Hacker News Reader

Comment by techsupporter | Hacker News Reader

I'm glad it worked for him but he asks the right question: How can we get this to work for other people in Washington State? I live in Seattle and have fiber optic service from CenturyLink. The gigabit is nice, but CenturyLink is running my fiber drop over a "route of convenience that, if the next door property owner ever gets snippy, will turn into a battle of lawyers. Why? Because CL won't use the utility poles in front of my house because they don't want to coordinate with the transit agency.

The whole infrastructure argument is getting absurd. KPUD can't sell to end users because Washington law prohibits it. I have service but might not someday "just because." A city in Washington that owns its own utility agency could serve but has to do it by selling bonds that require 60% voter approval. Meanwhile, everybody is left wondering what next.

View on HN

Who exactly wants those laws in your state? If the answer is "nobody", then get your neighbors together and fix the problem. And if there is somebody who wants those laws, at least you'll know who the problem is, and can start raising public awareness of who is needlessly keeping them from having better Internet.

It's a mix. Both of the incumbent providers push heavily to keep the restrictions on the books. In addition, there is a large contingent of voters who do not want the restrictions repealed because they are opposed to public operation and/or financing of a telecommunications system that can serve the general public.

Much like a lot of things, folks here are generally opposed unless or until it directly impacts them. There is a group in Seattle that is pushing for a ballot initiative with accompanying property tax levy to get the city to build an open-access last mile system. The areas of the city that already have good service, whether Comcast or CenturyLink fiber, poll at slightly under 50% support. Areas that are stuck with Wave Broadband or only CenturyLink DSL poll at well above 70%.

You originally said "CL won't use the utility poles in front of my house because they don't want to coordinate with the transit agency.". Given that those poles already exist, if CL was willing to pay for the work to string the new fiber on those poles, that shouldn't cost the city anything at all.

Coordination between two bureaucracies has non-monetary costs as well.

At the electric utility I worked at we charged bell $10 for each pole of ours they used per year

I'd agree w/that take based on my experience in the field -- key issue is finding the right person at the utility to help you w/rhe solution.

you don't even have to go that far to see it is all wrong.

for each people that is completely out of coverage, there are another 100,000 that is in a monopolistic coverage that probably had to pay for TV and other shenanigans on top of a ridiculous price just so they could get the service they wanted.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com