Slashdot Mirror
Google Fiber Adds 14th City: Lee's Summit
symbolset writes "On Thursday night the Lee's Summit city council passed three resolutions to welcome Google Fiber to their community. This is the 12th community in the Kansas City Metro Area to welcome Google Fiber and the 14th city overall. The KC map now covers almost all of the KC metro area with parts in both Kansas and Missouri. 8 months into the rollout two fiberhoods have been completed, 30 more are underway and 50 more are to start by the end of summer. This covers most of the territory of both Kansas Citys ahead of schedule and completes before the end of winter so the timeline has been accelerated. As Google runs their fiber across town it appears they're putting backbones down the major thoroughfares to be trunks out to the wider communities. With Provo wired with fiber already, Austin to start next, it looks like Google Fiber's ambitions are not to deliver their symmetric gigabit uncapped, unfiltered, inexpensive fiber Internet to just a few privileged enclaves. They still have over 1,000 cities left to go who have already petitioned to be Google Fiber cities, so it's not like they're going to run out of work."
Move across town. Problem solved.
Its very possible the broadband itself is still profitable even if you have to string up all the lines yourself. I had absolutely 0 hassle negotiating my (not Google) 30/5 connection down to $35 a month. It made me wonder how much their costs really are if they don't bat an eye at cutting the price by 25%. Google's gigabit line (without TV) is ~$70 a month (construction fee waived). I find it completely reasonable that this is profitable- the bulk of costs are in the physical distribution infrastructure. It may even be wildly profitable. Google doesn't pay others for bandwidth. Google doesn't have national advertising campaigns with TV commercials and massive paper advertising*, which makes up a huge cost for Verizon, ATT, etc. Being an ISP will probably even help to balance their peering agreements a bit.
As for their free plans, if you are running fiber to a paying customer, running fiber to the non-paying customer 50 feet away isn't really adding that much cost over the long term- especially if you make them pay a $300 construction fee. Maybe that person decides the free plan isn't enough speed and becomes a paying customer. You can't look at internet advertising (Google's main business) if you don't have internet. It is like letting a car dealership test drive a car- obviously there are costs involved which you may not recoup, but overall it is something that helps your business more than it hurts. They could ratchet up the spying and data mining to ridiculous levels, any maybe they will, but I don't think they necessarily need to in order to make a decent profit.
When you ask "What's in it for them"?, the answer might just be "Being an ISP is profitable".
*Google might be spending a lot on advertising, but I haven't seen anything. If they have 1000 cities begging for them to come and compete, they probably don't need to advertise.
Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
Exactly. Google seems to have come to the conclusion that since everything on the internet makes them money somehow (Ads), a way to increase profit is to get people to load up the web faster. You connect to the web faster, you're more likely to click an ad faster. Or just buy from Google Shopping direct. I've seen some stuff on there that beats Amazon's deals. And don't get me wrong, probably some goodness of their heart too.
No, fiber uses light so they can SEE you!
deliver their symmetric gigabit uncapped, unfiltered
Please reconcile that deception with these terms of service:
(Note, after 9 months of being lied to and ignored by the FCC, this complaint will supposedly be "served" to google on Monday, according to Rosemary McHenry at the FCC's Enforcement Beaureau)
--- FCC NetNeutrality 2000F Complaint REF# 12-C00422224 ---
Google's current Terms Of Service[1] for their fixed broadband internet
service being deployed initially here in Kansas City, Kansas, contain
this text-
"You agree not to misuse the Services. This includes but is not limited
to using the Services for purposes that are illegal, are improper,
infringe the rights of others, or adversely impact others enjoyment of
the Services. A list of examples of prohibited activities appears here. "
where 'here' is a hyperlink[2] to a page including this text-
"Unless you have a written agreement with Google Fiber permitting you do
so, you should not host any type of server using your Google Fiber
connection"
In my professional opinion as a graduate in Computer Engineering from
the University of Kansas (and incidentally brother of a google VP) I
believe these terms of service are in violation of FCC-10-201.
[1] http://fiber.google.com/legal/terms.html [google.com]
[2]
http://support.google.com/fiber/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=2659981&topic=2440874&ctx=topic [google.com]
--- (end of form 2000F complaint text)
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3106555&cid=41288357
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3156485&cid=41530745
http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3156485&cid=41516877
http://cloudsession.com/dawg/downloads/misc/kag-draft-2k121007.pdf
Hey, every time I hear Google Fiber I think it's some new Breakfast Cereal that helps you shit...
-- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
"I don't really care if people who can already get broadband can get faster broadband."
But yes, I welcome a couple of million seeders with 1GB/1GB lines.
Like anyone else, I'm more interested in clearing up this NSA matter before I go about selling my consumerist soul any further.
+1. I genuinely believe that the FCC has obstructed justice in regards to my complaint against GoogleFibers "Any kind of server prohibited without written permission" terms of service. It's kind of interesting to note how the predominance of such persecution against server operators achieves the ends of having the global populace gathered around a dozen large information watering holes provided by companies whose names fit on a single powerpoint slide. However, according to Rosemary McHenry at the FCC's Enforcement Review Board/Beaureau/Whatever, Google will be "served" with my 2000F NetNeutrality complaint this week (after 9 months of not getting word one from the FCC as to whether or not my legal claims had any merit).
You can't spell "Kansas" without "NSA".
Not much of a city.
Is Google doing this out of the goodness of their corporate heart? What do they gain by fibering up (as opposed to "wiring up") all these cities? Quicker access to their browsing habits? Quicker access to all the personal information they put into Gmail, Google Drive, Google Documents, Google Places, Google+ contacts?
Money.
Google expects it to be a profitable business: http://www.businessinsider.com/google-expects-google-fiber-to-be-profitable-2013-5
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
I know of 2 large cable modem ISPs that have no general server ban
Which?
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.