importance of these "dumb pipes".
- rayiner 12y ago
  > Investors and shareholders are not in favor of pouring billions of dollars a year into infrastructure either. Comcast spent $5.4 billion on capital expenditures in 2013: http://www.cmcsa.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=821438 http://www.cmcsa.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=821438. TWC spent $3.2 billion: http://ir.timewarnercable.com/investor-relations/investor-news/financial-release-details/2014/Time-Warner-Cable-Reports-2013-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-Results/default.aspx http://ir.timewarnercable.com/investor-relations/investor-ne.... Verizon and AT&T regularly top the list of companies with the highest U.S. capital expenditures, and Comcast and TWC are usually in the top 25: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-25-companies-investing-most-in-america-2012-7?op=1 http://www.businessinsider.com/the-25-companies-investing-mo.... > That's why we're seeing this rent seeking behavior, and one reason why we have slower speeds than other modern nations. Like? We compare quite favorably to countries like Canada and Australia, which have similar problems as we do with lack of density. According to Akamai's testing, we're in the top 10 worldwide for measured average connection speeds: http://www.akamai.com/dl/akamai/akamai-soti-q413.pdf?WT.mc_id=soti_Q413 http://www.akamai.com/dl/akamai/akamai-soti-q413.pdf?WT.mc_i... (page 19, Figure 20). Ookla's NetIndex puts us ahead of Canada and Australia, and only slightly behind the UK and Germany: http://www.netindex.com http://www.netindex.com. Our Northeastern states, like New Jersey and Pennsylvania, which have density comparable to continental Europe, have average connection speeds comparable to France, the EU standout. > Yes, I am in favor of municipal fiber-to-the-home solutions paid for with public dollars given the critical importance of these "dumb pipes". You don't, because when public dollars are involved, you get "lowest common denominator" levels of investment. Comcast's average user uses 2-5 GB/month. If telecom infrastructure was provisioned according to these people voting, do you think the resulting level of investment would be at a level that would make the folks on HN happy?
  - politician 12y ago
    > Comcast spent... Absolute dollars isn't as interesting as a trend. According to the National Cable Telecommunications Association, expenditure on broadband infrastructure has declined over the past 5 years. http://www.vox.com/2014/5/12/5711082/big-cable-says-broadband-investment-is-flourishing-but-their-own-data http://www.vox.com/2014/5/12/5711082/big-cable-says-broadban... > We compare quite favorably to countries like Canada and Australia. According to a 2013 report by Ookla, US ranks 31st in download speeds. http://venturebeat.com/2013/11/26/america-falls-a-dismal-31st-on-ranking-of-consumer-download-speeds-report/ http://venturebeat.com/2013/11/26/america-falls-a-dismal-31s... > You don't, because when public dollars are involved, you get "lowest common denominator" levels of investment. That must explain why Comcast and other monopoly providers fight municipalities tooth and nail against local broadband projects. I respect your opinion, but I disagree that communication infrastructure is not a public good.

grandalf 12y ago

Are you making the argument that the existing QoS for power and water are both optimal? If so, for whom are they optimal? Many people purchase bottled drinking water via delivery service b/c they deem the quality of tap water unacceptable for consumption. Many people invest in UPS units, backup generators, etc. b/c they deem the reliability of power from the grid unacceptable. Imagine if the power grid had an additional 9 of reliability -- it would save hospitals tens of millions of dollars on redundant power backup systems, significantly reducing the cost of healthcare. From this vantage-point, the poor quality of grid power is subsidized by those who need life support systems... this seems horribly unfair.

politician 12y ago
Many people purchase Google Fiber for 900Gb/s down b/c they deem the quality of Comcast's 25Gb/s down as unacceptable. Are you making the counter argument that 25Gb/s is optimal given the reality that we're living in a time where 900Gb/s down is attainable except for the lack of shareholder will preventing its deployment? I've built my own modems. I witnessed the stagnation around 2400 baud. I'm unimpressed by your suggestion that commercially-available bandwidth is at an "optimal" speed.
- grandalf 12y ago
  I think you misunderstood my argument, b/c you are making the same one.