Re:Broadband Monopolies Push Bill That Would Crush Your Abil...
by mindslight on Sunday August 20, 2023 @10:56AM
(#37199761)
This doesn't follow. Internet access is already mostly commoditized. Pushing Google's complements to be even better commodities are things like DoH, Net Neutrality, and free-as-in-beer Android. Taking on the business of running an ISP doesn't make Internet access more of a commodity. And the adage is "commoditize your complement", not "enter the business that is your complement" - the point is to squeeze their margins while growing yours.
> What do these dense urban areas have in common
Higher population density such that any activity in the public right of ways affects proportionally more people and thus receives more scrutiny and review?
I honestly don't have any easy prescriptions for facilitating new Internet buildout in dense areas. I do agree that zoning and permits have gotten us to a condition where it would be effectively impossible to rebuild what has already been built (eg the common example of most walkable duplex/triple deckers not conforming to the lots they currently sit on). FWIW this would imply that the incumbent communications companies should continue to be highly regulated due to new entrants being unable to duplicate their existing buildout.
My comments are focused on the not-dense areas where laying/stringing new lines is perfectly straightforward, but there are no incentives for Ma Bell or Ma Coax to lay new infrastructure (aka FTTH) as they're already milking a captive market. There are multiple comments in this thread of people suffering Ma Coax with some ridiculous bills, fiber being promised but not available, etc. Then a newcomer enters the market, whether municipal or private, and then all of sudden Ma Coax snaps to attention and starts competing. As I said, in places that new privately-funded competition actually does enter we should celebrate. But that shouldn't involve municipalities abdicating their own interests (eg mandates to build out the whole city/town) in the hope that it might make competition magically appear, since that's a race to the bottom - especially if we're talking about relaxing requirements for the incumbents, meaning competition still hasn't arrived.
Furthermore for many places (my own included), the needle was only ever going to be moved by the municipality getting involved. Internet access is basically a solved problem for me now, so much so that I have to wonder why I even started commenting in this thread, apart from saying to people who are wondering if pushing for municipal fiber is worthwhile - yes, it really is.
(And as far as electrical lines and infrastructure in general, I certainly have my complaints but overall I feel it's being decently maintained in my area. I often do see lineworkers replacing poles and upgrading lines. And electricity distribution certainly has advanced in 100 years Looking at the overall national statistics, sure I get the trends behind the narrative. But I'm also not going to let those general narratives destroy my faith in my local institutions, because that too is a cause of the problem)
> What do these dense urban areas have in common
Higher population density such that any activity in the public right of ways affects proportionally more people and thus receives more scrutiny and review?
I honestly don't have any easy prescriptions for facilitating new Internet buildout in dense areas. I do agree that zoning and permits have gotten us to a condition where it would be effectively impossible to rebuild what has already been built (eg the common example of most walkable duplex/triple deckers not conforming to the lots they currently sit on). FWIW this would imply that the incumbent communications companies should continue to be highly regulated due to new entrants being unable to duplicate their existing buildout.
My comments are focused on the not-dense areas where laying/stringing new lines is perfectly straightforward, but there are no incentives for Ma Bell or Ma Coax to lay new infrastructure (aka FTTH) as they're already milking a captive market. There are multiple comments in this thread of people suffering Ma Coax with some ridiculous bills, fiber being promised but not available, etc. Then a newcomer enters the market, whether municipal or private, and then all of sudden Ma Coax snaps to attention and starts competing. As I said, in places that new privately-funded competition actually does enter we should celebrate. But that shouldn't involve municipalities abdicating their own interests (eg mandates to build out the whole city/town) in the hope that it might make competition magically appear, since that's a race to the bottom - especially if we're talking about relaxing requirements for the incumbents, meaning competition still hasn't arrived.
Furthermore for many places (my own included), the needle was only ever going to be moved by the municipality getting involved. Internet access is basically a solved problem for me now, so much so that I have to wonder why I even started commenting in this thread, apart from saying to people who are wondering if pushing for municipal fiber is worthwhile - yes, it really is.
(And as far as electrical lines and infrastructure in general, I certainly have my complaints but overall I feel it's being decently maintained in my area. I often do see lineworkers replacing poles and upgrading lines. And electricity distribution certainly has advanced in 100 years Looking at the overall national statistics, sure I get the trends behind the narrative. But I'm also not going to let those general narratives destroy my faith in my local institutions, because that too is a cause of the problem)