B4RN Launch Event Presentation, 2012 (with CEO Barry Forde)
00:27 What is the problem?
02:35 Does it matter?
03:46 VIDEO Cabinet Office: Director of Digital Engagement
05:03 VIDEO Google Fibre Kansas City project
07:07 Community Initiative
08:07 It needn't be complicated
09:37 Cost (laying and connecting the cable)
10:46 Community Involvement
14:25 Skills (laying and connecting the cable)
15:56 How? (laying and connecting the cable)
17:36 VIDEO Mole Ploughing (JFDIT)
18:36 Numbers (parishes, routes, distances)
20:43 Phase 1 Map
12:12 Broadband for the Rural North Ltd
22:31 Building it
25:05 Membership (Mutual Society)
26:34 Funding the build out
27:35 Type "A" shares
28:04 Type "B" shares
28:40 Enterprise Initiative Scheme (EIS)
30:01 Holding Shares 1
31:14 Holding Shares 2
31:48 Holding Shares 3
32:38 Incentives to Invest
This is followed by the inevitable buy out of these rural telcos and the even more inevitable shuttering of what (for AT&T) was unprofitable business.
Wu, T. (2010). The master switch: the rise and fall of information empires (pp. 48-49). New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
And how do you explain the lack of fiber in Baltimore and Los Angeles? Those cities have been aggressively trying to get someone to build municipal fiber. No state laws are standing in the way. Still, nobody will do it.
All of that work has to be paid for and most large cities have other pressing budget needs. There's a movement in Seattle to get municipal broadband done in Seattle but it is slow-moving because, again, money.
(Nothing in Washington State law prohibits a city from running its own Internet/cable/phone system. The RCW that a lot of people, falsely, quote as banning muni broadband in WA only applies to public utility districts. Tacoma has its own municipal system, called Click!, that seems to be well-received.)
Because SF is notoriously corrupt. The city government doesn't give a shit about the citizenry; it's all a question of who can do whom favors and help in their next election.
// sf resident
I'm sorry, but Google isn't going to slip someone envelopes full of money. Here's a starter, if you want to read more: http://www.sfexaminer.com/new-details-political-corruption-c...
The problem may be the way the laws get enacted. What might be considered very corrupt in one country is just how business is done in the USA.
The definition of corruption is not dependent upon legal status. The wikipedia article on "Corruption" has an entire (and rather long) section that is entitled "Legal corruption".
They literally lobby to make the laws.
I get that you are talking about other corrupt phenomena, but we need a different word than bribery because I've run into way too many people who think our corruption problem comes from bribery.
We also need a better way for elected officials to be able to tap into citizen expertise rather than just the slice of it which is sponsored by a rent-seeking profit motive.
Full 183 page opinion: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-205.pdf
These things are not mutually exclusive, particularly when the corruption has resulted in changes to the law.
She now has up-to-3Mbps/1Mbps via a WiMax antenna on the roof, pointed at another antenna on the water tower of the nearest "town" a few miles away. For this, she pays $65/month.
It's expensive, but it's her only option. If she lived just a few miles in another direction, she could get these awesome DSL prices (from her ISP's website):
"Extreme Package = 5 Meg bps at $84.95 per month
Premium Package = 3 Meg bps at $64.95 per month
Gold Package = 2 Meg bps at $54.95 per month
Silver Package = 1.5 Meg bps at $44.95 per month
Bronze Package = 512 Kbps at $27.95 per month"
At the phone poles there are large devices (repeaters?) and I assume more equipment at the nearest colo.
This is all on a street that already had a lot of infrastructure and easy access. I haven't seen a single run through people's backyards in a hilly, densely populated neighborhood. It's going to be difficult.
I'm in awe of what this woman and others like her have done.
Fiber networks don't use repeaters out in the field. It may have been a (large) splice enclosure or some non-fiber equipment.
I have to pay Comcast for TV when I just want internet, that'd be bad enough but my parents pay 2x more for 20x slower connection (5mb/100b).
Kinda inspired me to talk to some of my neighbors and ask if they'd like to share internet.
Backbone providers don't have to give you access, but they will sell to you, provided there is a way to connect you.
Backbone providers sell you IP transit, which is a very competitive market in well connected locations. The problem is to get to those well connected locations. You often pay far more (like 10x) for the transport to that location than for the actual IP transit.
The difficulty level goes up if you want to run copper, coax, or fiber, but it too can be done. Just google "community broadband", "municipal broadband", or "broadband coop".
Technically, the main difference is that the 100mbit symmetric line is fully provisioned, and so you can actually use all 100mbit of it on a continuous basis. This will quickly get you in trouble with a residential provider. There's also the issue that this is symmetrical, and the way that ISP networks are engineered the upstream is usually actually more expensive to provide (mostly because they use a lot of underlying technologies and equipment that are designed for asymmetric service), and the issue that this service will probably come with fixed IPs that will be SWIPd over to the customer, which is extra administrative overhead, not to mention the IPs themselves getting more expensive to hold these days. Oh, and contract terms regarding service interruptions are usually much more generous towards commercial customers.
Once you really get into the big leagues, you usually don't pay on a cap basis but instead of a 95%ile basis, where you pay a rate based on the 95th percentile of your bandwidth usage over the previous month. These rates end up being very high because you are paying for bandwidth that you actually, seriously used - unlike on a residential connection, where you might pay your ISP for 150Mbps but they expect your 95%ile usage to be more like a couple of Mbps tops (you probably aren't even using the connection at all most of the time).
This isn't really accurate. ISP networks aren't engineered to be asymmetrical and the upstream isn't any more expensive than the downstream. The only asymmetry you will see is in the access network. Anything past that will be symmetrical.
If you use fiber (which almost any 100M or faster service will be) you can have any speed you like up to multiples of 100G symmetrically delivered.
IPs aren't really that expensive either. They are like $1 a pop per month. You can buy you own for $10-20.
Service interruptions will also just get you some service credits proportional to the outage.
Mostly commercial service costs more because you can charge more.
> Once you really get into the big leagues, you usually don't pay on a cap basis but instead of a 95%ile basis, where you pay a rate based on the 95th percentile of your bandwidth usage over the previous month.
You don't really have to be big in any sense to buy bandwidth using 95th percentile billing. I've had circuits on 95th percentile starting at a 100 Mbps commit. Probably could have gotten it at a lower speed too.
However, nowadays bandwidth is so cheap it might not even be sold to you at 95th percentile. It might just be rounded up to the nearest gig.
> These rates end up being very high because you are paying for bandwidth that you actually, seriously used - unlike on a residential connection, where you might pay your ISP for 150Mbps but they expect your 95%ile usage to be more like a couple of Mbps tops (you probably aren't even using the connection at all most of the time).
This is not true (anymore). Bandwidth is dirt cheap. If you have any change in your pocket you can afford a few megs. Prices are like 20 cents a Mbps per month.
This is because it is usually more expensive to buy bandwidth directly from the local (monopoly) provider than to buy transport from the same local (monopoly) provider to a colo or an IXP and buy then buy IP transit bandwidth at the remote site.
This is regardless of whether you require a buildout to get last mile service or not. You need not buy bandwidth to get business fiber extended to your premises. Buying transport to a colo or an IXP will suffice.
They also run the DSL (3mb on a good day) the long way to where I live by running the opposite direction and putting me at the end of the line (2.5 miles+/-) when they have another line that passes the corner of our property but turns the other direction at the corner and won't tie me into that. (1/2 mile).
Trying to decide if we should just wait for Elon Musk or go back to current satellite tech.
Plus 50% extra ISP monopoly pricing.
It's not very hard if you do it on private property, but the difficulty level does go up if you have to use public right of way due to red tape.
They run a wifi (ubiquiti based) mesh network in a rural part of France, which spans roughly 100km north to south and 60km west to east.
They are about to roll out their own fiber network in this rural area.
If some of you are interested in these subjects, there will be a decentralised internet devroom at FOSDEM in Brussels in early February
One local for dense, suburban areas or maybe urban. Helps to run the fiber on the utility poles instead of underground. More risk with weather, etc but cheaper.
That's all nice, but what if local governments and businesses start counteracting the project with bureaucratic rules, and lawsuits? It seems to me that the "JFDI" mantra doesn't really work then.