Telco Fiber Deployment Failures
Comments criticize US telcos for pocketing government subsidies without deploying fiber broadband infrastructure, lobbying against competitors like Google Fiber, and maintaining regional monopolies, often referencing historical events like the 1996 Telecom Act and AT&T breakup.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
man, can you imagine if we had payed some telcos money to drop fiber that they never did?
Good explainer vid: https://youtu.be/CIEQPwf9MHYtldr: one town in the US did it and it became an economic miracle, big telcos noticed and have set up lobbying and advertising infra to ensure it never happens.
No, but that was due to the '96 telecom act. They wanted it to be able to get into long distance, but that backfired. As soon as others started making meaningful inroads in deploying DSL, they were crushed. Essentially the cat was let out of the bag, but it did cost tax payers billions in subsidies for fiber to the home that never happened and the 'duopoly' of cable and DSL.
This seems like part of the problem: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/09/att-comcast-fail-.... Good old American telephone and telegraph.
IIRC some have, much to the ire of local telcos.
Thanks, good point about telcos.
because at&t doesn't feel like upgrading equipment. too much effort. in general they made a strategic decision to invest mainly in wireless. you can also throw into mix words like "absence of government regulation" and "regional monopoly".
Telco was no better when there were a bunch of baby bells
Is this not what the government did to the telephone companies providing internet services, which subsequently caused them to stop investing in their infrastructure, thus resulting in the current market situation, where only cable companies provide broadband?
Blame the telcos and their bad infrastructure.