5 ms·

Municipal governments are a big part of the problem. They make it nearly impossible for companies to build new ISPs. Municipal governments: the cause of, and

Municipal governments are a big part of the problem. They make it nearly impossible for companies to build new ISPs. Municipal governments: the cause of, and solution to, your ISP woes. It reminds me of housing. 1) Governments restrict new housing. 2) Housing becomes unaffordable. 3) Government builds public housing because "the free market has failed."

sp332 12y ago
Don't forget state laws. "Legislatures in 19 states have enacted laws restricting local governments from entering the broadband business". They can either get in the way of municipal deployments, or prevent municipal governments from interfering with public internet projects.
Torgo 12y ago
Ten years ago my hometown built a municipal ISP. It since then has done the bare minimum to keep the network going, and is total crap. There is one other cable ISP, but they effectively have to compete with the terrible speeds and service of the muni, which conspires to improve nothing. State laws preventing municipal ISPs should be gotten rid of, but some people seem to think that a municipal ISP will solve all their problems, and it won't.
- jrochkind1 12y ago
  > but they effectively have to compete with the terrible speeds and service of the muni, which conspires to improve nothing Wait, shouldn't that be easy for them to compete with, then? You say it like terrible speeds and service are somehow challenging competition for the cable company? Of course, they would prefer no competition at all, as all companies would.
  - Torgo 12y ago
    Muni had uptake mainly in the areas that commercial didn't service, and after that everything just kind of froze. They never, ever seem to try to compete on price, and I assume that upgrading equipment is expensive for either ISP. Wwhen it first started, it served unserved areas and was definitely better than commercial ISP by not being overutilized. Now that coverage is complete it just acts like there are two commercial ISPs. It seems like this a lot in the Midwestern rural areas, even with competition, they all settle into a low standard of service to avoid an arms race. My impression of what municipal Internet does, based on my experience, is they immediately implement state of the art, and then stagnate. By the way, our municipal ISP is opposed to net neutrality.
  - biot 12y ago
    > Wait, shouldn't that be easy for them to compete with, then? Oh, but it is. If the municipal service can only offer 1.5Mbps for $40/month, the private ISPs can offer 2.5Mbps for $70/month, 5Mbps for $125/month, 10Mbps for $199/month, or the ultimate in performance of 25Mbps for $350/month. They're effectively free to gouge people if the only alternative is the crappy, low-speed government service.
    - aphexairlines 12y ago
      Without the municipal service there, the alternative is no service at all.
    - jrochkind1 12y ago
      And if there is NO other alternative, what are they free to do? Many, many, locations have only one option for broadband service. Here in Baltimore, our only option is Comcast. (Verizon chose not to deploy FiOS in Baltimore, and won't sell you DSL anymore in Baltimore, although they have some legacy DSL customers). The suggestion that having competition which is 'crappy' somehow encourages worse service than having a monopoly with no competition at all, seems bizarre to me.
    - wnevets 12y ago
      why is an awful alterative worse than no alternative?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
Shivetya 12y ago
thank you. So many are quick to demonize the companies that spent their money to expand high speed internet do not realize just what you won't get with municipal anything. First is service, second is new technology, and third is support. They simply have to offer the baseline requirement and all responsibility after that is farmed off. Farmed off to companies which meet very politically correct setups. Want to see corruption hit an all new level, mandate this. It will turn into the same mess many city airports have become. Home of political friends and family. Serving the places THEY live, you might get some if your in the right zip code. This is the same national government which people blame for everything wrong but suddenly they think it will get this right?
- joblessjunkie 12y ago
  I get poor service, crummy old modems, and glacial support from my commercial internet provider. If those are your concerns for socialized broadband, then you should already be concerned. No one is mandating municipal ISPs. The claim is simply that there should be competition in markets, and in many cities (like mine) there is no competition by law. My city does a great job with providing me with cheap electricity, clean water, and emergency services. Just because a group of people work for local government rather than a giant corporation doesn't make them any more or less lazy or evil. Perhaps if my city starts investigating a municipal ISP, my one and only commercial broadband provider will finally get of their asses and upgrade my bandwidth, my uptime, and the terrible modem they made me pay for.
discardorama 12y ago
> Municipal governments are a big part of the problem. They make it nearly impossible for companies to build new ISPs. And whose fault is that? Yep, that's right, the ISPs. The ISPs love to play this game of "shut the door after I've gone through it". They get the municipal governments to sign exclusivity clauses and various other laws to keep competition out. I mean, think about it: nothing gets done in the government unless someone wants it and is willing to bribe the right people for it. Why the heck would the government go out of its way to set up roadblocks for ISPs if no one wanted it?
- nostromo 12y ago
  With such a dim view of local government, I'm confused as why you want them to run your internet.
  - discardorama 12y ago
    But we're OK with letting them run water and power and roads and hospitals and sewage and ... , right? Plus, they won't be "running" the Internet; they would be providing a link from point A (your domicile) to point B (the gateway or NAP).
    - oldmanjay 12y ago
      Not one of the municipalities I've called home in the last 40 years runs any of those things you've mentioned
      - discardorama 12y ago
        Surely water and roads, of all things listed, are managed by the municipality? Who maintains the local streets otherwise?
        lione 12y ago
        Yeah I don't know what that person is talking about. Those MUNICIPAL services are typically taken care of by.... The Municipality!

sp332 12y ago

Don't forget state laws. "Legislatures in 19 states have enacted laws restricting local governments from entering the broadband business". They can either get in the way of municipal deployments, or prevent municipal governments from interfering with public internet projects.

Torgo 12y ago

Ten years ago my hometown built a municipal ISP. It since then has done the bare minimum to keep the network going, and is total crap. There is one other cable ISP, but they effectively have to compete with the terrible speeds and service of the muni, which conspires to improve nothing. State laws preventing municipal ISPs should be gotten rid of, but some people seem to think that a municipal ISP will solve all their problems, and it won't.

jrochkind1 12y ago
> but they effectively have to compete with the terrible speeds and service of the muni, which conspires to improve nothing Wait, shouldn't that be easy for them to compete with, then? You say it like terrible speeds and service are somehow challenging competition for the cable company? Of course, they would prefer no competition at all, as all companies would.
- Torgo 12y ago
  Muni had uptake mainly in the areas that commercial didn't service, and after that everything just kind of froze. They never, ever seem to try to compete on price, and I assume that upgrading equipment is expensive for either ISP. Wwhen it first started, it served unserved areas and was definitely better than commercial ISP by not being overutilized. Now that coverage is complete it just acts like there are two commercial ISPs. It seems like this a lot in the Midwestern rural areas, even with competition, they all settle into a low standard of service to avoid an arms race. My impression of what municipal Internet does, based on my experience, is they immediately implement state of the art, and then stagnate. By the way, our municipal ISP is opposed to net neutrality.
- biot 12y ago
  > Wait, shouldn't that be easy for them to compete with, then? Oh, but it is. If the municipal service can only offer 1.5Mbps for $40/month, the private ISPs can offer 2.5Mbps for $70/month, 5Mbps for $125/month, 10Mbps for $199/month, or the ultimate in performance of 25Mbps for $350/month. They're effectively free to gouge people if the only alternative is the crappy, low-speed government service.
  - aphexairlines 12y ago
    Without the municipal service there, the alternative is no service at all.
  - jrochkind1 12y ago
    And if there is NO other alternative, what are they free to do? Many, many, locations have only one option for broadband service. Here in Baltimore, our only option is Comcast. (Verizon chose not to deploy FiOS in Baltimore, and won't sell you DSL anymore in Baltimore, although they have some legacy DSL customers). The suggestion that having competition which is 'crappy' somehow encourages worse service than having a monopoly with no competition at all, seems bizarre to me.
  - wnevets 12y ago
    why is an awful alterative worse than no alternative?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

Shivetya 12y ago

thank you. So many are quick to demonize the companies that spent their money to expand high speed internet do not realize just what you won't get with municipal anything. First is service, second is new technology, and third is support. They simply have to offer the baseline requirement and all responsibility after that is farmed off. Farmed off to companies which meet very politically correct setups. Want to see corruption hit an all new level, mandate this. It will turn into the same mess many city airports have become. Home of political friends and family. Serving the places THEY live, you might get some if your in the right zip code. This is the same national government which people blame for everything wrong but suddenly they think it will get this right?

joblessjunkie 12y ago
I get poor service, crummy old modems, and glacial support from my commercial internet provider. If those are your concerns for socialized broadband, then you should already be concerned. No one is mandating municipal ISPs. The claim is simply that there should be competition in markets, and in many cities (like mine) there is no competition by law. My city does a great job with providing me with cheap electricity, clean water, and emergency services. Just because a group of people work for local government rather than a giant corporation doesn't make them any more or less lazy or evil. Perhaps if my city starts investigating a municipal ISP, my one and only commercial broadband provider will finally get of their asses and upgrade my bandwidth, my uptime, and the terrible modem they made me pay for.

discardorama 12y ago

> Municipal governments are a big part of the problem. They make it nearly impossible for companies to build new ISPs. And whose fault is that? Yep, that's right, the ISPs. The ISPs love to play this game of "shut the door after I've gone through it". They get the municipal governments to sign exclusivity clauses and various other laws to keep competition out. I mean, think about it: nothing gets done in the government unless someone wants it and is willing to bribe the right people for it. Why the heck would the government go out of its way to set up roadblocks for ISPs if no one wanted it?

nostromo 12y ago
With such a dim view of local government, I'm confused as why you want them to run your internet.
- discardorama 12y ago
  But we're OK with letting them run water and power and roads and hospitals and sewage and ... , right? Plus, they won't be "running" the Internet; they would be providing a link from point A (your domicile) to point B (the gateway or NAP).
  - oldmanjay 12y ago
    Not one of the municipalities I've called home in the last 40 years runs any of those things you've mentioned
    - discardorama 12y ago
      Surely water and roads, of all things listed, are managed by the municipality? Who maintains the local streets otherwise?
      - lione 12y ago
        Yeah I don't know what that person is talking about. Those MUNICIPAL services are typically taken care of by.... The Municipality!