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."
On the one side is the innocent corporation which would never think to hold back service until the people are willing to pay through their teeth for it.
On the other side is the innocent government which would never think to render everyone's communications legally monitorable.
In the middle are all the people who don't know what the heck is going on but just want to amuse themselves on the network.
fast as fast can be. you'll never catch me.
Not that it's bad to bring broadband to poor areas, but I don't think it will do much good. These areas already have school. They may not be great schools, but if you're not taking advantage of them, that's your fault. The link exists between broadband and education/income, but education causes income which causes broadband, not the other way around. Correlation never implies causation.
The only thing that is unfair about this is how companies like BellSouth are allowed to actually slow down processes that are helping people just so they can try to get a piece of the pie. I am sick and tired of companies trying to put their own profits before the greater good of society.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
I'm not a vegan because I love animals, I'm a vegan because I hate plants!
It's proactive stuff like this from local government that is going to enable everyone to have high speed data/comms/AV content to their homes. Fuck the telco's.
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).
Since when do corporations have any say what a city can do with its land?
A telecommunications giant is fighting the city, because it is providing services. Well, that's what this is. A service, and it will benefit society. Besides, its not like Bellsouth doesn't have their own little little nest. From TFA:
BellSouth says it can't compete effectively with cities where taxpayers pay for laying down expensive fiber-optic networks. . . Perhaps, but Lafayette is building because BellSouth and the city's cable TV company aren't rushing to meet the city's needs.
There you go: evidence that capitalism isn't meeting the needs of people, and the state is stepping in. Adam Smith and economic libertarians would have those people simply sitting around, waiting for the invisible hand to bring them their broadband. Nope, the city is intervening, the corporation is retaliating.. and the city should win.
Of course, Bellsouth could probably just win everything by stepping into the area and providing service (probably with an initial loss, but they'd recoup their costs) - heck, get a juicy government subsidy and some nice photo-ops. I'm sure this USA Today article will turn some heads, especially if it gets reported in a more reputable newspaper.
"There's no success like failure, and failure's no success at all."
- Bob Dylan
I am TIRED of being behind Asian countries. Are we not *supposed* to be the most advanced country on earth. I don't think so. We are a rusty country, full of aging infrastructure, telecommunications monopolies (they are still monopolies even if it's not on paper), and a bureaucratic system that has been bought by Big Tele. We have lost our edge. The early American inventors are turning in their graves. We used to be the envy of earth with our mightly technology, now we are all but a joke to the Japanesse technocratic elite.
So the Telco wants to call in regulators to allow them to rollout their highspeed network, meanwhile Cox, an existing provider there, has raised the price for high-speed access 4 times already. They need regulations on the price, not the service providers.
And as for the comments on whether internet access will help the poor areas of America, in this case the University of Lousiana is in their backyard. So broadband access is a must if they hope to draw businesses that will do research associated with the University.
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.
> and are an important source of income for many
. ht ml
> millions of people
42 million people in the US own 401k plans:
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5168863
I'd guess that non-401K, like the TIAA-CREF related plans, are another 20 million or so. Even when you factor in that some of these are the lone breadwinner of an entire family, the fact that the US has 300 million people means that this doesn't represent the majority of Americans.
Only about half of Americans have any money, directly or indirectly, in the stock market. Many people's "retirement plan" is social security, their house if they have one, and their children if they have them.
It is these - the less fortunate half - that the city was trying to help.
We're practicing our labials.
Government intervention in capitalism should have one focus only: to address and correct 'Market Failure.'
This is obviously what's happening here; there's a market, it's not being serviced, and the City is stepping in.
For an incumbent telecoms monopoly who had no interest in servicing this area a priori (otherwise the City would not have had to DIY) to cry 'unfair competition' is idiotic. Since when has the Government had a natural advantage in the telecommunications space? It's hardly their core business.
From another standpoint, a Government performing a task is no different than the citizens who elected said government performing the same task themselves. The Government is merely acting on behalf of those who elected it.
The ILEC in question here should back the fuck off gracefully before something really horrible happens. Messing with Governments isn't smart, especially when said Governments are trying to score poltical points by doing this 'for the poor'.
You're doing it wrong.
Also, city water systems are unfair competition for bottled water companies!
How The Bells Stole America's Digital Future: Part I
And I'm just going to give a token mention to the miles and miles of unlit (dark) fiber lying around unused because it's "owned" by the phone company. And by owned I mean the state practically gave it to them through tax breaks.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
"...stating a link between broadband access and education and employment."
There may be a link; but once again, correlation != causation.
Some politician probably hatched the idea to give himself some kind of boost, whether power or money or whatever. It's one in a series of technological red herrings, back-room deals, and stupidities that politicians here have started. Don't believe me ?
Therefore, the profits of companies like BellSouth do directly and positively affect society, and are an important source of income for many millions of people.
God I am sick of this argument.
Just because a corporation has positive benefits to a small proportion of the public who are shareholders does not give them the right to trample everyone else.
Would you use your argument if a private hospital was suing the state for providing free health care for poor people?
My pics.
When I was at UL, the Lafayette Consolidated Government came and spoke to us a lot in my telecom classes... they want to use the fiber loop they have to provide data, voice, and video (i.e. cable)... but what they're gonna end up doing is running up the city's debt while a lot of the city already gets many or all three of those services from Cox cable without being locked into contracts. As their budget continues to increase it's looking like they'd have to provide the services at a loss to attract customers.
As a side note, what the city should do is spend some money on drainage, as we get a lot of rain, more than our flooded streets can handle in many areas.
--- If we knew half the things we shouldn't we'd stop wishing we knew it all
They've obviously never even been on Slashdot if they think broadband access is linked to education and employment.
*** Sigs are a stupid waste of bandwidth.
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
In 2003 the CEO of BellSouth made over $10 million in salary, bonuses, and stock. But, I'm sure he is only concerned with helping out those poor old people's retirement funds.
All the largest portions of stock are owned by company executives and wealthy investors. But, I'm sure the small time share-holders are a high priority.
In 2001 BellSouth executives released false information to artificially inflate the stock price and then cashed out before the stock plummeted. Surely that will help all those employees with 401(k) plans!
If you think corporate profits are boon to society I have some Enron stock to sell you.
Why can't the city just lay a dozen lines instead of one, and then auction off access to companies? Then the companies are free to market their service packages to the homeowners.
This gets around the bullshit of unfair competition and actually creates real competition.
Ensure each fiber line is capable of 100 mb or more up and down, build into the bidding process requirements of no blocked ports for internet service, no prohibitions on running servers, and businesses as well as individuals of all types are on equal footing as to access.
A dozen lines would cover the local telephone monopoly, the local cable monopoly, the local power company monopoly, the local water company monopoly, any other traditional (long distance/AT&T) monopoly, and will have lines left over for competitive bidding by independent internet service providers, the small guys.
The power company gets to read their meters remotely if lines are left over and cheap enough verses sending out a meter reader, the water company can bid for their own line for water meter reading or piggyback on the power company line, the cable company no longer has to maintain their own copper and can sell phone, video, and whatever else they want, the local phone company loses their monopoly and tax breaks on investment and all the other sweets they normally bribe legislators for, and either they compete, or they risk other areas looking at the city as a learning lesson and the idea spreads.
Laying a dozen lines of fiber is hardly more expensive than laying one line due to the majority of the cost being in the labor in digging up the ground or installing poles and all the related charges.
The city running their own fiber? My city can't even get water bills right, can't answer the phone, can't fix a manhole that makes noise for the last ten years, can't fix catch basins that overflow when it lightly rains for closer to 20 years, can't follow their own zoning laws (unless the builder bribes them and then everything is ok), can't plow snow on some streets a week after a snowfall, can't, can't, can't...
Am I really going to trust my city to not snoop on my internet and voip packets after I complain to the city or sue them in court?
Am I going to trust my city to not snoop on my internet and voip packets when my city is represented by about 90% of one party, and they call me up on election day to make sure I go vote for them? Am I going to trust them to not snoop on my internet and voip packets if I was registered in a different political party for the previous ten or twenty years prior to them installing voip?
Am I going to trust them to not snoop on my internet and voip packets when I call up to report a problem, and the phone rings twenty times and then I hear the phone receiver picked up, fumbled, then hung up again, to hear the line go dead? And when I call again, I hear the same thing, only laughter in the background as it is happening? And when I report what happened to a complaint line?
The city should lay the fiber lines, multiple lines, then auction access to them. Use the auction money to pay off the laying of the lines. And if that doesn't cover the total cost, consider it an investment in the future of the city, and an increase in the competitive attraction to businesses and individuals due to far superior internet access as compared to other cities, nearly every other city in the US.
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.
I don't have any problem with cities putting in a public network, if the voters think it makes sense. But do we need to break out the golden shovel here? The correlation between net access and income/education is there because people with higher incomes don't have to choose between new shoes for the kids and internet service. I'll bet you can also find a correlation between internet use and expensive cars, clothes, and Tivo. As many have pointed out on /. before, correlation != causation. Let's face it, the internet today is used mostly to stream porn.
In fact, the research suggests a pretty strong negative correlation between internet use in the schools and basic (reading, writing, and math) skills. Your kids are better off cracking a book and leaving the computer off until they need to write term papers. Cliff Stoll wrote a pretty good book on this subject.
But I guess you don't have to make logical arguments for anything as long as you add "think of the children" to your proposals.
I remember in Tacoma TCI / AT&T took out full page adverts in the newspaper and lots of airtime from a group that claimed to be "Citizens for Fair Cable". This was back 1997 or so. The CFFC claimed that a monopoly was good because if there was competition they would have to lower prices resulting in a negative impact on quality of service. Quality of service was piss poor anyway in the TCI territory due to their low grade cable and major leakage to the point that you could pirate the service somewhat with rabbit ears.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Who is more efficient at implementing and running a network? A telcom or the Layfayette Government?
The government isn't providing this service for free. Will it be fair to pay more, in a hidden way, for an inefficient service when the time comes? Fair because it comes from the benevolent government?
If this goes through, pay close attention to the books. $100 hammers aren't for the military only.
Broadband isn't going to break the cycle of poverty. Education is. Sounds like a waste of taxpayer money to me.