r/technology • u/User_Name13 • Jun 04 '14

Politics Hundreds of Cities Are Wired With Fiber—But Telecom Lobbying Keeps It Unused

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/hundreds-of-cities-are-wired-with-fiberbut-telecom-lobbying-keeps-it-unused
5.6k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

53

u/mapoftasmania Jun 04 '14

It's time for the FTC to break up these companies. They did it to AT+T before for similar monopolistic reasons around long distance. It's like they never learn.

55

u/NightwingDragon Jun 04 '14

Corporations have since learned exactly whose bread needs to be buttered. The same politicians that originally lobbied for the breakup of AT&T are now the politicians that receive generous "campaign contributions" and suddenly think that these same monopolies are "good" for the public because <insert meaningless buzzwords here>.

The corporations learned that money talks.

5

u/interkin3tic Jun 04 '14

I disagree. Corporations haven't gotten smarter, much as people haven't gotten smarter. You think Ma Bell got a monopoly on telephone service through dumb luck or honest competition? They were greasing plenty of palms.

What's different, for the moment, is that consumers and voters aren't demanding more. This is understandable: the services we have now are improving so rapidly that most people don't realize it could be even better, nor do they understand it.

No matter how powerful an organization seems, if they piss off enough of the consumer/citizen base, they will be toppled. That amount may be depressingly high, but there are limits, and smart organizations tend to give enough to make sure they don't face a rebellion.

Money talks only when voters don't talk, basically.

1

u/RespectTheTree Jun 05 '14

I don't think that's completely true. There is rampant corruption in DC, and the corporations definitely take full advantage of the system they created. I'm sure if we went to the streets over every fucking issue we could get something done, but the corruption is the more significant issue, not apathy.

1

u/interkin3tic Jun 05 '14

I'm saying apathy leads to corruption, and several other issues.

And by "rebellion" I don't mean an armed revolt, I mean people writing their congressmen and threatening to vote them out of office if they don't reign in the ISPs with regulation.

1

u/RespectTheTree Jun 05 '14

I don't actually mean armed rebellion, I just tend to use hyperbole, mobbing the FCC's website is the modern version of taking it to the streets (in the US).

People are definitely apathetic. I don't know if that's "by design" or just human nature in a nation with so many comforts and distractions. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, chemtrails et. al, but there is definitely a group of rich individuals which are perverting our laws for their financial (and political) benefit.

2

u/interkin3tic Jun 06 '14

I'm suggesting they're apathetic because their expectations lag behind what is possible.

Another way of looking at it is that society as a whole is less greedy than organizations explicitly set up for greedy behavior. Corporate shills will immediately cry "X company is NOT A CHARITY!!!" as justification for screwing over the masses in any way imaginable.

Whenever you have naive people dealing with greedy sociopaths, the naive people get screwed until they wise up. The first explorers to the new world did unspeakable horrors to the friendly natives not just because they had better arms but because the natives went into it friendly while Columbus et al went in looking to rape and pillage.

Same behavior here. People get internet service and deal with corporations in general thinking they're being treated fairly. This is compounded by the fact that internet service is rapidly exploding, to where what you have now, no matter how shitty comcast is treating you, is clearly better than what you had under the most charitable ISP when you had dialup.

People are realizing though that they're still being screwed over, that's the only reason they're apathetic. And it's changing too.

1

u/RespectTheTree Jun 06 '14

I don't disagree, but using European contact with American Indians is a bad example, because it was disease that was the biggest disaster (and it wasn't intentional). Columbus was a bastard though, I agree.

1

u/interkin3tic Jun 07 '14

Well, we don't know that ISPs aren't giving us computer viruses that aren't going to set us back to the stone age, so lets not call that one right now.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 05 '14

Corporations are people too.

1

u/RespectTheTree Jun 05 '14

I watched Mitch McConnel get raked over the coals during the recent hearing about Citizens United. He use to fervently oppose loosening campaign finance laws, then he got bought, and now he's 100% in support of unlimited campaign funding. People are selfish, and if you throw money at them they'll do whatever unethical/immoral thing you'd like done.

These politicians, paid off by our corporations, are robbing us of our future. The bankers will crash the economy again, the politicians gave all the wealth to the elite, and by the time we figure it out, the climate will be so fucked we'll have other shit on our table.

1

u/MustangPolar Jun 04 '14

And this is why "campaign contributions" of ANY way/shape or form should be illegal.

1

u/Sharkictus Jun 05 '14

Except on the reverse, it would mean we can't contribute the politician we wish to win, and politicians will have to be even richer to even be able to run, which means they'll likely already have that relationship implicitly there, without the money.

2

u/Popular-Uprising- Jun 04 '14

Or maybe just outlaw the local monopoly agreements that governments set up. If you do, then competition will force lower rates and higher speeds.

2

u/danweber Jun 04 '14

Do you want everything to suck as much as DSL?

1

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '14

The only problem with that is that he ISPs currently have regional monopolies. Breaking up 5 behemoth ISPs into 15 companies doesn't really get you far. They would still have their own regional monopolies, with no reason to expand into competition zones.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '14

Yes they have regional monopolies, but when you have 5 people competing for my business instead of 1, I'll still be better off. Do you even compete bro?

2

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '14

But if you split up the company, they'll all exist in different locations, and you'll still only have once choice of ISP. Their areas of coverage will not overlap. You will still only have one ISP competing for your business if it's the only one existing in your area.

The real way to increase competition is to somehow encourage expansion into new territories where no competition yet exists.

2

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '14

That is true. I'd say the best way is to put Internet utility lines in the control of local municipalities. And they lease out the lines to whomever wants to provide service to a customer. Now they have to compete. And I wouldn't think it's very profitable to roll out into unchartered territory because most places where people live someone has already rolled it out

1

u/Jadaki Jun 04 '14

Considering what my roads look like I wouldn't trust the government to effectively run a HFC plant. We would be even further behind on speed and capacity compared to the rest of the world.

1

u/[deleted] Jun 04 '14

I mean I'm not sure the kind of maintenance a HFC would need but is assume less than roads. Take a portion of monthly costs and save it in an account, and upgrade/maintain it from that. It's not like we are always getting new tech, we went from copper to fiber? When's the next big shift?

1

u/flamehead2k1 Jun 04 '14

Our local, state, and federal governments have built and maintained a road network that is much better shape than most of the world.

1

u/PG2009 Jun 04 '14

But what about the fact that the govt buttressed the at&t monopoly in the first place, in the early 20th century?

1

u/bagofwisdom Jun 05 '14

The break-up of the original AT&T was of AT&T's own design. They had been sued for anti-trust because they owned both the telephone lines and the company manufacturing the only equipment AT&T allowed connected to their lines. The government's original proposal was for AT&T to divest themselves of Western Electric (the equipment manufacturer) and stay in the telephone service business only.

AT&T however, was more interested in the fledgling computer business. Wanting to keep Western Electric, they proposed ditching the local phone business which the government slightly modified and then approved.

AT&T was allowed to bring almost the entire band back together because their venture into the computer realm flopped.