Slashdot Mirror
Getting Broadband To The Bayou
Caseylite points out an article in USA Today "about the struggle between the city of Lafayette, Louisiana and BellSouth. The big telecom objects to the city installing its own fiber-optic network, claiming unfair competition. The city says its goal is bringing high-speed data access to low income areas to break the poverty cycle, stating a link between broadband access and education and employment."
Unfair competition they say? Yeah, how about their continual attempts throughout history to insure a monopoly position on what communications get to our homes. Fiber optics laid by cities looks like the solution to these problems. Oregon lead the way. It is time we all petition our local governments so we can have cable/internet/phone/utility monitors/etc to our homes for less than $50 month (all together).
How may I help you today?
Our city installed it's own fiber network... guess who our local teloc is? BellSouth.
We now have nice, cheap, cable modem (and TV)service ($35/mo = 512k/1.5M); and ip phone service is coming soon.
© 2004 The SCO Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
People act suprised. Monopoly corporation fires lawsuits to stop competition (aka attempts to protect it's income stream). People again act suprised. Why? The only legal reason that corporations exist is to make as much money as possible. Since they forgot to append "within moral reason" to that, you end up with entities that meet the definition of a psychopath.
Add to that the fact that the fact that we give them the standing of a person in the eyes of the law (ie the right to sue) and the fact that Congress has no term limits (ie let's game the system), and you'll get an idea what's wrong.
If you want a bitingly cynical look at the problems America is currently facing, go buy "America, the book" by Jon Stewart. Believe me, it is SO worth $20 for the hardback version.
Well, off to watch Battlestar Galactica...
The fiber loop is _already_ a debt, and a long standing one. It was initially laid over 5 year ago, and has sat unlit since then because the city has been patiently waiting for BellSouth, Cox, or anyone else for that matter to step up and utilize it.
LUS never intended to actually run the thing themselves, the plan was always to have the telcos lease bandwidth from the city. That would still be the plan except the telcos decided that it was more cost effective for them to simply keep using their existing ancient infrastructure and give the city the proverbial finger.
Maybe it isnt optimal for the city to operate as a telco, but it is better than letting the whole thing just sit there and rot and that is pretty much the only alternative now.
- sigs are stupid
I currently live in Lafayette and it's a great town and the poverty is not nearly what SEEMS to be implied here. /128k down internet connections. :) :P
The local Library has plenty of computers available to anyone who wants free internet access rendering the argument above null. The people the article and the city talks about would be better served using the Library's facilities to find a job first, then purchasing a PC followed by Cox or Bellsouth's 128k up
What the article misses completely is the fact that Cox is by far and away the 1 ton gorilla here.
Before the city's proposal I'd rarely see Cox advertising on Cable television, but now our market is bombarded daily with adverts telling us how Cox IS our neighbors, friends, and family. They are trying desperately to give us that oooey gooey feeling towards them.
Also since the proposal broadband upload and download speeds for their 50 dollar a month service has doubled! The irony is they made their own case against themselves.
I don't agree with the article and I'm still not entirely sure I support the city's decision, but ultimately it competition is a good thing for consumers.
As long as Lafayette's fiber venture doesn't start loosing OUR money and is self sustaining I'll back it for years to come.
Oh and last but not least, there isn't even a bayou in Lafayette.
this is a city utility service, it's funded through use, nobody is forcing anyone to subscribe to broadband. the utility will be funded through access fees.
other city networks operate exactly this way -- funded through access fees, not public taxation.
Seeing as how so many big business supporters argue that government can't do things like this profitably, shouldn't the big business here be smiling, confident that they'll be able to make a profit because the government's pipeline will be too expensive?
Doesn't work that way. The government doesn't have to be efficient, because it can always vote itself more of your money rather than directly making the recipients of the service pay for its inefficiency. (Not that I have a whole lot of sympathy for companies like RBOCs and cable TV providers, who have government-granted monopolies.)
Capitalists don't love monopolies. Monopolists love monopolies. The two aren't even close to being one and the same.
Max
My god carries a hammer. Your god died nailed to a tree. Any questions?