IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Privatization of Federal powers?, What precisely does the gov't do?
hyzmarca
post Jan 1 2008, 03:16 AM
Post #26


Midnight Toker
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,686
Joined: 4-July 04
From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop
Member No.: 6,456



I find that those companies that own the lines provide substantially better service than those companies which simply have access to the lines and do so at substantially less cost. In the case of phone service, independent local providers charge three times as much as the local big telecom, don't provide any special features, and it literally takes up to two weeks for them to fix any problem while the big telecom usually fixes them within hours. In the case of internet access, independent providers also charge three times as much for slower service and always oversell their lines so that no one actually gets what they paid for, while the big telecoms have enough bandwidth to actually let people with unlimited plans at a set rate have throughput at that rate 24/7 without making complaints about oxymoronic crap like "abusive usage" and without throttling P2P protocols.

In my experience, there just isn't any point to the independents, though I will admit that the laughable competition that they provide might be a precipitating factor in the absurdly great service provided by local phone companies. I imagine internet telephony has more to do with it, however.

QUOTE (Kyoto Kid)
...actually there are fewer "full service" (non discount) Majors in the US than there were before Deregulation.

My analogy was mistaken, then. Its more like a 9-guy gangbang without any coordination. They're trying in vain to triple-penetrate the vagina when there are two open nostrils which are being ignored.

In other words, everyone is focusing on the busiest routes and while they're all piling onto these routes others are getting ignored. The result is absurdly low prices on the major routes and high rates if you're going to or coming from anyplace with a population less than a million. Previously, all of their actions were co-ordinated such that no routes were under-serviced or over-serviced. The current problem is redundancy, it is just a different sort of redundancy.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Jan 1 2008, 03:30 AM
Post #27


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



Part of it is also just bad management. For example, I saw Eastern Airlines Mechanics strikes used as the example of "I'll see you in Hell" negotiating strategies in a business negotiations book. There was so much distrust and bad blood that the mechanics preffered to kill the company rather then compromise. Delta is another, it used to be the best airline to work at, with great labor-management relations. It's now about the worst for both.

But I feel it does take some special skill to not make money when almost every flight you fly is full.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Jan 1 2008, 04:29 AM
Post #28


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,013
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



QUOTE (hyzmarca)
In the case of internet access, independent providers also charge three times as much for slower service and always oversell their lines so that no one actually gets what they paid for, while the big telecoms have enough bandwidth to actually let people with unlimited plans at a set rate have throughput at that rate 24/7 without making complaints about oxymoronic crap like "abusive usage" and without throttling P2P protocols.

A short list of selected US providers I'm aware of, their relation to the network and the last mile, and their practices, whether beneficial or baneful to the internet at large:

Comcast: last mile owner. Actively forges packets to disrupt customer communications, engages in disconnections based on undeclared transfer limits. Prohibits servers in standard TOS.

Verizon: tier 1 ISP, last mile owner. Engages in disconnections based on undeclared transfer limits. Prohibits servers in standard TOS.

AT&T: tier 1 ISP, last mile owner. Appear not to be doing anything wrong (within this specific and very limited domain).

They're a mixed bag, but aside from that ISP in Canada (which may be "Big Telecom" in Canada, I'm not too up on Canadian telecommunications) that IIRC started rewriting incoming HTML to add advertisements, I don't think I've heard of a more user-hostile provider than Comcast. The only independent provider I'm familiar with is Speakeasy, but from my experience and knowledge the only accusation that holds true for them is that they're comparatively expensive.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hyzmarca
post Jan 1 2008, 04:47 AM
Post #29


Midnight Toker
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,686
Joined: 4-July 04
From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop
Member No.: 6,456



My experience is with Windstream, a Tier 2 network that serves the parts of the South where it isn't terribly unusual for men to knock up their own daughters. Despite being the only game in a decidedly one-horse town, they have perfect service with no restrictions other than an one-year lock in for people who get the free modem/router.

And Comcast is just run by a bunch of jackasses from what I understand of it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Jan 1 2008, 05:21 AM
Post #30


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
AT&T: tier 1 ISP, last mile owner. Appear not to be doing anything wrong (within this specific and very limited domain).

ATT is really several companies glued together under the same banner.

It's really SBC with a name change and the ATT ISP biz added. Tier 1 providers don't mess with their customers traffic, but their customers pay well for the bandwidth and it's supposed to be provisioned so they never drop packets inside the SLA except in bizarro situations. If you have an ATT DSL it's typically really an SBC line, which is grossly oversubscribed, as are all DSL providers. That's why it's $30 a month instead of $1200 for the T1 to ATT or another Tier1. (Actually it's been a while since I priced a T1 from a Tier1, but I think thats about right.)

Oversubscribed DSL/cable carriers have three possible answers to congestion caused by PtP traffic: Kick offenders, QoS traffic or charge more per moth to pay for more bandwidth upstream.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Jan 1 2008, 05:25 AM
Post #31


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,013
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



Actually, they have two options: the two you mentioned that are not "kick offenders".

I guess "stop advertising unlimited transfer and hope they stay afloat long enough for most of their customers to have come in under the new advertised service" is also a possibility. Making use of what you were told you would get when you paid for it doesn't make you any kind of "offender".

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Jan 1 2008, 05:32 AM
Post #32


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



Well, yeah. The comcast lameness that they won't provide the actual level where they start getting annoyed with you is kind of stupid.

But it's essentially an example of the "Tragedy of the Commons."
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hyzmarca
post Jan 1 2008, 05:55 AM
Post #33


Midnight Toker
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,686
Joined: 4-July 04
From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop
Member No.: 6,456



They could also lay down enough wire to fully meet demand without raising prices, a much more reasonable solution.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
kzt
post Jan 1 2008, 06:32 AM
Post #34


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,537
Joined: 27-August 06
From: Albuquerque NM
Member No.: 9,234



We found that students could essentially use up all the bandwidth we would throw at them. After trying several cycles of upgrading the pipe we gave up at 1.5Gb/sec (I1 & I2 combined). So we greatly limit the students bandwidth for PtP during the day and somewhat less at night.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Jan 1 2008, 06:51 AM
Post #35


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,013
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802



QUOTE (kzt)
Well, yeah. The comcast lameness that they won't provide the actual level where they start getting annoyed with you is kind of stupid.

But it's essentially an example of the "Tragedy of the Commons."

Sorta, but in the opposite way I think you're seeing. As long as Comcast (or other ISPs who engage in the practice) don't get successfully sued for false advertising, they can continue advertising unlimited transfer—which, make no mistake, is exactly what they advertise (or advertised at some time in the past, I haven't looked recently). The cost is that when someone tries to actually take them up on that by maxing out their bandwidth for a sustained period of time, they make someone upset by giving them the boot. Since very few people actually use that kind of transfer (even today! Basically heavy BitTorrent users or extremely heavy traditional filesharers, along with a smattering of other more unusual ways to chew transfer), this is a very low cost to Comcast or the relevant ISP. Meanwhile, the market is polluted—you can't actually advertise transfer limits and hope to compete against someone advertising unlimited transfer without a substantial advantage elsewhere, but because the organization advertising unlimited transfer is lying, you don't even get to shave off the money that would have otherwise been spent on capacity.

The bad drives out the good, simple extension of Gresham's Law.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hyzmarca
post Jan 1 2008, 07:11 AM
Post #36


Midnight Toker
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 7,686
Joined: 4-July 04
From: Zombie Drop Bear Santa's Workshop
Member No.: 6,456



QUOTE (kzt @ Jan 1 2008, 01:32 AM)
We found that students could essentially use up all the bandwidth we would throw at them.  After trying several cycles of upgrading the pipe we gave up at 1.5Gb/sec (I1 & I2 combined).  So we greatly limit the students bandwidth for PtP during the day and somewhat less at night.

Providing throughput for a college (?) is substantially different from providing throughput from a home. Unless the figure your given is per student, I'd imagine that all of that throughput was divided between anywhere from 200 to 20,000 students, depending on the size of the school, students who are, by their very nature, money poor, time rich, and tech savy. They'll certainly tax the network far more than any home user possibly could.

But consider that 1.5Gb/s Fiber To The Home is standard in Korea and Japan. That's 1.5Gb/s per household. North American networks are pitiful in comparison.

To bring this back to the original topic, the problem is that building infrastructure costs money, which some people may not be willing to put out. In the very long term, a monopolist corporation will profit from extensive infrastructure building in the areas which it controls. When free market forces dominate decisions, a corporation may not be able to lay out huge amounts of capital for profits which it won't see for decades, if it survives that long, which is where the government usually comes in to provide incentives. Of course, freedom from market forces doesn't guarantee infrastructure building or long-term planning, either. Corporations can easily be stupid or short-sighted.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Snow_Fox
post Jan 1 2008, 04:22 PM
Post #37


Prime Runner
*******

Group: Members
Posts: 3,577
Joined: 26-February 02
From: Gwynedd Valley PA
Member No.: 1,221



To touch on something no one has, local governments control the streets. Think that's not a big deal? Heck think of the affect of shoppers trying to go to your mall/archology if the street in front of it is a construction zone and maybe we, the town, haven't really got a shcedule to when this will be fixed and I know we're half blocking the street with out bulldozer that's been parked there for 3 days but we'll get round to it and...what's that? Oh, you'd like to make a contribuiton to the mayor's re-election//education/homless fund? ....


QUOTE (kzt @ Dec 31 2007, 10:30 PM)
Part of it is also just bad management.  For example, I saw Eastern Airlines Mechanics strikes used as the example of "I'll see you in Hell" negotiating strategies in a business negotiations book.  There was so much distrust and bad blood that the mechanics preffered to kill the company rather then compromise.  Delta is another, it used to be the best airline to work at, with great labor-management relations.  It's now about the worst for both.


sounds like US Air, the workers at the Philly hub pulled those strikesevery now and again, like on Thanksgiving thinking 'we'll show managemnent" but all they do is trash the airline. Seeing how they act I won't risk flying with that airline-just in case.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nezumi
post Jan 2 2008, 04:54 PM
Post #38


Incertum est quo loco te mors expectet;
*********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 6,548
Joined: 24-October 03
From: DeeCee, U.S.
Member No.: 5,760



The airlines example is a mixed example. The truth is, taking a company and turning it from basically running like a government (fixed, near-guaranteed income) to cut-throat competition. I guarantee, if the government office I work in suddenly had to compete with private industry, we would crash and burn. I notice that while some of the big, older companies seem to be struggling, newer companies like Southwest seem to be doing very, very well, even after 9/11.

Also worth noting, at one point in the US fire protection was a subscription service. You pay the fire department, they stick something on your house. If you have a fire, they put it out. If you don't have the sticker, they just control the fire to keep it from spreading to neighbors (which is safer anyway).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 3rd December 2025 - 07:23 AM

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.