Slashdot Mirror
Louisville's Fiber Internet Expansion Opposed By Koch Brothers Group (usatoday.com)
Slashdot reader simkel shared an article from the Courier-Journal:
A group affiliated with the Koch brothers' powerful political network is leading an online campaign against Mayor Greg Fischer's $5.4 million proposal to expand Louisville's ultra-fast internet access... Critics argue that building roughly 96 miles of fiber optic cabling is an unnecessary taxpayer giveaway to internet service providers, such as Google Fiber, which recently announced plans to begin building its high-speed network in the city. "Fundamentally, we don't believe that taxpayers should be funding broadband or internet systems," said David Williams, president of the taxpayers alliance, which is part of industrialists Charles and David Koch's political donor network... The group says $5.4 million is a misuse of taxpayer funds when the city has other needs, such as infrastructure and public safety.
To shore up public support, the mayor has begun arguing that high-speed connectivity would make it cheaper to install crime-monitoring cameras in violent neighborhoods.
To shore up public support, the mayor has begun arguing that high-speed connectivity would make it cheaper to install crime-monitoring cameras in violent neighborhoods.
These bastards must hate the environment, as much as they oppose any regulation to protect it. I'm sure SuperKendall will be along shortly to spew idiocy in defense of the Koch Brothers. Now they want to oppose efforts to improve infrastructure in Louisville. At what point do we decide that these people are just evil and seize their assets for the public good?
US really need ban all "political donations" which comes out of constant election costs. Have the government pay for the election funding where each candidates will get fixed amount for their campaigns.
But money will talk and the Koch Brothers will 'own' another bit of the USA.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
We've seen how well private industry does it. In the places where taxpayers fund the internet, you get gigabit speeds at rates around a quarter of what private industry offers for any internet service at all. Private industry might complain that it isn't "fair", but private industry won't step up and do it, either. And if life were "fair", you'd die penniless in the gutter after spending a lifetime enriching yourself by destroying the planet. So I'm not going to worry about that too much.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
Interesting comment from someone who's defending two thick, white Kochs.
...I think most people here on /. agree that fast internet access *is* vital infrastructure. We may disagree on how best to pay for this, of course, but it's essential.
The last portion of this article stood out the most.
Basically put:
The only way we can truly be a big brother society is by installing high speed internet everywhere to connect the devices.
We feel you should pay for it because this will make you feel safer.
Fundamentally, we don't believe that taxpayers should be funding broadband or internet systems
What a stupid fucking asshole. We're struggling to keep our business afloat because neither of our two ISP's (TWC and AT&T) can provide us with stable Internet connections at one of our locations. Everybody needs government funded, government regulated Internet access ASAP.
I don't respond to AC's.
"Old monopolies are the only free market you deserve"
Kentukywired intends to wire the whole state. The Kochs have strategically chosen to pick this fight in Louisville, a classic (D) run bed of corruption.
Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
Else those dirty flirty poor will ruin it for everyone.
Fiberoptic is infrastructure.
If the city owns the fiber then they can rent it out to which ever operator that is interested in that area. Even two competing operators.
The ones complaining the most about towns and cities running their own fibers are the ones that want to control the consumers the most.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
I saw on Youtube when my local power company was working to get the law changed so they wouldn't have to pay for the extra power solar installations put back into the grid. It was a bunch of old people sitting around talking about something scary that was gonna happen and it ended with "Vote No on Prop such and such". The law passed, no problem
The gov't's been paying for expanding broadband for decades. The Koch bros own companies continue to suck up subsidies left and right. They couldn't be any more transparently hypocritical if they tried. But old people vote. They're easily frightened because they're brains go in old age and this stuff works.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
And treating it as such is the only way to get decent competition among ISPs.
Instead of Kockblocking this; just try to remember that a fiber buildout is basically dumping chemically doped glass fibers into populated areas. Doesn't that feel so much better? Don't think about the service, think about the emissions.
The Koch brothers need to be charged for their crimes against humanity.
They should be forced to live in abject poverty for the rest of their miserable lives.
Have you ever talked to someone who behaves like this?
They talk about themselves (for a long time) then when they are done they look at you like it's now your turn talk about them. Does this remind you of anyone? They can suck the air out of a whole room.
"Fundamentally, we don't believe that taxpayers should be funding broadband or internet systems,"
Translation: Fundamentally, instead you should let us rake hundreds of millions per year from these same taxpayers with our inferior service.
Ang that for those lucky enough to get anything reasonable at all.
Perhaps we should start having public executions for enemies of the people and progress?
Broadband providers already recieve federal grants to subsidize the expansion of service. This is part of a federal mandate to ensure that information can be swiftly communicated across the country. An argument that is based on the proposition that the use of tax revenue to subsidize the expansion of a service provider is an unfair burden to taxpayers is an argument that has cosmetic appeal but no legitimatimacy based on current and ongoing practices. The conclusion is that the true reason for opposing the expansion is a reason that cannot be stated as the true reason would most likely reveal an association with an interest attempting to avoid free market competition.
They could even take the approach that was originally required for DSL, where you pay one entity for the physical infrastructure usage, and pay a different entity for the final connection to the backbone of the Internet.
With modern routing you could even do it without having to result to changing physical patching, assuming that equipment used at the customer premises and at the network-equivalent of the neighborhood exchange or central office is capable of sub-line-rate service to the level that the customer is paying for and that the backbone linking NX or CO locations is sufficiently high-throughput.
If anything this approach would allow for more players, not fewer players, as providers would only have to cable-in infrastructure to the central offices instead of worrying about the last-mile links. This could allow for less expensive private WANs between multiple facilities within the metro-area; the customer with multiple locations could pay for their own private metro optical MLPS network without having to to onto the Internet for simple site-to-site networks.
Lastly it might make it easier for customers in less-desirable areas from a service-provider point of view to actually get service. This can affect both poor neighborhoods where an ISP might not expect enough adoption, and even some wealthier neighborhoods where the housing density is too low to make for a good return on the trenching or other infrastructure requirements to put the network in even if a lot of households want it.
I don't see any losing proposition except for ISPs that want monopoly or effective-monopoly positions in markets.
Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
In New Zealand, the government (in conjunction with a private company Chorus) is putting in Fibre to something like 90% of the population and high speed wireless elsewhere.
ALL ISPs get to rent it out at the same price.
We have tiers in pricing based on speed and data caps but a 100/20 is available with unlimited data for NZ$95 or less.
Different ISPs offer different packages, i.e. free Netflix, Cheaper SkyTV, Local support, etc etc etc
We have net neutrality, data is data no matter where it comes from.
Here's the thing, the government is elected by the people, for the people. The taxes we pay SHOULD be benefiting us so the government putting in decent internet in this day and age IS what they are there for.
Like happened near me (Jackson, WI), the municipality spends a fortune setting up an internet utility and is quickly out-competed by private companies.
The Internet is a utility. It may not have started that way, but today, it is as necessary a public utility as water or electricity.
To that end, governments everywhere gave telecoms huge tax abatements to bring internet to everyone, and they basically stole that money.
So, I have no sympathy for the AT&Ts and Comcasts when they collectively steal billions of dollars from taxpayers.
Tax payers have already been funding it federally and it hasn't moved for shit.
At least if it's done locally, it will get things moving.
These are the type of people who probably still claim Coal and Oil is the way of the future. Out with the old generation filled with morons stuck in their old ways, in with the new generation that knows what it wants instead of letting the old generation tell them what they should want. (ie nothing because it's all going to the old gen's pockets)
The group says $5.4 million is a misuse of taxpayer funds when the city has other needs, such as infrastructure and public safety.
I'd think that building a publicly accessible fiber optic network does in fact meet the definition of infrastructure. I'd also think that providing a means for communication for the public does add to public safety.
Not the best argument in my estimation.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
>The group says $5.4 million is a misuse of taxpayer funds
Louisville is apparently 3/4 of a million people, so this comes to seven dollars per person. Surely less than 1% of anybody's property taxes. Louisville undoubtedly spends that on road maintenance every couple of weeks.
But that's just operating, this is capital. If they're spending less than $54M replacing pavement and wires and pipes every year, the city would be a shambles. This is probably about a 2% hit on one year of capital spending.
And if you think America deserves something better than the Koch brothers', you have been asleep for the last 50 years.
I'm a fan of dark and ironic humor, and reading these comments fills me with endless hope for the future. Too bad about your children, maybe they can emigrate.
Goodnight America.
So, by this logic, building highways and city streets was just the government giving away taxpayer dollars as a gift to the likes of Ford, Chrysler and GM?
We may benefit if they provide the infrastructure, but they SHOULD NOT be regulating it, beyond the amount necessary to ensure each user gets either their paid for minimum capacity, or their fair share, depending on what model/tiers of service are provided.
Regulating the internet however should NOT be the governments job, otherwise you will find censorship or worse being done by government entities.
Deregulation does not work for large projects that can only be done by a legal monopoly.
Little players? So I'm going to route a string and two soup-cans from my neighbor to the next and have that be a viable communication system?
If "Google Fiber, which recently announced plans to begin building its high-speed network in the city" let them pay for all of it they have billions and billions of dollars!!! OMG why would the city pay for them to make even more money. That is beyond stupid!
I know they despise common people, but this is really strange, maybe they lost the bid for this contract? or just don't want people to get world news? who knows.
Yes, let's let corporate America run the Internet because obviously, they can do it cheaper and better than a public utility or municipality. Someone needs to go check in on Ephrata, WA. Fastest Internet in the nation in 2013. I just checked, and they are offering 100Mb/100Mb for 59.95 a month.
https://www.dailydot.com/debug/ephrata-washington-fastest-internet-us/
Fiber optic cable IS infrastructure. The ones who will be using it will be citizens of the greater Louisville area, not the ISPs. Ownership of the infrastructure gives Louisville great leverage dealing with both the big ISPs and little ones. That's the REAL reason this group opposes the build out.
Actually, the New Zealand team whooped the United States (Oracle) team today on live TV. America's Cup on NBC.
I think fast internet (>10 megabit/sec) is NOT vital infrastructure. 1 megabit/sec is fast enough to visit webpages. The only thing people use 'fast' internet for, is to watch videos, such as youtube, or Netflix. But people on /. are biased in favor of tech, so this is not a good place to look for an average opinion.
Having a bunch of little generators hooked up to an A/C grid can cause lots of problems. I'll side with the power company on this. I guess you could lobby for switching to a D/C power grid.
The Koch Brothers opposed Donald Trump and opposed Obama. Their track record of buying election isn't so good.
Hello? McFly? You do know that that presidential election isn't the only election in the country, right?
The Koch bros have been fantastically successful at buying elections. They were the driving force behind the state-level turn over of political offices to the republican party. They've also been so succesful at buying elections in congress that there is a 40 member "koch caucus."
PS its weird you capitalized the "B" in brothers. What's that about?
Then you would have thousands of people filing for every elective office, just to get the free cash. Or will the cash only go to "established parties"?
You aren't very bright, are you?
The laws on campaign spending are very strict. There is no "free cash."
People regularly go to jail for misusing campaign funds.
Fundamentally, we don't believe that taxpayers should be funding broadband or internet systems,
MhmmmKay. Let's whip that around a bit, shall we?
Fundamentally, we don't believe that taxpayers should be funding fire departments,
Fundamentally, we don't believe that taxpayers should be funding police departments,
Fundamentally, we don't believe that taxpayers should be funding Public water & sewer systems,
Fundamentally, we don't believe that taxpayers should be funding Hospital systems,
Fundamentally, we don't believe that taxpayers should be funding streets and highways,
Because, fundamentally, internet access isn't about browsing porn anymore. It's about scheduling medical appointments, getting prescription refills, it's about having a job, or looking for a job. It's about paying your bills, taxes, and doing your banking. It's about ordering things on line you simply can't get at your local brick and mortar store even if you wanted to take the trouble.
Because, fundamentally, if a person doesn't understand how all pervasive and simply necessary internet access is, they are either planning to rip off the public, or they are thinking with their fundament.
Fundamentally.
You can discern the hypocrisy in their statement by observing how fast they get on board if it's building (with tax dollars!) a billion dollar sports stadium or for a multi-billion dollar air port expansion, or a new freeway. Better watch out then, because they will leave hoof prints (like all jack asses do) across your back.
Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.
Look into why the DSL co-hosting rollout was such a monumental failure. That will tell you why your idea is hogwash.
If taxpayers shouldn't be funding broadband and internet systems, who the FUCK should? Who the fuck do they think is funding this shit? It's the taxpayers, except its done with profit taking instead of at cost. Fuck every last one of those motherfucking critics and fuck any of you shill pieces of shit that argue for their side.
U never run a story about how happy and George Soros is that the state is funding the abortion of millions of black babies every year. You only see things though the distorted lends of the media that wants you to hate everyone of a different party. Wake up both sides wÃre korrupt as hell.
Affiliated with their network. In plain English, at two degrees of separation from them.
This is just clickbait.
I live in New Zealand too.
Take the previous commentor as talking a load of rubbish.
I live in New Zealand and call bullshit on your post. Price, availability and all. I think you need treble your prices.
Then for the 20% of the population.
Simply NOT true.
Spend the money again two decades from now, who cares? Basically pay for the leverage only when you need it.
Minority parties generally don't have the luxury of being corrupt.
I live in an area with a rare thing... a choice of cable ISPs. I'm currently on RCN. A few years back, RCN was hurting bad and the Comcast folks were offering amazing deals to just RCN customers... $1 a month for one year. (Of course jumping to some regular crazy pricing after one year.) I didn't take it b/c I knew if I did, I wouldn't have a choice next year, RCN would be gone in my area. This exactly what they are doing. "Look Jackson, see you don't need the municipal internet... it's prices are high, it's costing tax payers, it's annoying to maintain, just close your eyes and it will be all over soon."
Modem....routing? Holy balls. 802.1q. Double-tagged traffic, with tags added at the ONT (FTTH customer prem equipment). Outer tag identifies Service Provider, Inner tag identifies Customer, or there could be other schemes. Some access equipment supports MPLS encapsulation so you don't even need to worry about VLAN assignments being unique accross ISPs. The access equipment can be connected directly to a colocated ISP on a dedicated LAG, or there could be an ENNI between routers of the facilities based ISP and the colocated ISP, which would require fewer physical connections but would burn more of the ISPs router ports ($$$).
The main problem with this is that it requires a level of cooperation that most US ISPs aren't competent to handle. There are standards for how services are delivered between carriers, defined by the Metro Ethernet Forum, but they're not widely understood outside the Wholesale game. AT&T or VZ are competent enough, but have no incentive to support it.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
Their asses. I live in one of the biggest metro areas in the US, in a rapidly gentrifying (read: lots of highly paid techies moving in) and none of the major players are even planning on a FiOS expansion here (hell, we were one of the last spots in the city to get 4G wireless, we're so low on the priority list). If there were a push for municipal fiber rollout, I'd support it if only because it seems like every time a municipality puts it on the docket, the private companies fall all over themselves to scream about how unfair it is while rushing to add FiOS to the area in question. Either way, I'd get FiOS as an option.
The more fiber the better. These are connections were originally conceived in the Ky Wired program which is a program to connect all municipalities in each county across the state. These funds allow that to occur plus it provides fiber to the neglected parts of the city (our west end) that has so much potential.
that when it comes to evil, progressive types are clean as the wind driven snow? Oh, ok Slashdot moderators,I got it.
Funny that doesn't jibe with the facts like the recent attempted murder of Steve Scalise and other congressional ball players or the violence inherent in the Occupy and Black lives matter protests; which are/were all perpetrated by progressives.
Is there any connection whatsoever between the Koch brothers or this group and the city of Louisville?
Because if not, I'd have to ask why it's any of their fucking business. Without any connection to the city, they lack standing to be trying to 'stand up' to democratically elected officials who live in the city and who were elected by the people of that city.
I wonder if similar opposition existed for other infrastructure expansion.
"We don't believe that the taxpayer should be forced to fund such frivolities as paved roads and clean water."
"How dare this mayor try to abscond with your money in support of this newfangled electricity grid."
"The main overseas income earner for New Zealand is Tourism. Dairy is 2nd.", isn't global warming caused by #1 evil Koch Bros and #2 COW FARTS?!
SAVE US ALL FROM NEW ZEALAND!!! HELP ME OBAMA WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN US?! YOU ARE OUR ONLY HOPE... DOH!
Don't forget that having internet is another way of getting educated. The powers that be (Koch, etc) don't like that idea very much because education generally leads to liberalism (at direct odds with their BS).
Charter, ATT, a couple smaller ISPs -- all providing higher speeds than the village.