Hacker News Reader

Comment by mikece | Hacker News Reader

Netflix seems to be hedging their bets by partnering with T-Mobile, the company aiming to bring 5G wireless to the US. As for Alphabet, I'm submitting this comment via my 1Gbps synchronous Google Fiber internet connection. Google seems to have stalled rollout of Fiber, however.

View on HN

My understanding of Google Fiber is that they ran into to many headaches from existing telecom companies while trying to expand their fiber infrastructure. Instead of continuing to fight such an uphill battle they are trying to make a wireless approach work.

I haven't heard much recently from their more standard wireless attempts (other than Loom being used in Puerto Rico) but they did invest (jointly with Fidelity) $1 billion into SpaceX. The assumption is the SpaceX investments are specifically to support the SpaceX Starlink constellation which if successful could bring wireless internet to pretty much all of the planet.

Every little town in America is a battleground of government blessed monopolies for physical access. Trying to do a large rollout for Google Fiber probably turned into a bigger hassle than they expected.

Would be nice if there was a nationwide building code for cities which stipulates fiber optic to the premises with absolute minimum connection speeds of 1Gbps synchronous and ideally 10Gbps. Completely unrealistic but I can dream.

That news is so frustrating to hear:

1) It would help break up local ISP monopolies. Yes, internet is a bit of a natural monopoly, but if we can't have NN then lets start breaking ground for new fiber,

2) Google will need to lobby for changes in local regulations that prohibit local ISPs... which helps the local ISP startup market.

> 2) Google will need to lobby for changes in local regulations that prohibit local ISPs... which helps the local ISP startup market.

Google won't do that because of its political ties. To open up local ISP competition, you need to get rid of things like build-out requirements, loosen permitting requirements, reduce the ways people can stall installation of Fiber huts for NIMBY reasons, etc. Google will happily push for waivers of those requirements (as it did in every Fiber city), but cannot politically justify lobbying to eliminate those requirements for everyone else.

That sounds exactly backwards. Google argued for net neutrality because they said it benefits everyone, not just them. And it does benefit everyone. Google doesn't have to justify things politically. At the same time, Google doesn't always do everything it can in the public interest, it sometimes does things that primarily benefit itself.

Net neutrality is something that Google can reconcile with its other political affiliations. The stuff that's required to reduce barriers to broadband deployment at the state and local level is not. Take build out requirements for example (the idea that ISPs should be forced to build service to areas where people can't afford to subscribe to it). Google can't lobby to get rid of build-out requirements generally, even though it would massively help broadband deployment. It's a meat-and-potatoes Democratic issue at the state and local level. So instead of lobbying to get rid of them, it simply sought waivers of those requirements in every Fiber city. (And even then, it got pilloried for it: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/alex-salkever-/is-google-fibe...).

Yes they're also hedging their bets by getting distribution via Xfinity - I can watch Netflix through my Comcast cable box. This essentially reduces them to a "channel" ala HBO (albeit a deep channel).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com