Slashdot Mirror


Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon Are Quietly Buying Undersea Cables (venturebeat.com)

The internet is commonly described as a cloud, writes the consumer policy expert and editor at BroadbandNow, but "In reality, it's a series of wet, fragile tubes, and Google is about to own an alarming number of them."

An anonymous reader quotes VentureBeat: Google makes billions from its cloud platform. Now it's using those billions to buy up the internet itself -- or at least the submarine cables that make up the internet backbone. In February, the company announced its intention to move forward with the development of the Curie cable, a new undersea line stretching from California to Chile. It will be the first private intercontinental cable ever built by a major non-telecom company. And if you step back and just look at intracontinental cables, Google has fully financed a number of those already; it was one of the first companies to build a fully private submarine line.

Google isn't alone. Historically, cables have been owned by groups of private companies -- mostly telecom providers -- but 2016 saw the start of a massive submarine cable boom, and this time, the buyers are content providers. Corporations like Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon all seem to share Google's aspirations for bottom-of-the-ocean dominance... We're reaching the next stage of internet maturity; one where only large, incumbent players can truly win in media....

I've been watching this trend develop, being in the broadband space myself, and the recent movements are certainly concerning. Big tech's ownership of the internet backbone will have far-reaching, yet familiar, implications. It's the same old consumer tradeoff; more convenience for less control -- and less privacy... As we look to the future, we need to start asking ourselves what the internet is really going to look like whenever the content services that already command so much of our attention are in control of the internet backbone as well.

"Consumers will soon need to decide exactly how much faith they want to place in these companies to build out the internet of tomorrow."

5 of 76 comments (clear)

  1. consumers by religionofpeas · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Consumers will soon need to decide exactly how much faith they want to place in these companies to build out the internet of tomorrow.

    What if a consumer doesn't have faith ? What options are there to stop this ?

  2. Wait... what? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The slant of the headline and the lede paragraph imply that Google (and others) are “buying up” the existing undersea cabling... but what they are actually doing is laying their own new cable.

    And this particular new cable brings the number of undersea cables owned by Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Amazon to a grand total of...

    (Drumroll please)

    One.

    There are plenty of real reasons to hate on these companies. We don’t need to find made-up reasons for doing so.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
    1. Re:Wait... what? by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, that's what I was going to say. They're building new submarine cables? Great. I don't trust anyone to own cables, that's why I use encryption.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  3. Shills shill shill shills by the shill shore by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Consumers will soon need to decide exactly how much faith they want to place in these companies to build out the internet of tomorrow.

    As if people have faith in Comcast, AT&T, and Verizon.

    Like the removal of Net Neutrality, privatizing internet infrastructure has only reduced prices for consumers.

    Reduced what in the what now?

    This is an "article" written by an astroturfing lobbyist. His ideology sells the belief that deregulation solves all problems, yet because he is beholden to his telecom masters, he must also sell the belief that having more competition is also bad.

  4. Re:Have the government step in to build it by Can'tNot · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This isn't exactly a revolutionary idea, a government is supposed to be the instrument of the will of the people. The fact that a question like that could even be asked, of whether vital infrastructure would be better administrated in the hands of individuals rather than entrusted to the government's safe keeping, is an example of how far we've strayed from the democratic ideal.