PedroDaGr8
06-16-2016, 09:37 AM
Hopefully, this won't get to techie, but as most of us know one of that MANY of the largest issues threatening the freedom of the internet (data caps, anti-net-neutrality, etc). all come down to the exploitation of businesses due to a lack of competition. Many of the practices that the large cable/dsl operators foist upon their customers is because basically there is no competitor to stop them. There is no reason for data caps, which has been admitted in testimony by ISPs. The network overload that many of us experience is actually mostly manufactured and artificial to try to convince us to upgrade. Usually, these aggreements are in the terms of local franchise monopolies or duopolies, where a company is given a local monopoly to an area for a franchise fee paid to the local government. The ISPs love these because they can basically screw-over the constituents all they want, they have no other options. The government likes it because any ill will goes to the company, not to the government that created this situations in the first place.
Currently, one of the only other alternatives is the municipal ISP, where the city (or other administration like Tennessee Power) takes over the ISP duties. This is usually done either in direct competition with the ISP or in the more severe cases as a direct replacement of the ISP. Critics of the municipal ISP say that it is unfair for the government to compete against private companies, which is a fair criticism to SOME degree (though not entirely). The main counterpoint being that these companies are not actually competing in the first place because they are often given a the monopoly or duopoly and their abuse of this setup is what dictated the formation of the municipal ISP. There are a variety of other arguments both for and against these scenarios but they are more or less irrelevant to the rest of the discussion. The city of Ammon, Idaho ran into a common issue; they needed to context city hall to a municipal building roughly a mile away. They sent out requests for bids to the two major ISPs in the area. The first one didn't want it, the second one wanted to charge them an $80k setup fee and a $1k/mo usage fee. For a mile run, this fee is quite high and the city determined the same thing. They realized that they could build the link for around $22k and maintenance was a fraction of the $1k/mo. They also realized that as part of this, they could spread out and connect to other local government buildings and businesses in as the article says "in a fiscally responsible manner". They are now working to expand out to the various neighborhoods and homes in Ammon. Normally, this would be the beginning of a municipal ISP but Ammon took a different route. Instead of being the ISP, Ammon chose to be a "last-mile" fiber utility which then sources out the actual ISP function to any ISP that wants to hook up to their network and provide internet access. The ISPs pay Ammon a network maintenance fee and pay for their internet infrastructure. This dramatically reduces the barrier to entry for ISPs in the area, they no longer have to build a VERY costly local network before becoming an ISP. The city recouped their costs in 3yrs and is now operating in the black, as they expand to additional homes. As a result of the success, they have already had several new ISPs sign up to offer service, providing real competition for customers in a market that is void of competition. Now if they had stopped here, they would have basically reproduced the British Telco model, where most home users have a minimum of 6 ISPs to choose from. They took it one step further creating a portal to make it easy for users to change ISPs. No more retentions, no more hassle, a couple of clicks and your are done. If your ISP sucks and isn't providing what they claimed, you go onto the cities fiber website, open your account and click subscribe for a different ISP, and within minutes you are now officially a subscriber of that other ISP.
Quite simply, this is the true competition that the internet needs. If this were in place in most cities, net-neutrality discussion would be unnecessary, prevention of data caps would be unnecessary, the inherent competitions would stop any of these abusive tactics right in their tracks. Of course, you will see Comcast et al. fight this idea tooth-and-nail if it catches on, including their paid for senators and appointees like Pai at the FCC. They love their lack of competition and try to hide behind some pro-corporate republican and democrat senators to maintain said monoploy.
Link to the story:
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-if-switching-fiber-isps-was-as-easy-as-clicking-a-mouse/
Currently, one of the only other alternatives is the municipal ISP, where the city (or other administration like Tennessee Power) takes over the ISP duties. This is usually done either in direct competition with the ISP or in the more severe cases as a direct replacement of the ISP. Critics of the municipal ISP say that it is unfair for the government to compete against private companies, which is a fair criticism to SOME degree (though not entirely). The main counterpoint being that these companies are not actually competing in the first place because they are often given a the monopoly or duopoly and their abuse of this setup is what dictated the formation of the municipal ISP. There are a variety of other arguments both for and against these scenarios but they are more or less irrelevant to the rest of the discussion. The city of Ammon, Idaho ran into a common issue; they needed to context city hall to a municipal building roughly a mile away. They sent out requests for bids to the two major ISPs in the area. The first one didn't want it, the second one wanted to charge them an $80k setup fee and a $1k/mo usage fee. For a mile run, this fee is quite high and the city determined the same thing. They realized that they could build the link for around $22k and maintenance was a fraction of the $1k/mo. They also realized that as part of this, they could spread out and connect to other local government buildings and businesses in as the article says "in a fiscally responsible manner". They are now working to expand out to the various neighborhoods and homes in Ammon. Normally, this would be the beginning of a municipal ISP but Ammon took a different route. Instead of being the ISP, Ammon chose to be a "last-mile" fiber utility which then sources out the actual ISP function to any ISP that wants to hook up to their network and provide internet access. The ISPs pay Ammon a network maintenance fee and pay for their internet infrastructure. This dramatically reduces the barrier to entry for ISPs in the area, they no longer have to build a VERY costly local network before becoming an ISP. The city recouped their costs in 3yrs and is now operating in the black, as they expand to additional homes. As a result of the success, they have already had several new ISPs sign up to offer service, providing real competition for customers in a market that is void of competition. Now if they had stopped here, they would have basically reproduced the British Telco model, where most home users have a minimum of 6 ISPs to choose from. They took it one step further creating a portal to make it easy for users to change ISPs. No more retentions, no more hassle, a couple of clicks and your are done. If your ISP sucks and isn't providing what they claimed, you go onto the cities fiber website, open your account and click subscribe for a different ISP, and within minutes you are now officially a subscriber of that other ISP.
Quite simply, this is the true competition that the internet needs. If this were in place in most cities, net-neutrality discussion would be unnecessary, prevention of data caps would be unnecessary, the inherent competitions would stop any of these abusive tactics right in their tracks. Of course, you will see Comcast et al. fight this idea tooth-and-nail if it catches on, including their paid for senators and appointees like Pai at the FCC. They love their lack of competition and try to hide behind some pro-corporate republican and democrat senators to maintain said monoploy.
Link to the story:
http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/06/what-if-switching-fiber-isps-was-as-easy-as-clicking-a-mouse/