Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Seattle To Get Gigabit Fiber To the Home and Business

samzenpus posted about a year and a half ago | from the greased-lightning dept.

Networking 108

symbolset writes "Enthusiasm about Google's Kansas City fiber project is overwhelming. But in the Emerald City, the government doesn't want to wait. They have been stringing fiber throughout the city for years, and today announced a deal with company Gigabit Squared and the University of Washington to serve fiber to 55,000 Seattle homes and businesses with speeds up to a gigabit. The city will lease out the unused fiber, but will not have ownership in the provider nor a relationship with the end customers. The service rollout is planned to complete in 2014. It is the first of 6 planned university area network projects currently planned by Gigabit Squared."

cancel ×

108 comments

We have seen the future (3, Funny)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283709)

I for one believe in internet. The internet makes people stupid and shortsighted, which is why I never use it. My secretary and wife Laura handles all my internet usage for me. As internet usage increases, so will moronosity, advancing the day when I shall rule the world! Ha ha ah ha ha ha ahhhhahahaha!!!!

Re:We have seen the future (2)

Skapare (16644) | about a year and a half ago | (#42287235)

What the internet is doing is showing people for who and what they really are.

CIA Head: We Will Spy On Americans Through Electri (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283723)

CIA Head: We Will Spy On Americans Through Electrical Appliances

Global information surveillance grid being constructed; willing Americans embrace gadgets used to spy on them

Steve Watson | Prisonplanet.com | March 16, 2012

http://www.prisonplanet.com/cia-head-we-will-spy-on-americans-through-electrical-appliances.html [prisonplanet.com]

"CIA director David Petraeus has said that the rise of new "smart" gadgets means that Americans are effectively bugging their own homes, saving US spy agencies a job when it identifies any "persons of interest".

Speaking at a summit for In-Q-Tel, the CIA's technology investment operation, Petraeus made the comments when discussing new technologies which aim to add processors and web connections to previously 'dumb' home appliances such as fridges, ovens and lighting systems.

Wired reports the details via its Danger Room Blog[1]:

"'Transformational' is an overused word, but I do believe it properly applies to these technologies," Petraeus enthused, "particularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft."

"Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters - all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing," Petraeus said.

"the latter now going to cloud computing, in many areas greater and greater supercomputing, and, ultimately, heading to quantum computing." the CIA head added.

Petraeus also stated that such devices within the home "change our notions of secrecy".

Petraeus' comments come in the same week that one of the biggest microchip companies in the world, ARM, unveiled new processors that are designed to give practically every household appliance an internet connection[2], in order that they can be remote controlled and operate in tandem with applications.

ARM describes the concept as an "internet of things".

Where will all the information from such devices be sent and analyzed? It can be no coincidence that the NSA is currently building a monolithic heavily fortified $2 billion facility[3] deep in the Utah desert and surrounded by mountains. The facility is set to go fully live in September 2013.

"The Utah data center is the centerpiece of the Global Information Grid, a military project that will handle yottabytes of data, an amount so huge that there is no other data unit after it." reports Gizmodo.

"This center-with every listening post, spy satellite and NSA datacenter connected to it, will make the NSA the most powerful spy agency in the world."

Wired reports[4] that the incoming data is being mined by plugging into telecommunications companies' switches, essentially the same method the NSA infamously uses for warrantless wiretapping of domestic communications[5], as exposed six years ago.

Former intelligence analyst turned best selling author James Bamford, has penned a lengthy piece[6] on the NSA facility and warns "It is, in some measure, the realization of the 'total information awareness' program created during the first term of the Bush administration-an effort that was killed by Congress in 2003 after it caused an outcry over its potential for invading Americans' privacy."

----------------------

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones' Infowars.net[7], and Prisonplanet.com[8]. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.

(C) 2012 PrisonPlanet.com is a Free Speech Systems, LLC company. All rights reserved.

[1] http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/03/petraeus-tv-remote/ [wired.com]
[2] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-17345934 [bbc.co.uk]
[3] http://gizmodo.com/5893869/this-is-the-most-powerful-spy-center-in-the-world [gizmodo.com]
[4] http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/all/1 [wired.com]
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NSA_warrantless_surveillance_controversy [wikipedia.org]
[6] http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2012/03/ff_nsadatacenter/ [wired.com]
[7] http://infowars.net/ [infowars.net]
[8] http://prisonplanet.com/ [prisonplanet.com]

The people (city) paid, and the company profits? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283727)

Forced socialism for company expenses,
and cutthroat law-of-the-jungle capitalism for company profits?

Sounds American to me!

Re:The people (city) paid, and the company profits (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283957)

Democrat City, County, State.
Bingo.

speeds up to a gigabit (*) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283743)

(*) when using the most recent version of Internet Explorer; 96kbit/s otherwise

Color me unimpressed (3, Interesting)

Dyinobal (1427207) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283755)

I think it is awesome that they are trying to get fiber through out the city but 55,000 is a really really small number. From the math in the article it is going to cost them $3636.37 per residence/business they connect to the network. Any idea how that compares to google's plans in Kansas city cost wise?

Re:Color me unimpressed (3, Interesting)

Nyder (754090) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283993)

I think it is awesome that they are trying to get fiber through out the city but 55,000 is a really really small number. From the math in the article it is going to cost them $3636.37 per residence/business they connect to the network. Any idea how that compares to google's plans in Kansas city cost wise?

Seeing as I live in one of those areas, and all i can get it either crappy DSL, evil Comcast Cable, or stupid wifi thingy, I'm pretty cool with this. At least till i see what it's going to cost me monthly. I'm signed up and debating on if i should get involved to get the word out to my neighborhood to sign up to show interest.

While this may not be enough for you, it's a start.

Re:Color me unimpressed (3, Insightful)

Dyinobal (1427207) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284009)

Ya it is a start but I'm a bit dubious about the cost and such. Telecom companies are kinda notorious for taking funds that are supposed to be used to improve their networks and connect more customers and pretty much doing very little with it and giving the rest away as bonuses etc.

Re:Color me unimpressed (4, Insightful)

firex726 (1188453) | about a year and a half ago | (#42287349)

Yep, we've been paying for these upgrades since Clinton but haven't seen a damn thing really.

The upgrades are always too expensive and they don't have the money, so WTF have them been doing with all those service fees for the past couple decade?

They need to be held accountable, give us the upgrades or give us the money.

Re:Color me unimpressed (1)

TobinLathrop (551137) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284081)

I would be nice to leave comcrud but it looks like I am just shy of the coverage. I think this is awesome though. Even if I end up moving out of the area by the time it gets more coverage this really should be public utility.

Re:Color me unimpressed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42288283)

Man, you can get Comcast! So jealous! I live in the "Cable Franchise District" and my options are a 5M DLS or Broadstripe Cable :( I'm less than a mile from downtown!

(yeah, the Franchise District is so bad I'm jealous for people who can get Comcast :P )

Re:Color me unimpressed (4, Informative)

Bengie (1121981) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284119)

Google is claiming about $1500/house, which lines up with estimated costs from many other fiber companies.

Re:Color me unimpressed (3, Interesting)

timeOday (582209) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284593)

I've had Comcast (previously, @home) broadband at my current address for a little over 10 years. Figure $60/mo, that's $7,200. Obviously there will be maintainence and upstream bandwidth costs, but the numbers don't seem so out of line to me, especially with borrowing money being so cheap right now.

Re:Color me unimpressed (1)

rshimizu12 (668412) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284827)

How about or putting the civilian youth corps to help deploy fiber. We could train them and they can learn a skill.

Re:Color me unimpressed (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year and a half ago | (#42285025)

I wonder how long they expect that fibre to last? Given a useful lifespan of 50 years that would be $30/year.

Re:Color me unimpressed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42286657)

Fine. Yes. I'll pay RIGHT NOW. JUST DO IT.

Other fiber companies?
$1,500 just gets you the investigatory committee to review the oversight necessary to start the paperwork.
They've been taking their sweet time.

At least Google gets things done.

Re:Color me unimpressed (1)

Bengie (1121981) | about a year and a half ago | (#42296561)

I said "other fiber companies" because I've been following GPON since it started getting installed around here and all the "success stories" are claiming prices per house ranging from $700 to $3000 with near $1500 being the most common.

Re:Color me unimpressed (1)

mcrbids (148650) | about a year and a half ago | (#42297231)

Wow. $1,500 per house sounds expensive at first, until you compare average cost/benefits analysis. Spread out over 3 years gives you a ROI price of $41.66 per month. (If you charged $41.66 for 3 years, you'd get your money back)

Spread over 10 years is $12.50/month. Suddenly that's not so expensive, and interest rates are at all time lows. A company with AA+A+A+++ credit should be able to easily support this kind of expense with a 10 year term at 8% or less.

Investors are SCREAMING for anything "sure" more than 5% ROI, this is a pretty simple case to make.

WTF AT&T?!?!?

Re:Color me unimpressed (2)

Midnight Thunder (17205) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284261)

There will always be an initial cost, but this is usually paid back in a specied timeframe. My general expectation is that you don't break-even for two years. I also believe that captilism sometimes benefits from a government investment at the right level. In this case the government pays for the general infrastructure, but in doing so allows for competition at the ISP level. Competition prospers, users get choice, business gets to concentrate on service and in general everyone wins.

I believe in general government is good for investing in large scale projects that are deemed to risky for private enterprise, but whose benefits can be leased or licensed out to private business, once the biggest risk factor has been taken care of.

Re:Color me unimpressed (1)

godefroi (52421) | about a year and a half ago | (#42288589)

Or, you never break even, go bankrupt, and start taking cities out as you collapse:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Telecommunication_Open_Infrastructure_Agency [wikipedia.org]

That's how we did it here in Utah. Your mileage may vary.

Re:Color me unimpressed (1)

s73v3r (963317) | about a year and a half ago | (#42289865)

From what it looks like, that project started out great, but then was infected with a bunch of anti-government types who insist on the private sector at all costs, even when it's clear to everyone that the private sector has no interest in doing what needs to be done and is just going to take money to sit on their asses.

Re:Color me unimpressed (1)

lipanitech (2620815) | about a year and a half ago | (#42285869)

You think since Microsoft is based out of Washington they would want put there stamp on it and call it Microsoft Fiber just to rain on Google's recent fiber success. See these are the NEWS generating things Microsoft needs to do get themselves into the spot light not that I am a Microsoft fan but you would think someone at Microsoft could think these things.

Last mile cost (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42289321)

Typical last mile infrastructure is normally rated at something lik $1000 per serviceable address, so they are over cost but fiber costs more than copper, splicing is harder, and glass seems to cost more (not sure why but even for a short jumper it seems to cost more)
So your per subscriber cost isn't as crazy as your thinking it is.

Exactly as it should be (5, Insightful)

soundguy (415780) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283761)

This is perfect. All FTTH/FTTB should be tax supported "infrastructure" instead of run by thieving corporate scumbags. All fibers should terminate in a neighborhood or regional carrier-neutral "meet me" room where anyone with backbone (pun intended) could offer connectivity to any customer just by running a jumper or configuring a switch remotely. Then the customer is free to choose the flavor of thieving corporate scumbag he wants to deal with. Sign me up for a mix of Level 3 and Cogent please!

Re:Exactly as it should be (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283963)

What you would find is that the scumbags are being contracted to build/maintain such a network anyways.

Re:Exactly as it should be (4, Insightful)

organgtool (966989) | about a year and a half ago | (#42286513)

I am fine with the scumbags building and maintaining the network. The problem I have is that our government pays money to the scumbags to build and maintain the network and then allows the scumbags to hold OWNERSHIP of the network. The creation of the network should be a work-for-hire job in which the government pays a company for the materials and the process of assembling those materials into a working network. At all times, those materials and the finished network should remain property of the people just like how we own all of the other parts of our infrastructure. Then our local governments can contract out the maintenance of the network equipment to the company that built the network or other competent companies. If the performance of the company serving the maintenance contract is not up to the satisfaction of the people they serve, then their local government can choose another company after the current contract expires. This system would save us from the current system of regulated monopolies that everyone rightfully hates.

Re:Exactly as it should be (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284127)

Cogent, really? Oversubscribed.

Re:Exactly as it should be (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284599)

Cheap bandwidth is cheap bandwidth.

But the cogent issues is probably why he wants a mix with Level 3 too.

Re:Exactly as it should be (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284195)

Before you jump for joy for tax financed fiber you should look at how good UTOPIA fiber is doing in Utah. It's a complete disaster mainly because of the garbage pricing plan.

From TFA: "HOW MUCH WILL GIGABIT SEATTLE COST? Our rates are yet to be finalized..."

If their pricing plans work out like UTOPIA ($3,000 to install plus $70 a month) I suspect this will have a similar fate. Not everyone can afford that much initial cost and lots of tax dollars will be required to keep it afloat.

Re:Exactly as it should be (1)

s73v3r (963317) | about a year and a half ago | (#42289891)

To counter you, I would look at Chattanooga, TN.

Just because your project was infected with anti-government types wanting to sabotage it doesn't mean all of them will be.

Re:Exactly as it should be (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284271)

Bravo. The Internet is too important to be left to the corporados, and it's worse if they are also content providers. I live in a state of NY university town. Supposedly, Verizon struck a deal with SUNY to give preferential FIOS treatment to cities with state universities. Didn't happen. Never will, apparently. So, we are stuck with slow Verizon DSL or middling Time Warner cable service. Neither is very good. Both are expensive. There is -NO- effective competition.

Re:Exactly as it should be (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284367)

tax supported? Wait, we have more important uses for tax money! Like, fighting wars everywhere bringing democracy to people who never want it, will hate us for it, and then giving aid to countries that want all internet censored anyway.

Re:Exactly as it should be (1)

godefroi (52421) | about a year and a half ago | (#42288629)

Yes, we'll have it be OWNED by thieving government scumbags, and merely OPERATED by thieving corporate scumbags. Sounds like a brilliant plan!

The people (city) paid, and the company profits? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283767)

So the company gets shitloads of money on what is basically a government-supported

Forced socialism for company expenses,
and cutthroat law-of-the-jungle capitalism for company profits?

Sounds American to me!

Re:The people (city) paid, and the company profits (1)

nebular (76369) | about a year and a half ago | (#42286159)

The municipality still owns the fibre. They lease it out. So the city should be making money off the infrastructure and the company will be making money off the individual subscribers.

Also a city is far more likely to allow for much longer term profitability than a corporation is. This will allow them to roll out the fibre to places that a corporation would ignore.

Re:The people (city) paid, and the company profits (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42297379)

The state of internet in Seattle has been embarrassing enough that I think people would more or less give away the capacity to have access to more than a 1.5mbps uncapped connection that is the max in some parts of the city. Although, that might have changed in the last year with all the CenturyLink upgrades.

Latency though, is a different matter and none of the options offer acceptable latency.

Fuck them (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283775)

Fucking latte sipping communists.

Oh and Linux sucks donkey dicks.

Good (4, Insightful)

epp_b (944299) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283787)

I hope this trend spreads so that the incumbent telcos are left only with the choice to either make good on their 200 billion dollar "promise" or go screw themselves.

Finally (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283791)

Seattle threatened the local ISPs to do this sort of thing about 8 years ago, nice to see that they're finally putting some of that dark fiber to use.

It's just a shame that I live slightly outside that area. OTOH, one of my friends lives in the area, so maybe I can mooch internet from him.

Re:Finally (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284059)

Seattle threatened the local ISPs to do this sort of thing about 8 years ago, nice to see that they're finally putting some of that dark fiber to use.

I find your lack of faith in the dark fiber disturbing.

Just say no (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283795)

Please stop using Linux! It's a piece of shit OS that is highly insecure and only contains applications written by basement-dwelling neckbeards that steal other people's IP. Please support SCO in shutting down this case of rampant and viral IP thievery in order to support the US economy's recovery.

Cost to end user? (2)

patella.whack (2630677) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283797)

As a former Seattlite, I applaud the city's efforts, and I wonder what this will mean with respect to cost for the end user and competition in the market:
" The city will lease out the unused fiber, but will not have ownership in the provider nor a relationship with the end customers"

Can there be multiple lessees along particular routes, or is the whole thing likely to be gobbled up by Comcast or FIOS?

Re:Cost to end user? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284799)

This really should have happened years ago. Centurylink is already upgrading their bandwidth speed in the area. Sure, I'm not going to complain about them going above and pressuring for fiber, but this would have made a much bigger impact several years ago.

Communism? (2, Funny)

manu0601 (2221348) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283827)

Enthusiasm? But isn't that kind of public intervention an horrible communist-like threat to free market?

Oh, wait, ISP have not yet started their media campaign against the project

Re:Communism? (1)

fsterman (519061) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283903)

I'm ready for them!

Re:Communism? (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about a year and a half ago | (#42298261)

When I posted the above comment, this story had no comment and I was in hope for a first post. Oddly, my comment disapeared after I posted it, and the story remained with no comment. Then it came back after other posted.

Is there a set of keywords that cause a comment to be spared for review before getting displayed?

First... (2)

broginator (1955750) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283839)

First they get legalized weed, now this? I really gotta move.

Re:First... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284149)

Legalized, or decriminalized? (legitimate question from a foreigner here) Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought it was just decriminalized - meaning it's not a crime that will send you to jail or go on your permanent criminal history or anything, but it's still illegal and you can still be fined and have your pot confiscated?

Legalized would mean people could sell it in the supermarkets - likely with restrictions like cigarettes and alcohol.

If pot has been legalized in Seattle, I would do like five double takes! That's a decatake!

Re:First... (1)

arsemonkey (1970712) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284227)

As I understand it, possession here of up to an ounce is now legal. So is consumption. Selling the stuff is not...quite yet. :)

Re:First... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284239)

It will be sold in licensed stores like alcohol. Up to one ounce of plant material, 1 lbs of edibles, and 72 oz of liquids. The details are being ironed out right now by the state government, it will also be taxed which is something you can do with just decriminalization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Initiative_502

Little more background

Re:First... (2)

TheLink (130905) | about a year and a half ago | (#42285083)

Maybe the fibre will be paid for by legalized and taxed weed.

meanwhile in Boston... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283841)

...Comcast and Verizon fight it out with 1 megabit per year increases for the next 1000 years.

This proves it (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283845)

Yeah, Seattle is the best place to live. You all wish you lived here. Suckers.

Re:This proves it (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283917)

I've tried Seattle's best coffee, and I'm not impressed.

ds (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283873)

first

About time (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283881)

Can't wait for this to happen across the country.

Fastest Pipe Around (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283885)

I'm in Kansas City hence the reason I was able to be fp.

Private sector would be more efficient. (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283889)

Be prepared to pay double or triple what you should for this. This would be more efficiently handled by the private sector in a competitive environment. There is no reason tax dollars need to go to subsidize this when it has been proven time and time again that government involvement translates into higher prices, more screwups, and more debt for us all.

Re:Private sector would be more efficient. (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283987)

Be prepared to pay double or triple what you should for this. This would be more efficiently handled by the private sector in a competitive environment. There is no reason tax dollars need to go to subsidize this when it has been proven time and time again that government involvement translates into higher prices, more screwups, and more debt for us all.

yeah, look how efficiently comcast, time warner, verizon et al are rolling out the gigabit fiber.

Re:Private sector would be more efficient. (3, Interesting)

Tumbleweed (3706) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284025)

Too bad you don't know what you're talking about. Except for the two dozen or so buildings serviced by CondoInternet.net, that area of Seattle has the worst ISP services in the metro area. Very bizarre since so many startups are located around there. If the private sector was up to doing this, it would've already happened long ago.

Re:Private sector would be more efficient. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284431)

that is pure bull..... Private sektor won't build it in the first place, and the one who is running the service will be competitive. Do you believe the authoroties shouldn't build streets and roads as well?

Where I live, I have fiber in to my livingroom, and 100 Mb internet is 200 SEK, equivalent to 30 $ a month. I think that is a competitive price for a good service.

Re:Private sector would be more efficient. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284551)

Sigh. Competition isn't that great for infrastructure. It's debatable and variable how effeceint government can be. In any event, building 3 infrastructures to do the same thing is very ineffeceint.

Re:Private sector would be more efficient. (1)

s73v3r (963317) | about a year and a half ago | (#42290091)

Except there is absolutely nothing to back up your statement, and the fact of the matter is, the private sector has REFUSED to provide this service.

Seriously, how the fuck can you say the private sector would be "cheaper and more efficient" if they won't do it at all?

Re:Private sector would be more efficient. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42294773)

> the private sector has REFUSED to provide this service.

In many places the private sector is not allowed to do so. You forget that we're talking about the Democrat-ruled city of Seattle. They're very anti-business and will not allow competition. For example, Time-Warner has fought for years to provide service to the neighborhood where I live. The city blocked them by requiring so many scam "environment studies," aka bribes, that they couldn't afford to offer service. Also, the city has blocked Verizon FiOS from selling. Several of my coworkers have FiOS in the areas surrounding Seattle that are a little less anti-business, but the city does not allow Verizon to sell here. Hell, in my neighborhood the city won't allow Comcast to upgrade the TV service to provide for more homes. I live in the middle of a damn city, but cable TV is not available and obviously neither is cable Internet. My only choice for wired Internet is DSL with CenturyLink.

Not Comcastic! (4, Interesting)

fsterman (519061) | about a year and a half ago | (#42283897)

YES!!! I have been suffering under the Comcast/Century Link (aka Qwest) for 7 years. Minimal competition means that they only have to maximize profits.

I love this city: our utilities are clean and environmentally friendly because of a great administration. Although the public transit system isn't as nice as NYC, we are fixing that too.

Re:Not Comcastic! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284143)

... Although the public transit system isn't as nice as NYC, we are fixing that too.

We are?

Re:Not Comcastic! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284269)

I hope he doesn't mean ending the free-ridership zone downtown...or the viaduct's replacement...or 520...the emerald is only half green, but with 420 legal, we'll see a boon for government spending in the coming years...shit i am highhhh

Re:Not Comcastic! (1)

Nyder (754090) | about a year and a half ago | (#42285089)

I hope he doesn't mean ending the free-ridership zone downtown...

I'm going to point out that the main part, that is, the business part of downtown Seattle is barely a mile long and about 6 blocks wide. And the free bus ride was pretty much only for that area (it was a little bigger). So if you used the free bus ride a lot, pay up, or stop being lazy.

I'm also going to point out the people that will miss the free bus ride the most are the people who would get on the bus with no money and expect a free ride when it got out of the downtown area. So if that is you, HAHA!!!

Re:Not Comcastic! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284363)

Orca is a HUGE improvement over the old pay system. The free ride "zone" should have been replaced by designated free ride buses, but, long-term, underground light rail is where it's at. It takes a long time, too bad we didn't start in the 1970's when the government offered to help pay for it.

A troll complains about the 520 and the viaduct project below, again, you can't just keep building more roads!

Re:Not Comcastic! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284731)

I have never had a bad experience with Cox Business Cable, which is ubiquitous where I live.

Re:Not Comcastic! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42287227)

Please make a wise decision and move back to the great NY.

Re:Not Comcastic! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42294527)

Another CenturyLink victim here. Comcast is at capacity on my block and has been for years so I've been on the waiting list for nearly six years. My DSL connection is only 696kbps up so it is painful. I had a faster Internet connection ten years ago when I lived in South Carolina. Internet access in Seattle is a disaster because of the anti-business city government that prevents competition. Also, the anti-business green laws prevent competition. My HOA looked into building our own network, but the environmental study would have cost more than the fiber and equipment.

Going to be a downer here.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42283985)

But after all the laws and regulations pass on whats legal and illegal on the internet, all thag bandwidth will be wasted.

Going to save myself the time to write "how" but if youre well informed I think you understand.

Ah crap, analogy came to mind...

56kbps connections could get the job done for what the internet will become if we keep allowing it to be regulated.

This is what Bonds are for. (1)

F34nor (321515) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284169)

Organize your neighborhood then city and pass a bond you can then defer the cost of capital investment over 30 years. Amazing communism plus capitalism defeating unregulated oligarchies in the free market.

don't count yer fibers just yet (2)

smoothnorman (1670542) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284325)

i've been sitting in seattle, well, since forever... and this is at least the third try at this. comcast the evil monopoly that holds seattle in its death-grip will try everything that was successful at shutting this down and then-some before letting this through. they will start with "incentives" (building computer labs in the schools for example), then move to bribes (there's a hot mayor race coming up. watch if one candidate suddenly gets a zillion in outside funding. "but that's illegal!!" yeah... right), then legal threats like suing for restraint of trade (which have turned the trick before). they may also get federal, using a bribed federal regulatory agency to shut down the endeavor. so as much as i'd love to see this, and might even directly benefit, this ain't going to go down smoothly. this is a fairly fidgety "David" against an massively monetized Goliath.

Re:don't count yer fibers just yet (1)

Nyder (754090) | about a year and a half ago | (#42285101)

i've been sitting in seattle, well, since forever... and this is at least the third try at this. comcast the evil monopoly that holds seattle in its death-grip will try everything that was successful at shutting this down and then-some before letting this through. they will start with "incentives" (building computer labs in the schools for example), then move to bribes (there's a hot mayor race coming up. watch if one candidate suddenly gets a zillion in outside funding. "but that's illegal!!" yeah... right), then legal threats like suing for restraint of trade (which have turned the trick before). they may also get federal, using a bribed federal regulatory agency to shut down the endeavor. so as much as i'd love to see this, and might even directly benefit, this ain't going to go down smoothly. this is a fairly fidgety "David" against an massively monetized Goliath.

You do know that comcast only covers parts of Seattle, right? I part of where i live, Capital Hill and Beacon Hill don't have Comcast, they have a different cable provider. I tried to find a map of what Comcast covers, but that seems impossible. I did find a map of Fiber Optics in Washtington, from last year and you can see a big void in Seattle:
http://www.uptun.org/2011/08/29/fiber-optic-coverage-in-seattle/ [uptun.org]

Seems to me that Comcast should have no say. They had their chance and they didn't do anything.

Re:don't count yer fibers just yet (1)

TemporalBeing (803363) | about a year and a half ago | (#42289503)

Not saying its right, but Comcast, the other Cable Providers, AT&T, Verizon, etc. will probably all join together in suit to shut it down. They've done it before to other municipalities, even where residents paid to have the fibre optic line installed and split between their homes the telecoms industry has suited and gotten judges to shut it down. Its sad, but true.

Re:don't count yer fibers just yet (1)

doktor-hladnjak (650513) | about a year and a half ago | (#42296713)

The map you're looking for is here [seattle.gov] . If I remember correctly, yellow is Millenium/Broadstripe/Wave, everything else is Comcast. In shaded areas of the Comcast section, Millenium can wire individual apartment or condo buildings. For example, I live in a Comcast area of Capitol Hill but we only have Millenium in my building, most likely because they offered either the building management or the builder an incentive (e.g., wired the building for cable for free in exchange for a multiyear contract).

Every time somebody complains about their Comcast internet in Seattle, I want to smack them upside the head. Try living in an area or building that only has Millenium/Broadstrap/Wave for cable service. I dream of going back to Comcast after dealing with CenturyLink's reliable and cheap but extremely slow (usually 35Kb up, 2-3Mb down) DSL. Millenium is a non-starter with their higher prices and shitty service.

Give us MORE!!!! (3, Funny)

Dutchmaan (442553) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284449)

First legal weed and now this!!! Damn Seattle is becoming a greater place to live!

And what's new with getting Gigabit? (1)

Z00L00K (682162) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284487)

I was offered that several months ago. But the downside is the monthly cost.

ok so you pay twice (2)

Osgeld (1900440) | about a year and a half ago | (#42284541)

you paid for the city government to lay dark fiber for years, then they are handing it off to a private company who will gouge you to flicker lights at the ends of it?

yes I know there is more to it than flickering lights, but I also know the ISP is not going to provide this service for operating cost + small percentage, they will run with it, charge as much as every other fiber service and you footed the bill for their infrastructure, that is "on lease" at a deep discount for might as well be life.

Re:ok so you pay twice (1)

Nyder (754090) | about a year and a half ago | (#42285103)

you paid for the city government to lay dark fiber for years, then they are handing it off to a private company who will gouge you to flicker lights at the ends of it?

yes I know there is more to it than flickering lights, but I also know the ISP is not going to provide this service for operating cost + small percentage, they will run with it, charge as much as every other fiber service and you footed the bill for their infrastructure, that is "on lease" at a deep discount for might as well be life.

So what is your solution? We use dial up modems?

Re:ok so you pay twice (1)

Osgeld (1900440) | about a year and a half ago | (#42297351)

quit having government meddle with private network projects? or have them start an ISP for the taxpayers that funded the monorail to nowhere project?

Re:ok so you pay twice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42286439)

Why is it always wrong for an ISP to be a business and make money!? People should be more bent out of shape about the price of gas.

Government solutions kill innovation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284635)

If this had been a good idea, then there'd be no need for the government to get involved. Individuals having free choice would have spent this money in a way that better fits their individual needs, most likely stimulating more decentralized, less censorship-prone means of delivering a high-speed connection. Even though there are private companies involved, this is nonetheless socialism (fascism). Once government is involved, restrictions (ex. "Net Neutrality") are sure to follow and spread. Trading freedom for useless extra bandwidth (that like 99% of people don't need) is never a good thing.

--libman

Re:Government solutions kill innovation (1)

Nyder (754090) | about a year and a half ago | (#42285107)

If this had been a good idea, then there'd be no need for the government to get involved. Individuals having free choice would have spent this money in a way that better fits their individual needs, most likely stimulating more decentralized, less censorship-prone means of delivering a high-speed connection. Even though there are private companies involved, this is nonetheless socialism (fascism). Once government is involved, restrictions (ex. "Net Neutrality") are sure to follow and spread. Trading freedom for useless extra bandwidth (that like 99% of people don't need) is never a good thing.

--libman

Okay Comcast shill.

Re:Government solutions kill innovation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42286901)

Hey dumbass - Comcast operates through local government-granted monopolies too. A genuinely free market in Internet interconnectivity would be their worst nightmare!

--libman

Re:Government solutions kill innovation (1)

suutar (1860506) | about a year and a half ago | (#42289521)

yep, the government should never have arranged for you to get electricity, sewer lines, telephone, roads, or any of the other widespread physical networks that it makes sense for everyone to have one of but not so much sense for there to be three of.

Re:Government solutions kill innovation (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42295149)

Study free market economics, as well as the specific engineering subjects relating to issues like: transportation [wikipedia.org] , power grid decentralization, wireless telecommunications, etc.

All alleged "natural monopolies" are self-fulfilling prophecies. When you solve a problem with a gun, which is what government ultimately rests on, you miss the opportunity to solve this problem with the mind, through voluntary persuasion and technological innovation, which can lead to better economic outcomes by several orders of magnitude. You can justify "lesser evil" violence during our barbaric past, but government monopolies become ever less legitimate as technology moves forward.

Economic choices that carry the greatest value to the stakeholder are those made on an individual level - or through voluntarily established groups, like: building contracts, neighborhood associations, charter cities, etc. Government homogenization of Internet access choices is the most unnecessary of the examples you've provided, and especially not on such a large scale.

A voluntary community holding a democratic vote on sewage management plans for their neighborhood (since it requires a uniform decision, as per the charter they've all signed on to when moving in) is freedom. Seattle's central planners deciding what kind of Internet its serfs can surf through is tyranny.

--libman

If only. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284657)

Ticks me off continually that I still can't even get wired broadband in NY state, 10 miles outside of a college town, one mile off a major state road. Last time we asked, they told us we should get together with our neighbors to raise 30,000 dollars and then they'd do it.
Not even DSL. Hell, Caller ID doesn't even work. It's pretty thoroughly ridiculous.
We use the awful wireless broadband devices from carriers. 5gb limits. Pretty much banned from engaging in culture that way. If you disagree, try it.
And anybody who tells me to move, I'd slap you upside the head, if you said it to my face. Not everybody can move when they want to. We certainly can't.

Re:If only. (1)

anasciiman (528060) | about a year and a half ago | (#42286507)

I feel your pain, dude-san. I'm on Sprint's lousy network. 12gb/month where the speed is slower than dialup most of the time.

FiR5t (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42284993)

Lihte is straining they are Come on A relatively of the founders of

WALLSTREET 2.0 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42285605)

Now if you can just get the markets to move their HFT machines to Oregon, you could have PINESTREET and trade in CARBON CREDITS, maybe a branch of the Federal Reserve, you could print money, lots of it!

Although it won't fix any of our problems, it will only make them worse, but not much worse then the shit fags in DC are doing.

Finally government almost gets it right. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42285609)

There's a reason it is unconstitutional for government to compete directly with private enterprise, but providing common infrastructure for use by all is compatible with the mission of government.

What they ought to be doing is leasing CAPACITY on the unused fiber to any company who wants to be an ISP. Then, there can be real competition and real choice for consumers. To lease all of the capacity to one company might run afoul of equal protection, since it is basically giving a company an unfair advantage over others.

But, a step in the right direction.

I live in a Gigabit-enabled City (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42286421)

I live in Chattanooga, TN, a city supplied with gigabit-speed fiber internet provided by EPB, our power provider. While gigabit speeds are available, they start at $300/mo for residential areas, and it was just revealed that businesses must pay a rate of $9,000/mo if they intend on using it for anything data-intensive. So, the option is there, but it's not cheap.

On the plus side, their offering of 100mbps internet is affordable, extremely reliable, and probably overkill for most of what I do. Comcast can't touch it.

Is this deployment comparable to Chattanooga, TN? (1)

schnook (561498) | about a year and a half ago | (#42286743)

I would also like to know how this compares with the deployment costs and deployment methods used by EPB in Chattanooga, TN for their Gigabit network. http://chattanoogagig.com/ [chattanoogagig.com] . I had a 100MB synchronous connection in TN for the same price I pay Comcast for a 20Mb down/ 364kb up link in Seattle area.

Re:Is this deployment comparable to Chattanooga, T (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#42288253)

According to what I've read in the local paper, the total investment for EPB is going to be around 500 million for their buildout, though that's including their Smartgrid infrastructure as well.

Actually, from what I've read, they realized they were doing everything they'd need to run an ISP to do the SmartGrid, said hey, let's not waste the labor, and got into the ISP business. Comcast and AT&T freaked out, went to court, failed, went to the legislature and got a law that served them, but left EPB to keep doing what they're doing.

Now Comcast is paying the local paper to shill for them against EPB, but they can't deliver the speeds.

who is using gigabit? (1)

mapkinase (958129) | about a year and a half ago | (#42287351)

I wonder who of normal users needs gigabit speeds?

Are there any usage caps in this cyberhighway paradise?

Re:who is using gigabit? (1)

suutar (1860506) | about a year and a half ago | (#42289575)

depends. Define 'normal'. Remember home businesses, telecommuters, folks who watch a lot of netflix streaming, folks who use dropbox et al for offsite backup of substantial amounts of data, and business ideas that are infeasible right now but could be possible given widespread high bandwidth (3-d hi-def video phone!)
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...