Message from @athene
Discord ID: 455836347056259072
thats my point
because they are expesive and public nusances
how are ISPs not already a public nuisance?
name a single ISP who's customer service is steller
none, because they don't need to be
they are, your talking about making them bigger nuisances without any payoff
A competing company can't even worry about expense if they can't even explore the option due to regulation
you install a new large storm-drain like pipe line once, then get a lot of space to had lots of new lines for a while, any that is a nuisance?
these pipes which could be used to put power lines in so that you don't lose power every time a tree falls or a drunk driver takes out a light pole
yeah customer service may increase by 10% now that theres 3 competing isps and not just 2 but then you also have a 30% increase in infastructural problems which will effect the overall service of all 3 that rely on that infastructure
you realize that stormdrain either falls on the ips or the taxpayer right?
idk, how much more does it cost to maintain a concrete pipe in the ground over time verse the always falling over telephone poles?
how much does it cost to built it?
were talking about building a 5-10 foot tall wall underground that runs beside every road in the united states
basicly probably costs as much as the road does
That is never going to happen---cost prohibitive
over who knows how many years. idk, if i have the money, i seems like it might be worth while building it in a city or two and then letting other isps rent space in it for cheaper than the current cost to get on a pole.
maintenance would start to pay for itself
make money off my competition
if i lose the war for the actually internet piece, i still make money off the pipe
I don't know for all EU but things unraveled here like this: companies built their infrastructure then lease it to other companies... if you are internet operator you compete for costumers all over but you pay the lease for infrastructure to some .... Speed is unaffected since they are under "lease agreement)
the alternitive is what were doing right now creating ever complex systems of cables ontop of artifical trees or under the ground with the added problem of it being easier to forget where they are underground because they arnt inside the extremely expensive pipe your preposing
and all of thise expense falls onto either the tax payer or the isp
And whoever is going to do that will need to get the local community's permission to do so...pay an annual fee to the government, etc. in other words they are given a monopoly on that. 😉
local government doesn't even approve it to start with, i mean why would they? whatever company is the current ISP can just pay the town not to
the monopoly exists simply because its hard to do this and anyone who trys eventually gets eated up by the larger isps and their cables become comcast's cables
consumers wants competition
"hey, don't undo this regulation and i'll pay you uhhhh.... late fees for missed dues, yeah"
even if the right of way cost is exorberent, its still preventing more taxation on the united states infastructure
because keeping that infrastructure funded by only the government has been working out real well.
actually it sounds like its funded by isps taking up pole realistate
though taxepayer money probably does eventually go into that
fuck, i wish they would privatize roads here just so that there would be real roads, rather than the state government raiding the transportation funds to pay some ex governor 100k a year in pension for retiring at 50
@Arch-Fiend i wasn't talking about just the internet infrastructure, otherwise your comment on "preventing more taxation on the united states infrastructure" would make no sense
"its taxing the infrastructure....by building new and better ones.... yeah..."
also who owns poles is really random and different from place to place
your suggesting a pole for every isp?
we once looked like this https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4066/4329783566_8e1420ea07.jpg
it would probably end up being easier and cheaper to start going the underground route at some point
there is several different ways to solve this problem but the government is not one of them
Underground tends to work better in many areas (I know in FLorida it would be better as it would minimize damages and speed up recovery after hurricanes. That is unless you are in a low lying area that is prone to flooding...in which case your underground wiring/cable/electric will get fried when you have alot of rain/hurricanes/storm surges