Can you clarify where you are getting this from. I'd put the price point much much higher (i.e. around 1000 servers and buying your own space via. fiber). I'll agree that paying by the minute for server runs about 4x the cost of by the month but there are clouds that sell more consistent usage.
Net neutrality wasn't the entirety of GPs claim. GP's claim was about "laws that essentially make private investments subject to public control"
Net neutrality originally was a local claim, about the last mile regarding non discrimination. It was part of the regulatory framework for last mile. Some aspects of that regulatory framework, have decreased profits and thus decreased infrastructure investment. On first and middle mile it is harder to see the negative impact of net neutrality but it is also much harder to see any impact.
OK if that's what you meant then bad choice of verbs. To break something is to, "separate or cause to separate into pieces as a result of a blow, shock, or strain". You want to use break then something like "break the power of the cable companies... either through ___ or through ___".
That's not technically a T1 it is bonded DSL at 1536kbs. What makes DSL cheap is that it isn't going direct back to the CO but is shared. If it isn't shared, then why not bond it and deliver it as an actual T1. I'd assume they don't intend to meet the SLAs. Certainly though bonding up lots of inexpensive connections can make for a so-so to good but not great internet at terrific price point.
Rules not allowing differences in rates between residential customers prevent cable companies from recouping their investment effectively on more remote connections. They also don't allow apartment owners to do things like offer cable as an amenity for 1/2 of what it would cost to buy.
No on what you said, yes on what you meant. It is either or. T1 is a specific standard of how you use analog copper. VDSL is another way to use copper. So it is either / or for the telco. However... those high frequency DSL signals won't make it to the LEC, he's likely too far for VSDL2 to work.
The business license is no big deal. And the $600 / mo / 1.5m is probably reducible with an agent. So something like $250 / mo or 5mbs for $600 if he prices out different options.
That isn't highway robbery though. While there is lots of old copper at 24 lines per 1.5mbs offering people good modern bandwidth chews up a ton. Say 88mbs is 56*24 lines. It is a limited resource.
You are contradicting yourself. If it is a utility it can be a monopoly no problem it just has substantial regulation and oversight. If you want competition then there is much less regulation and oversight.
It is tough with inaccurate broadband maps. The government site is terrible. People really need to confirm.
First off he needs to get an agent this is not something that an individual is going to be able to successfully navigate easily though it is possible. This Seth guy doesn't seem to really understand what he's doing which is understandable but he's in over his head. The article mentions he is 1/2 mile away from Comcast's access point. That's going to be an expensive buildout, the $50k-60k he's objecting to sounds right. That doesn't mean that Comcast might not eat a percentage of the cost for example neighbors also want broadband.
There may also be other fiber near him, for example that CenturyLink fiber. If he's marked as on net there may be another access point for Comcast near him (for example fiber that Comcast is selling to a 3rd party provider who might thus be able to give him access)
His comment about XO at $600 / mo being exorbitant is crazy. If there is no fiber in the neighborhood then the internet over bundled copper (which the article doesn't say they are doing but XO specializes in and makes sense given they started with a T1 quote) seems reasonable. Again he might be able to bring that down by engaging an agent to something like $200 / mo / 1.5mbs but he's not getting 50mbs for $50 / mo other a copper bundle.
The main thing that's happened is that simple horizontal applications are approaching a price of $0. The answer is don't code simple horizontal applications if you are looking to make money. That doesn't mean the whole model is broken but that there is massive oversupply of particular types of applications.
Apple app store payouts are about $5b growing at a rate of about $1b / year. I'm having a hard time seeing a medium sized and rapidly growing revenue stream as not existing. It is absolutely concentrated though that's true. Where it isn't concentrated is money from vertical and custom applications which far exceed the app store payouts.
Not really. BBSes started as closed communities. AOL provided a large basket of services for their users as did competitors like Prodigy. There were at the time pure ISPs who just offered internet but mostly people wanted BBS services. Internet was added to AOL's services around 1995 and proved very popular as an add on, eventually replacing all their other products in the basket.
Some of the comments from the article are nuts like:
"We'd hate to see ISPs and Facebook police these workarounds, which would show that they care less about users' access to the internet and more about the terms of the deals, open internet be damned," Levy told Motherboard.
What does Josh Levy think? User access to Facebook is what is paying for this access. Or course they care about the terms! Why would they want to fund someone using Tumblr, Yelp, Google+, Twitter...?
Why did you allow your kids to be bombarded with commercials at an age where they couldn't cope?
Because there were compensating advantages to those shows. Life is about grey and tradeoffs. And her wanting particular products and getting upset about it while a negative was not a game changer. Your ID is low enough that you are about my age. I'd assume you know this and should be sounding like a teen that hasn't made these tradeoffs.
I remember when my daughter was about 2.5-4 commercials were unbelievable effective. Even those commercials that targeted the mother watching with the kid had an impact and my daughter would often get upset we didn't have the right products. I'd love to just see a ban on advertising for kids under 10, and public financing.
Slashdot Mirror
The Apple 2 came out in 1977. Visicalc was 1979 and didn't start development until 1978. No Apple was not building the machine around Visicalc.
Can you clarify where you are getting this from. I'd put the price point much much higher (i.e. around 1000 servers and buying your own space via. fiber). I'll agree that paying by the minute for server runs about 4x the cost of by the month but there are clouds that sell more consistent usage.
Oh I didn't realize wages were cut. Absolutely employers would much rather cut wages and have a shorter workweek.
That's even better. That means employees get an extra day for their family and hobbies with no impact on productivity.
Net neutrality wasn't the entirety of GPs claim. GP's claim was about "laws that essentially make private investments subject to public control"
Net neutrality originally was a local claim, about the last mile regarding non discrimination. It was part of the regulatory framework for last mile. Some aspects of that regulatory framework, have decreased profits and thus decreased infrastructure investment. On first and middle mile it is harder to see the negative impact of net neutrality but it is also much harder to see any impact.
OK if that's what you meant then bad choice of verbs. To break something is to, "separate or cause to separate into pieces as a result of a blow, shock, or strain". You want to use break then something like "break the power of the cable companies... either through ___ or through ___".
That's not technically a T1 it is bonded DSL at 1536kbs. What makes DSL cheap is that it isn't going direct back to the CO but is shared. If it isn't shared, then why not bond it and deliver it as an actual T1. I'd assume they don't intend to meet the SLAs. Certainly though bonding up lots of inexpensive connections can make for a so-so to good but not great internet at terrific price point.
Rules not allowing differences in rates between residential customers prevent cable companies from recouping their investment effectively on more remote connections. They also don't allow apartment owners to do things like offer cable as an amenity for 1/2 of what it would cost to buy.
Interesting idea! A relay and a short rural cable run. I like it.
No on what you said, yes on what you meant. It is either or. T1 is a specific standard of how you use analog copper. VDSL is another way to use copper. So it is either / or for the telco. However... those high frequency DSL signals won't make it to the LEC, he's likely too far for VSDL2 to work.
The business license is no big deal. And the $600 / mo / 1.5m is probably reducible with an agent. So something like $250 / mo or 5mbs for $600 if he prices out different options.
That isn't highway robbery though. While there is lots of old copper at 24 lines per 1.5mbs offering people good modern bandwidth chews up a ton. Say 88mbs is 56*24 lines. It is a limited resource.
Did you ask the data center what providers were in there or check a fiber map? It probably wasn't Comcast.
You are contradicting yourself. If it is a utility it can be a monopoly no problem it just has substantial regulation and oversight. If you want competition then there is much less regulation and oversight.
Well written comment. You are not going to get the up votes you deserve by talking about the real costs.
It is subsidized. Look at your cable bill. There is an FCC tax to expand broadband. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/N...
It is tough with inaccurate broadband maps. The government site is terrible. People really need to confirm.
First off he needs to get an agent this is not something that an individual is going to be able to successfully navigate easily though it is possible. This Seth guy doesn't seem to really understand what he's doing which is understandable but he's in over his head. The article mentions he is 1/2 mile away from Comcast's access point. That's going to be an expensive buildout, the $50k-60k he's objecting to sounds right. That doesn't mean that Comcast might not eat a percentage of the cost for example neighbors also want broadband.
There may also be other fiber near him, for example that CenturyLink fiber. If he's marked as on net there may be another access point for Comcast near him (for example fiber that Comcast is selling to a 3rd party provider who might thus be able to give him access)
His comment about XO at $600 / mo being exorbitant is crazy. If there is no fiber in the neighborhood then the internet over bundled copper (which the article doesn't say they are doing but XO specializes in and makes sense given they started with a T1 quote) seems reasonable. Again he might be able to bring that down by engaging an agent to something like $200 / mo / 1.5mbs but he's not getting 50mbs for $50 / mo other a copper bundle.
The main thing that's happened is that simple horizontal applications are approaching a price of $0. The answer is don't code simple horizontal applications if you are looking to make money. That doesn't mean the whole model is broken but that there is massive oversupply of particular types of applications.
Apple app store payouts are about $5b growing at a rate of about $1b / year. I'm having a hard time seeing a medium sized and rapidly growing revenue stream as not existing. It is absolutely concentrated though that's true. Where it isn't concentrated is money from vertical and custom applications which far exceed the app store payouts.
They filed they aren't threw the bankruptcy yet. A trustee has been appointed and the trustee decided there still are outstanding legal issues.
Not really. BBSes started as closed communities. AOL provided a large basket of services for their users as did competitors like Prodigy. There were at the time pure ISPs who just offered internet but mostly people wanted BBS services. Internet was added to AOL's services around 1995 and proved very popular as an add on, eventually replacing all their other products in the basket.
So not really the same thing.
Some of the comments from the article are nuts like:
"We'd hate to see ISPs and Facebook police these workarounds, which would show that they care less about users' access to the internet and more about the terms of the deals, open internet be damned," Levy told Motherboard.
What does Josh Levy think? User access to Facebook is what is paying for this access. Or course they care about the terms! Why would they want to fund someone using Tumblr, Yelp, Google+, Twitter...?
Because there were compensating advantages to those shows. Life is about grey and tradeoffs. And her wanting particular products and getting upset about it while a negative was not a game changer. Your ID is low enough that you are about my age. I'd assume you know this and should be sounding like a teen that hasn't made these tradeoffs.
Yes. I could easily see it making things much worse.
I remember when my daughter was about 2.5-4 commercials were unbelievable effective. Even those commercials that targeted the mother watching with the kid had an impact and my daughter would often get upset we didn't have the right products. I'd love to just see a ban on advertising for kids under 10, and public financing.
That's pretty much 3 paragraphs of name calling. If you want to critique Bing, critique Bing.
Microsoft has a test engine where you can test both. My mean and mode are of the 5: 3 better for Google, 2 better for Bing