Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

>Small, local competition for ISPs do not make sense over the long term.

I would love a Glass-Steagall for the telecom industry – long haul and last mile not allowed by the same company. ISPs must peer at local exchanges. Add municipal ownership of the last mile fiber with ISPs leasing capacity to individual residences (allowing you to choose one of many) and the world seems ideal.

I'm lucky enough / chose my home such that I am served by a local ISP which is hooked up to a local exchange. It's great. The biggest bottleneck is usually WiFi, and after that peering. Having the last mile not be the weakest link is great.




So now the "middle mile" ISP is completely undifferentiated and basically owns one router with some ports connected to the local exchange and some ports connected to the municipal last mile... Why bother? Why not just nationalize the whole thing?


The "middle mile" provides customer service, does advertising, installation, bundled services over IP (voice, TV, etc.), negotiates competitive rates and speeds; does things like colocating Netflix on their network to reduce peering costs. Their business is bridging the gap between customers and long-haul network operators.

It's basically enforced separation of the wholesale and retail markets. The roads that get you to brick and mortar stores are publicly owned, why not the last mile of fiber? Vertical integration is good for some markets, but markets where your customer is captive because you own the lines outside their house, vertical integration is terrible.


>Why not just nationalize the whole thing?


Because the government only drives innovation when it's in competition with other governments (wars mostly). Give it a basic service to manage and it tends to do the shittiest acceptable job possible.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: