Verge: The Internet is fucked

Status
Not open for further replies.

GK86

Homeland Security Fail
Link to the whole article.

And after months of declining Netflix performance on Comcast’s network, the two companies announced a new “paid peering” arrangement on Sunday, which will see Netflix pay Comcast for better access to its customers, a capitulation Netflix has been trying to avoid for years. Paid peering arrangements are common among the network companies that connect the backbones of the internet, but consumer companies like Netflix have traditionally remained out of the fray — and since there’s no oversight or transparency into the terms of the deal, it’s impossible to know what kind of precedent it sets. Broadband industry insiders insist loudly that the deal is just business as usual, while outside observers are full of concerns about the loss of competition and the increasing power of consolidated network companies. Either way, it’s clear that Netflix has decided to take matters — and costs — into its own hands, instead of relying on rational policy to create an effective and fair marketplace.

THE INTERNET IS A UTILITY, JUST LIKE WATER AND ELECTRICITY

Go ahead, say it out loud. The internet is a utility.

There, you’ve just skipped past a quarter century of regulatory corruption and lawsuits that still rage to this day and arrived directly at the obvious conclusion. Internet access isn’t a luxury or a choice if you live and participate in the modern economy, it’s a requirement. Have you ever been in an office when the internet goes down? It’s like recess. My friend Paul Miller lived without the internet for a year and I’m still not entirely sure he’s recovered from the experience. The internet isn’t an adjunct to real life; it’s not another place. You don’t do things "on the internet," you just do things. The network is interwoven into every moment of our lives, and we should treat it that way.

Yet the corporations that control internet access insist that they’re providing specialized services that are somehow different than water, power, and telephones. They point to crazy bullshit you don’t want or need like free email addresses and web hosting solutions and goofy personalized search screens as evidence that they’re actually providing "information" services instead of the more highly-regulated "telecommunications" services. "Common carrier rules are basically free speech," says the Free Press’ Aaron. "We have all these protections for what happens over landline phones that we’re not extending to data, even though all these people under 25 mostly communicate in data."

THERE IS ZERO COMPETITION FOR INTERNET ACCESS

None. Zero. Nothing. It is a wasteland. You are standing in the desert and the only thing that grows is higher prices.

70 percent of American households have but one or two choices for high-speed internet access: cable broadband from a cable provider or DSL from a telephone provider. And since DSL isn’t nearly as fast as cable, and the cable companies are aggressive in bundling TV and internet packages together, it’s really only one choice. And that means the level of innovation from these providers has almost completely stagnated, even as prices have gone up.

Why are cellphones so much cooler now than they were in 2000? Because Apple and Google and Samsung all had to fight it out and make better products in order to survive. They’re competing. Comcast hasn’t had to fight anything, at any time. It is fat and lazy and wants nothing more than to get fatter and lazier. That’s why Comcast is spending $45 billion on Time Warner Cable instead of integrating Netflix into its cable boxes and working with Apple and Google and Microsoft on the real next generation of TV: when you’re the only real choice in 19 of America’s 20 biggest markets, you get to move real slow and still make a lot of money. It's not clear Comcast even knows what real competition looks like.

...

What happens in countries where there’s real competition? In the UK, where incumbent provider BT is required to allow competitors to use its wired broadband network, home internet service prices are as low as £2.50 a month, or just over $4. In South Korea, where wireless giants SK Telecom and LG Uplus are locked in a fierce technology battle, customers have access to the fastest mobile networks in the world — up to 300Mbps, compared to a theoretical max of 80Mbps on Verizon that’s actually more like 15 or 20mbps in the real world.

American politicians love to stand on the edges of important problems by insisting that the market will find a solution. And that’s mostly right; we don’t need the government meddling in places where smart companies can create their own answers. But you can’t depend on the market to do anything when the market doesn’t exist. "We can either have competition, which would solve a lot of these problems, or we can have regulation," says Aaron. ‘What Comcast is trying is to have neither." It’s insanity, and we keep lying to ourselves about it. It’s time to start thinking about ways to actually do something.

THE FCC IS WEAK AND INEFFECTIVE

The Federal Communications Commission is ostensibly in charge of managing broadband deployment and regulating companies like AT&T and Comcast, but it’s shown no actual ability to do so in a focused and effective way — and when it tries, it does so in such a half-assed way that it gets smacked around in court and loses.

...

The FCC also sat in the back seat when AT&T tried to buy T-Mobile, has remained virtually silent about the rumored linkup between Sprint and T-Mobile, and has offered little public comment about the Comcast / Time Warner deal — instead letting the Department of Justice take the lead in opposing these obviously anticompetitive mergers. The FCC’s stunning lack of presence and leadership during these watershed moments in communications history is an extraordinary failure for an agency that is officially tasked with protecting the consumer interest.

The FCC "doesn’t seem to have the confidence to stop a merger," says Columbia’s Wu. New FCC chairman Tom Wheeler has "to be willing to take the heat," if he’s going to get involved, says Aaron. "If you’re going to take this job, you have to lead," he says. "The whole reason we have an independent agency is to shield it from Congress."

So there’s the entire problem, expressed in four simple ideas: the internet is a utility, there is zero meaningful competition to provide that utility to Americans, all internet providers should be treated equally, and the FCC is doing a miserably ineffective job. The United States should lead the world in broadband deployment and speeds: we should have the lowest prices, the best service, and the most competition. We should have the freest speech and the loudest voices, the best debate and the soundest policy. We are home to the most innovative technology companies in the world, and we should have the broadband networks to match.

If you want to write/call:

Email: Tom.Wheeler@FCC.Gov
Phone: 1-888-225-5322 (press 1, then 5 to connect to agent)
 
(In America)

Seriously, most of the world doesn't live there.

It's pretty naive to think these things won't have ramifications internationally. One of the two major ISPs here in Belgium was bought by the American Liberty Global some time back to give you a random example. ISPs are multinational companies often further entangled in the telecom and/or entertainment industry and so on. It's a market that's almost impossible to penetrate without substantial amounts of money so rather than new initiatives being started, further mergers (again, across borders) are probably more likely to happen, compounding the problem.
 
This is true, but also it has many design flaws that get covered up because "internet is awesome." The internet was never open and it will never be and these problems will always persist in the system as it has been built. But also the US will never lead, not because of tech or regulation but because it's simply less population dense and it costs more to do anything, specifically, quickly iterate. It should be treated like a utility because communication is important but even that isn't a solution to the problem.
 
I'll read the article later when I have the time but recently moved and signed up for Comcast at my new address.

Told them when I signed up that I had my own modem and router and only needed them to flip the switch and thus wouldn't need to rent one from them.
Long story short, I had to call 5 times (once per month) to have them remove the modem fee from my account.

Each time I calmly explained the situation, asked them to remove it from my bill, and update their records so I didn't have to call them again.

This took five times. This all to get their shitty service at the price/rate they advertised.

Great company though.
 
Why would a former cable and wireless industry lobbyist who is now head of FCC do anything about the internet?

We are fucked.
 
My current internet speeds from the only broadband provider in my city:

437496684.png


I can't stream shit right now until they fix whatever the issue in the area is. I would pay double for Fios or anything else if I had the option.
 
It's pretty naive to think these things won't have ramifications internationally. One of the two major ISPs here in Belgium was bought by the American Liberty Global some time back to give you a random example. ISPs are multinational companies often further entangled in the telecom and/or entertainment industry and so on. It's a market that's almost impossible to penetrate without substantial amounts of money so rather than new initiatives being started, further mergers (again, across borders) are probably more likely to happen, compounding the problem.

It bugs me that the title of the article is so broad and inflammatory when it's really only talking about America.

I've been using the Internet since the early 90's and the performance has steadily gone up while the price to access it has consistently gone down. I can't really complain about that.

I think the Comcast/Time Warner merger would be bad for consumers and Americans should stand up against it.
 
Complaining to Tom Wheeler won't make one bit of difference. He was an industry shill before becoming chairman of the FCC. The very fact that he was allowed to become chairman is a joke.

EDIT: Beaten
 
Overly pessimistic take on things.

The internet is a fundamentally uncontrollable force, and as technology progresses, will only become moreso.

What are the cable companies going to do about a wireless mesh network that covers 90% of the earth's land surface? Because that is where we are headed eventually. Eventually the internet will find a way to route around the last mile providers unless they stop being stubborn and actually provide a competitive service. Some actual competition would speed things along and keep the cable co's from dicking consumers around during the interim, but in the long run bandwidth is going to become so cheap that there is really nothing they can do to hold back the tide.
 
Oh look, The Verge actually wrote an article that's about tech for a change. I'd rather them review all Apple products then what they are doing now with general/entertainment news.
 
My current internet speeds from the only broadband provider in my city:

437496684.png


I can't stream shit right now until they fix whatever the issue in the area is. I would pay double for Fios or anything else if I had the option.

Wow, that is just terrible.
 
Overly pessimistic take on things.

The internet is a fundamentally uncontrollable force, and as technology progresses, will only become moreso.

What are the cable companies going to do about a wireless mesh network that covers 90% of the earth's land surface? Because that is where we are headed eventually. Eventually the internet will find a way to route around the last mile providers unless they stop being stubborn and actually provide a competitive service. Some actual competition would speed things along and keep the cable co's from dicking consumers around during the interim, but in the long run bandwidth is going to become so cheap that there is really nothing they can do to hold back the tide.


Lobby against the ability for american citizens to have access to it, or gain access to it and throttle access to it.

Or buy it.

There are a lot of things they can do to retard the process for as long as possible. By the time we get that worldwide wireless feed in the way that is currently proposed, we'll probably be dead

My current internet speeds from the only broadband provider in my city:

437496684.png


I can't stream shit right now until they fix whatever the issue in the area is. I would pay double for Fios or anything else if I had the option.

I would flip so much shit.
 
This.

My wife on the phone for 40 minutes yesterday trying to GIVE Time Warner money.

Took four different people to get through to a person who could arrange a guy to come out and set up our cable.

Had similar problems when i lived in my first apartment. Only one provider and they were horrible to deal with.

Now i have the choice between three and if i want to upgrade my bandwidth speeds (if they upgrade the speeds for contracts) i just call them up, tell them i want to upgrade, pay a 10€ fee and have the new speeds in an instand.

I will never in my life move somewhere, if i can´t get internet from them or a company just as good. In my mind, internet is in the same class as electricity and running water.
 
Lobby against the ability for american citizens to have access to it, or gain access to it and throttle access to it.

Or buy it.

There are a lot of things they can do to retard the process for as long as possible. By the time we get that worldwide wireless feed in the way that is currently proposed, we'll probably be dead
.

Isn't it illegal in like 17 states for the community to set up their own internet services, in effect screwing over many rural areas?
 
Why would a former cable and wireless industry lobbyist who is now head of FCC do anything about the internet?

We are fucked.

Yup. The only way to change the direction is to bribe local and state officials to undo the monopoly laws. Then bribe them to support municipal broadband.

I'm going to look into starting a SuperPAC focused on this very thing when I get some more free time.
 
My current internet speeds from the only broadband provider in my city:

437496684.png


I can't stream shit right now until they fix whatever the issue in the area is. I would pay double for Fios or anything else if I had the option.

Am I reading this right as under 1mbps? Like, less than half of 1mbps? What the fuck are you even paying for?
 
THE INTERNET IS A UTILITY, JUST LIKE WATER AND ELECTRICITY

It’s time to just end these stupid legal word games and say what we all already know: internet access is a utility. A commodity that should get better and faster and cheaper over time. Anyone who says otherwise is lying for money.
Then why does my water and electricity not get "better and faster and cheaper" over time? And how come I don't have competition for my energy bills? Oh, that's right, because there is no competition for water and electricity.

I would definitely take an internet utility that is highly regulated by the government over what we have now. But to talk about it like it is water and electricity, then complain about competition creates a contradiction.
 
They should just shut down the internet. People seemed to be a lot happier without it. At least then I won't have to worry about spoilers for everything anymore.

Internet should only be used for scientific research and streaming Netflix.
 
Then why does my water and electricity not get "better and faster and cheaper" over time? And how come I don't have competition for my energy bills? Oh, that's right, because there is no competition for water and electricity.

I would definitely take an internet utility that is highly regulated by the government over what we have now. But to talk about it like it is water and electricity, then complain about competition creates a contradiction.

http://www.competecoalition.com/about
 
The is what happens when you live in a corporate oligarchy. Politicians won't help us because they work for the companies that are screwing us over.
 
Isn't it illegal in like 17 states for the community to set up their own internet services, in effect screwing over many rural areas?

If I remember correctly, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that that law stemmed from people in Aspen CO essentially creating a citywide wifi network by posting tiny repeaters from building to building illegally, which was "cheating local businesses out of charging for the wifi they were providing" I think, in the end, it was more of a tresspassing issue than anything else but that's why that law exists.

But yeah man, and if that worldwide wireless network is hosted by a non american country? The US could bar access to it simply out of "the interests of national security".

There's an assload of things lobbyists could do to keep the issue of broadband miserable for the foreseeable future
 

Well, I'll be damned. I was always under the impression ComEd was all we had back when I was living in Chicago. And I know I didn't get to choose who to get my electricity from here in Indiana. But I'm all about adding competition.

I still think that the internet ought to be considered national infrastructure, similar to roads, and there should be some national wifi set up so folks can have access to the internet anywhere, anytime, and pay one bill. How to pay for that? I'm open to discussion.
 
Then why does my water and electricity not get "better and faster and cheaper" over time? And how come I don't have competition for my energy bills? Oh, that's right, because there is no competition for water and electricity.

I would definitely take an internet utility that is highly regulated by the government over what we have now. But to talk about it like it is water and electricity, then complain about competition creates a contradiction.

I think the point is that what we're dealing with is a scenario that mimics Internet as a Utility (single company providing it to an area), except it's being treated as a service. Imagine if the gas company did the kind of things Comcast did?
 
Then why does my water and electricity not get "better and faster and cheaper" over time? And how come I don't have competition for my energy bills? Oh, that's right, because there is no competition for water and electricity.

I would definitely take an internet utility that is highly regulated by the government over what we have now. But to talk about it like it is water and electricity, then complain about competition creates a contradiction.

There's competition in my area. I can pick from like 2-3 water and electric providers in my area.
 
My current internet speeds from the only broadband provider in my city:

437496684.png


I can't stream shit right now until they fix whatever the issue in the area is. I would pay double for Fios or anything else if I had the option.

Comcast puts so much money into Philadelphia (where I'm from) that they basically own the place.

Only cable provider is Comcast. They do everything they can to prevent comptetitors from selling in the city. You can't get Verizon FiOS in the city because of this. All you can get is satellite or Comcast.

Speeds are decent but prices are not :L
 
What happened to those internet balloons or satellites that were supposed to go up and provide cheap internet to everyone? I think it was supposed to be a publicly funded endeavor, maybe I dreamt it or I'm remembering wrong...but clearly someone needs to step up and challenge these companies
 
I don't know. This argument is blowing very close to the 'teh Internet is a human right'. Businesses owe people nothing. They are service providers. ISP's function on fulfilling a want, NOT A NEED. People can function in society without being online. They really can.

I want to participate in the modern economy. I do participate in the modern economy. I enjoy the Internet. I like having a Fast Speed, which I appreciate I am lucky to have. I pay for this service, and if my provider makes faults or I am unhappy with the service, I complain or withdraw.

But make no mistake - equating it to heating, water and gas, semantically what people equate Utilities to be (regardless of how the reality is), is a dangerous game. My family would cope just fine at home with no Internet. I'm 31. Society was just fine before it, and it will be fine with whatever comes after.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom