Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Last mile (Score 1) 113

My worry with that is that there's a big disparity in who gets it, as new construction tends to go to the upper-middle class and rich (at least in most of the US). In my previous state (Pennsylvania) the fiber really only went to the expensive neighborhoods; from a business sense I understand -- regular neighborhoods would be less likely to care about those packages, but it still leaves a bad taste. If the gov't is running something, it ought to be inclusive.

Of course what you say would be a good part of the ongoing solution, making sure the city doesn't need to spend nearly as much after the initial push.

Comment Re:Last mile (Score 1) 113

Mind if you share where you live, or other places with the same model? I'd love to be able to point to real examples.

If my state ever gets it's head out of it's rear and drops its municipal network quazi-ban, I'd love to push this in my city. We were briefly on the "possible" list for Google Fiber, but instead of waiting for a unicorn I feel like we'd do well to push it far enough on our own that it becomes cheap for any ISP to move in.

Comment Re: No kidding (Score 1) 113

Which part of the 4 sentence post is a misrepresentation? The first two sentences are verifiable facts, and with obvious math you can see that 70% are R-leaning, just like the GGP "corrected" me with. The remaining two sentences which make any kind of claim are:

(1) The pattern is that of corporate corruption of politics, which affects both parties but Republicans more.
(2) Since you have solidly blue states such as CA and WA in on this, you really can't call it just a Republican problem.

Which of those two do you disagree with?

In my other post I broke this down in a spreadsheet; if you can link a table with legislature majorities I'd be happy to incorporate it. Note that most of these regulations came prior to 2016, and 2008/2012 has a more D states and the population was split was 58% and 63%. Of course states don't need to be defined by who they voted for president, but that is the definition most people use for "red/blue" rather than governor or the current state legislature.

Comment Re:No kidding (Score 5, Interesting) 113

You know when you combine our pots, 30+70=100 and 7+17=24, so you're saying the same thing. Also, it's 23 states, not 24, because you counted Washington twice as it shows up in the report table twice.

You were implying this is somehow a Republican-only problem, which as a Californian, I can confirm that it's not. Since CA has 12% of the US population all by itself, and is D controlled at nearly every level, it's pretty disingenuous to call it merely cherry-picked. Hell in my post I even say that it's mostly a Republican problem ("affects both parties but Republicans more"). However if you must view everything through the lens of "if one party is wrong the other must be right", then I can't help you.

Besides, raw counts are dumb since 30/50 states voted R, so really we ought condition or even weight by population:
Voted D: 6/20 = 30%, 49% population-weighted
Voted R: 17/30 = 56%, 69% population-weighted

So if you are in a D state, odds are 50/50 that you have restricted municipal broadband. In R states it jumps to almost 70%. What it most definitely is not, in either case, is near zero.

Comment Re:No kidding (Score 5, Insightful) 113

p>If Republicans would stop preventing broadband competition we'd be far better off. And before anyone wants to whine about being partisan, go take a look at the places which have outlawed municipal broadband. See the pattern?

California, Colorado, Minnesota, Nevada, Washington, Virginia all voted blue in the last presidential election, and all have some form of restriction or hurdle for municipal broadband. That's about 30% of the states with such regulations. The pattern is that of corporate corruption of politics, which affects both parties but Republicans more. Since you have solidly blue states such as CA and WA in on this, you really can't call it just a Republican problem.

Comment Last mile (Score 5, Interesting) 113

My dream: local governments (or the local power company) run the "last mile" passive fiber to every home. Then any company can apply to come in and start hooking up at the switch boxes. This means new offerings like Google Fiber could hook up quickly, and the old guard can still provide competitive service if they choose to (also dragging them into a fiber-first model). No need to fret over who gets connected at the house level, because you have public oversight at that level, and not having to do the last-mile means there's less incentive to hook up only the rich neighborhoods, because all of them can be done fairly efficiently once you have backhaul. This design also keeps the government from trying to be an ISP, which they aren't really equipped for -- instead they maintain the street-level infrastructure, something they do a lot of already.

Before telecom deregulation I had a small ISP over Verizon's copper, and (for the time) it was great. The ISP of course got killed off as soon as Verizon was allowed to stop sharing the lines. A decade of stagnation followed. I'd love to see the smallest changes on the public side to make private competition viable, and a municipally owned last mile makes a lot of sense.

Comment Re:Seems like a good idea to me... (Score 4, Insightful) 307

Why would a developer build anything but the priciest luxury rentals? There is no economic incentive to build small places for small rents. There ain't no such thing as a free market for *renters*. Every advantage and price increase trick is on the side of the the property owners.

Developers will never, ever build enough units to drop rental prices. That would be stupid. They will build to keep supply high for the highest incomes, and let the lower price units dribble away into condos, which keeps rents high and induces more pricey condo contrstuction.

There is no incentive whatsoever to build cheap apartments. A decentive, really, because the neighbors will fight to the death anyone who tries to put low-income people in their Zillow Zone.

Comment One pro of e-mail (Score 1) 140

E-mail has this one thing going for it that it is standard-compliant. So you can pick and choose which client program(s) you want to use to access your messages. Many of these clients are free. And You must have a very niche platform that doesn't have some sort of e-mail client.

Slashdot Top Deals

Remember: use logout to logout.

Working...