×

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!

Unanimous: Provo Utah Council Approves Google Fiber

Unknown Lamer posted 1 year,12 hours | from the where-did-the-fiber-go dept.

Networking 130

symbolset writes "In a unanimous vote the Provo Municipal Council has agreed to a plan to sell the city's troubled iProvo fiber Internet network to Google. Although this makes Provo, Utah the third city to embrace Google's ambitious gigabit fiber to the home plan the existing network will allow the residents of Provo to see faster installation than the others. Google had previously announced plans to proceed immediately on approval." They city handed the network over for $1, but there are hidden costs, from the article: "Provo taxpayers will still have to pay off a $39 million bond that the city originally issued to build the network. With interest, taxpayers still have to pay $3.3 million in bond payments per year for the next 12 years. ... The city will have to pay about $722,000 for equipment in order to continue using the gigabit service for government operations ... The city also has to pay about $500,000 to a civil engineering firm to determine exactly where the fiber optic cables are buried ... Google will lease the network to Provo city for free for 15 years."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

130 comments

http://www.linuxadvocates.com/p/support.html (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537815)

Dear Linux Advocate,

Money doesn't grow on trees. And, Linux Advocates is growing. Naturally, we anticipate operating costs and hope to be able to meet them.

But, any amount you feel you are able to donate in support of our ongoing work will be most surely appreciated and put to very good use. Your contributions keep Linux Advocates growing.

Show your support by making a donation today.

Thank you.

Dieter T. Schmitz
Linux Advocates, Owner

http://www.linuxadvocates.com/p/support.html [linuxadvocates.com]

Google Fiber (5, Funny)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537821)

Because it takes a special company to provide 'family size' bandwidth in Utah!

Re:Google Fiber (4, Funny)

MickyTheIdiot (1032226) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537877)

I don't get it. Aren't they too godly to watch porn in Utah?

Re:Google Fiber (5, Interesting)

elsmob (751783) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537901)

I don't get it. Aren't they too godly to watch porn in Utah?

Funny you should point that out, UT has one of the higher consumption (viewed) of porn.

Re:Google Fiber (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538147)

Not funny at all, it just makes sense. Much of the Middle East has the same behavioural property. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6592123.stm

People like to have sex, oppressive social obligations or otherwise.

Re:Google Fiber (1, Flamebait)

Reverand Dave (1959652) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538249)

That's because the more openly repressed you are, the more twisted your closeted desires become.

Re:Google Fiber (0)

snadrus (930168) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538385)

And occasionally dangerous/deadly the frustrations between them become.
I'd rather live in a society where all weird is celebrated. Repression's a pressure cooker.

Re:Google Fiber (3, Informative)

i kan reed (749298) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538699)

Pressure cookers have gotten a bad rap from terrorists, but I'll be damned if you can't get delicious food out of them.

Re:Google Fiber (2, Funny)

larry bagina (561269) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538711)

Case in point: one of the Boston marathon bombers was upset because his wife wouldn't fist his asshole. The other was upset he couldn't get a girl to shit on his face.

Re:Google Fiber (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538493)

Hmmm...citation?

Re:Google Fiber (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537923)

Utah is one of the larger consumers per capita in the US.

Re:Google Fiber (0)

HornWumpus (783565) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538873)

On direct TV and dish. Which are somewhat anon at least within their neighborhoods.

Alternative explanations exist.

But no Mormon prosecutor will ever make the mistake of giving the defense license to get these facts on the record again. That _had_ to sting.

Re:Google Fiber (1)

slazzy (864185) | 1 year,9 hours | (#43539603)

I used to work at a hosting company and maintain servers for a large adult company, including building reports about their customers... If you think they watch a lot of porn in Utah, you should see how many customers come from the Vatican...

Should have been the University of Utah (1)

elsmob (751783) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537839)

Living in the metro SLC area, it makes more sense to have Google Fiber at the University of Utah. And, there is no way in hell I would move to Provo. Hopefully the fiber will spread.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (4, Informative)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537979)

Because Provo already built out large portions of a fiber optic network. That's where the $39million bond comes from. However, they were having trouble administering it, and were losing a lot more money every year. What they are basically saying is, "here, take over this project for us and you can have all the profits." The city wants fast internet, and Google wants to make money providing it. Wikipedia has more info.

If you want SLC to have fiber, talk to the city council. Maybe they'll take up a bond and build it, too.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538043)

That's fucked up since the taxpayers are still footing the bill.

Why didn't they sell it to google for exactly what the current bond fees were?

Google gets all the profit and only pays a token amount to purchase it?

Why not sell it to me for a dollar? Or for that matter to another commercial entity, who at least might actually be a little less evil?

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (4, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538135)

Why didn't they sell it to google for exactly what the current bond fees were?

Because then Google wouldn't have taken the deal. To the city, it was like this: they were losing something like $1million every year on the project, it was an albatross around the neck. Now Google says, "Hey, we'll get rid of that $1million loss for you and give you what you wanted in the first place."

Now, the city might have been able to get a better deal, that's what negotiation is about. But in the end, everyone is better off. Everyone is getting what they wanted. Which is how good business works.

Why not sell it to me for a dollar? Or for that matter to another commercial entity, who at least might actually be a little less evil?

Do you really think other telecom companies would be less evil? Really?

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538357)

Do you really think other telecom companies would be less evil? Really?

I can tell you one that actually would be. It's called XMission. You've probably used their mirrors before.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538743)

Plus they're local to the area.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (4, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539079)

I can tell you one that actually would be. It's called XMission. You've probably used their mirrors before.

XMission is a competitor that wanted to buy the iProvo system but lost to Google. My guess is they lost because the city trusted Google to be more competent with the project, since they'd been hurt by small contractors before (why exactly do they have to pay $500k to find out where the wires are?).

Here is what the XMission guy said about this:

""Even though Google is promising a number of upgrades to iProvo....Those upgrades will be paid for by subscriber fees, and Google will make a profit. They wouldn't be doing this otherwise, nor would I."

What about that sounds less evil to you? It sounds exactly the same, to me, potentially worse.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539295)

You should check out XMission's policies.
I've been reading complaints here for years about all these awful things your ISPs do to you: caps, rate hikes, throttling, injecting ads, blocking BT, etc.
I always congratulate myself that I chose XMission back when there were dozens of dialup options.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538431)

That is why the community should own the wires or they should be regulated as a utility. Then access can be leased to competing ISPs.

The UTOPIA project pioneered the model (though they also showed a lot of early mismanagement), but it is now being proven by other communities across the country.

http://www.utopianet.org/ [utopianet.org]
http://www.freeutopia.org/ [freeutopia.org]

Again proving government management = mismanagemen (2)

raymorris (2726007) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538989)

The UTOPIA project pioneered the model (though they also showed a lot of early mismanagement)

That mismanagement wasn't coincidental. Government is designed to make and enforce rules. It's not designed launch and run tech companies. Government is supposed to be very fair, open, democratic (slow, ineffcient, slow). That's not the type of organization that does a fiber build out well.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538861)

Xmission wanted to buy it. They are a major part of the other fiber networks in Utah. I would say Xmission is less evil than the other ISPs.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (1)

hedwards (940851) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538143)

I'm guessing that the bond money was already spent and that Google wouldn't have agreed to come if they had to pay back the bond money.

Yes, it sucks for the tax payers, but at least this way they'll be getting service, even if the money itself was wasted.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (4, Insightful)

drakaan (688386) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538605)

Why does it suck for the taxpayers, though? IIRC (and if it's the same deal here), the lowest tier of pricing is $0 per month after a $30 equipment fee. Everyone in the city would get fast (presumably reliable) fiber-based internet and have an operator with a vested interest in providing good service operating it while paying basically nothing more than the original tax obligation (plus $30/household).

Sounds like a way to make sure the money *wasn't* wasted to me

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538971)

Only a moron would think this was a good deal. They city pays for the entire infrastructure and then once the bond is paid off will have to pay Google for the pleasure of using the service they the tax payer paid for!

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (2)

HereIAmJH (1319621) | 1 year,9 hours | (#43539811)

They city pays for the entire infrastructure and then once the bond is paid off will have to pay Google for the pleasure of using the service they the tax payer paid for!

That is incorrect. Only about a third of the households were covered. Without this deal the city would have to pay for the expansion to the rest, or admit defeat. Google is committing to complete the network.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (1)

Dunbal (464142) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538443)

No, the bond investors are footing the bill. The taxpayers have to pay back the money which their town gladly borrowed in their names. You have to pay back money that you borrow, this isn't like mommy and daddy. Oh and there's a price for borrowing, it's called interest. Don't want to pay interest? OK, go find someone to lend you money. Have fun.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (1)

i kan reed (749298) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538731)

Would you believe that there are parts of the world where getting interest on loans is illegal? They aren't places where I'd like to live, but finding interest free loans can be done.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (4, Interesting)

TWiTfan (2887093) | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539109)

Would you believe that there are parts of the world where getting interest on loans is illegal?

Most of the time, when countries try to pass such usury laws, creative workarounds are found (otherwise no one would lend money or be able to get a loan). Europe in the Middle Ages was a great example. Though interest was technically illegal, you could still borrow with interest from Jews and certain Church organizations like the famous Templars (of course, this ultimately led to very bad backlash for both groups in the forms of pogroms, burnings, and other such unpleasantries). Usually they'll just charge you some sort of "administration fee" or "tribute" or some such shit that is basically the same as interest.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538611)

That's fucked up since the taxpayers are still footing the bill.

And they'd be footing the bill if they were simply called Customers instead.

What, you think Time Warner or Comcast or AT&T do things out of charity?

Why didn't they sell it to google for exactly what the current bond fees were?

Because Google didn't want to buy it for that price?

Google gets all the profit and only pays a token amount to purchase it?

Why not sell it to me for a dollar? Or for that matter to another commercial entity, who at least might actually be a little less evil?

I don't believe you submitted a business proposal. If somebody else has submitted a better one than Google's, then shame on the City Council of Provo Utah.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538981)

No the customer don't pay for the infrastructure elsewhere. Guess you love corporate welfare.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (2)

PhxBlue (562201) | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539037)

No the customer don't pay for the infrastructure elsewhere.

The government does, though.

Guess you love corporate welfare.

At least the folks in Provo are getting something for their money. Ask Qwest or Comcast what they're doing with the money the government gave them a decade or so ago to improve network infrastructure.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (2)

DRJlaw (946416) | 1 year,9 hours | (#43540011)

Why not sell it to me for a dollar? Or for that matter to another commercial entity, who at least might actually be a little less evil?

Do you also have the resources to operate a network that is currently running at substantial loss for the next 15 years? Because that is required by the "lease the network to Provo city for 15 years" part of the transaction.

If you have a $6000 book value car with a $4000 loan on it that requires $4000 in repairs (new engine and transmission, or whatever), you're not going to sell that car for $6000, or for $4000, but somewhere around $2000. Now tack on a requirement that whoever buys the car drive you around for 15 years because you've proven incapable of maintaining a car, and the price will rapidly drop toward $1.*

*$1 is a semi-standard "this isn't worth anything but the law says that I should pay you something to make this a binding contract" price.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (0)

ackthpt (218170) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538325)

Because Provo already built out large portions of a fiber optic network. That's where the $39million bond comes from. However, they were having trouble administering it, and were losing a lot more money every year. What they are basically saying is, "here, take over this project for us and you can have all the profits." The city wants fast internet, and Google wants to make money providing it. Wikipedia has more info.

If you want SLC to have fiber, talk to the city council. Maybe they'll take up a bond and build it, too.

Though at the end of 15 years, or long before that, the network will appear to be too slow and overburdened, because of web bloat, streaming media, tracking, MMO games and spying on everyone with cameras and the natural progression of technology.

Utopia (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538793)

If you want SLC to have fiber, talk to the city council. Maybe they'll take up a bond and build it, too.

You should convince SLC to join UTOPIA for fiber. UTOPIA wasn't eligible for Google's plan because it spans multiple cities.

Re:Utopia (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 hours | (#43540167)

I live in one of those cities and still can't get utopia.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (1, Funny)

ColdWetDog (752185) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537993)

Google: All your bits are belong to us!

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (0)

TheSync (5291) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538145)

AYB is never going to get old!!!!

I bet 10 years from now if you say "Harlem Shake" people are going to think you are talking about a street dance rather than an Internet meme.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (1)

Anastomosis (1102421) | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539347)

I agree, and I always wondered why that is, why AYB is still so memorable. I'm assuming because AYB was created in the days when memes were rare entities and thus is perhaps a prototype.
Now, well, yeah. I can't even keep track of knowyourmeme.com anymore.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,9 hours | (#43539521)

I agree, and I always wondered why that is, why AYB is still so memorable. I'm assuming because AYB was created in the days when memes were rare entities and thus is perhaps a prototype.

Exactly, AYB is pretty much the Charles Lindbergh of internet memes.

Re:Should have been the University of Utah (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539387)

Someone living in the SLC metro area would never live in Utah Valley? This is incredibly shocking!

Announcement, Utah! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537865)

Announcement:

I have just poured hot grits down my pants.

Thank you!

incompetence (5, Interesting)

dmbasso (1052166) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537883)

The city also has to pay about $500,000 to a civil engineering firm to determine exactly where the fiber optic cables are buried...

Wtf, don't they have the installation project plans in the first place? This is the kind of incompetence that really pisses me off.

Re:incompetence (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538033)

Plans aren't always what I would call EXACT. They are what they say just plans.
Plus it's a lot easier to tell your crew dig the blue line not the red line.
It sounds like a lot but if they followed the plans they would still have several boo boo's that would probably have a damage valuation of 500k.

Re:incompetence (2)

RobertLTux (260313) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538349)

plus even if you have plans accurate to the inch you have to deal with the ground shifting about. you put the cable down this line 3 years ago?? the whole line has shifted THAT WAY by 3 feet.

Remember kids the Call Before You Dig Hotline is 811 (or consult your local yellow pages for "utility locating services")

Re:incompetence (1)

jfengel (409917) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538405)

Do they do anything more than just paint where the lines are supposed to be? Do they do anything to try to locate the actual lines? (Which, in the case of fiber or those crappy plastic plumbing lines the local water company installed, I presume would involve actually digging for it.)

Re:incompetence (5, Funny)

Java Pimp (98454) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538583)

They have some pretty neat equipment for finding the utility lines. Just the other week I saw the water company come through marking the water lines. One guy with a spray can followed the other who was holding this stick with a fork in it. The pointy end always pointing at the ground.

Re:incompetence (1)

patchmaster (463431) | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539061)

Decades ago I worked during the summer for the water department. One of our jobs was to find and mark water lines. We actually did use divining rods. No stick with a fork, though. Ours were two pieces of wire, each bent to form an 'L'. You loosely hold the shorter side, keeping the longer sides parallel to the ground and initially to each other. As you pass over the water main the wires cross. It worked quite reliably as long as the water main wasn't too deep. I always assumed it had something to do with magnetism.

Re:incompetence (2)

c++0xFF (1758032) | 1 year,9 hours | (#43540047)

Decades ago I worked during the summer for the water department. One of our jobs was to find and mark water lines. We actually did use divining rods. No stick with a fork, though. Ours were two pieces of wire, each bent to form an 'L'. You loosely hold the shorter side, keeping the longer sides parallel to the ground and initially to each other. As you pass over the water main the wires cross. It worked quite reliably as long as the water main wasn't too deep. I always assumed it had something to do with magnetism.

I know someone [randi.org] who would pay quite handsomely for your services. As long as you can do this reliably, that is.

Re:incompetence (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 hours | (#43540251)

Do they do anything more than just paint where the lines are supposed to be?

That's the point. I was installing a sprinkler system and put my shovel through an unmarked gas line. I had called the gas company and they didn't locate it. I never heard a word or saw a bill, they just fixed it and moved on. I'm guessing things would of been a lot different if I didn't call.

Re:incompetence (2)

Archangel Michael (180766) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538103)

Because hiring civil engineers is more expensive than outsourcing to a firm. And with outside firm, you'll effectively verify what your internal IT people know all along. Nobody believes internal IT people for some reason, but outside consultants telling the same exact story as internal sources makes it more believable.

Yeah, we're dealing with that now. It isn't incompetence, it is people in decision making positions, knowing nothing about IT. Ignorance is not incompetence, though they often look and result in the same exact way. And I can tell you that very few people know exactly how expensive IT done right is. BTW, $700K isn't that much for equipment. About $7 per person for Networking equipment ... sounds cheap.

Re:incompetence (3, Interesting)

captbob2002 (411323) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538191)

My old boss always said "you cannot be a prophet in your own land."

I am reminded about the time the two of us were pushing for this new thing called the "World Wide Web" or some such. Administration in the college said that it was nice, but gopher does all we'll ever need.

It's called an audit (2)

sjbe (173966) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538739)

Nobody believes internal IT people for some reason, but outside consultants telling the same exact story as internal sources makes it more believable.

It's called an audit. You bring in outsiders to verify what the insiders are telling you is the truth. If I'm a third party making an investment, I'm not going to rely on the good word of the people I'm buying from when millions of dollars are at stake.

Re:incompetence (1)

kamapuaa (555446) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538113)

This is pretty common, actually. Accurately mapping the position of every bit of line or piping isn't practical in the real world.

Re:incompetence (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538975)

It is practical and at times it is vital. I am a general contractor, and any time I want to trench across a public right-of-way or dig, I have to have to have to call a free utility locating service that will mark out where the 46,000V lines or the city gas lines or the Verizon lines or the water lines or the sewer lines or anything else that that's underground. Hitting a line transporting gasoline or any elevated voltage at all with a backhoe is a very unpleasant death, and there are lots of such lines in Southern California.

I find it extraordinarily unlikely that Provo does not know where the lines were buried - they have most of the same utilities with the same consequences for hitting them. It would be criminally negligent not to have a civil involved in the first place, and all parties - city, civil and the contractor have no excuse for not having record drawings.

BTW, once you backfill, compact and patch the asphalt or concrete over a buried utility, it does not move around.

Re:incompetence (-1)

Gaelinda (2132256) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538547)

It is Utah, they probably lay the cable based on faith. God will tell them where to dig, not civil engineers.

Plans often don't match reality (4, Interesting)

sjbe (173966) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538953)

Wtf, don't they have the installation project plans in the first place? This is the kind of incompetence that really pisses me off.

Project plans frequently do not accurately document where the cable was actually placed. My father worked in engineering for AT&T for several decades planning jobs like this. He always had to go check what the plans said against what was drawn on the engineering documents. What the guys in the field do often does not match what the engineer designed. Furthermore since Google is essentially buying this cable they need to audit what they are actually buying. When you are investing millions of dollars you don't take anyone's word for it, you have someone go out and check to see that the actual infrastructure is something close to what the plans say it should be.

This is exactly the opposite of incompetence. This is exactly how a rational buyer should behave when buying an expensive asset.

Re:Plans often don't match reality (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,9 hours | (#43540049)

They paid $1.

Re:Plans often don't match reality (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 hours | (#43540201)

and are then going to expand and upgrade.

Not incompetence - avarice (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539025)

The story goes like this.

Contractor for the US government builds US government facilities to make weapon system X, and operate them for $1 a year. Contractor goes to US Congress Critter Committee and says "We need $X in a maintenance contract to keep and update the necessary records to be able to operate the facilities for the foreseeable future."
Congress Critters go NOOOOOOOOOO! "We wanna build new bridges, courthouses, federal office buildings and put our names on them - NO MONEY for records."
It is called the Manhatten Project.

Re:incompetence (5, Informative)

rahvin112 (446269) | 1 year,8 hours | (#43540283)

The only incompetence is your understanding. Out here in the real world things change in the field. That's because when the plans say install the line 1' off the sidewalk but as they start installing it they find the gas line is in that exact location they do some quick test holes and make a field change to move the wire to different spot.

This is why in civil engineering you have plans, and you have a second set of plans called As-Builts, because how it was built often has serious variations form where it actually was shown to be built. I've seen utilities on the opposite side of the street, Buried 10' deep when they are supposed to be 18 inches, I've seen them follow a relatively straight line then jog 20' off for 10' then jog right back.

See in the real world when you go to bury something you don't always know what you are going to run into. There is all kinds of stuff out there that's buried that no one knows is there and sometimes people don't even know what it is. I've stood in front of excavations staring at pipes that no one has any idea what it is, it's not on plans, city maps or even acknowledged by the dig locating service. I've also seen them run into buried rail lines, coffins and all sorts of things that would make your head spin. I've seen lines that were installed exactly as shown, but the road and homes that delineated it's location are gone because they were torn down and a shopping mall was built in their place. Real world buried utilities is very very hard and your an idiot for thinking it's easy.

Oh and $500k is CHEAP for a subsurface utility investigation on a city the size of provo.

Like they'd turn it down... (1)

crovira (10242) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43537907)

Really, Provost Utah voted to accept Google fiber.

Was there ever any doubt that they would?

Re:Like they'd turn it down... (1)

hedwards (940851) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538061)

I doubt there was, especially given that Google doesn't just choose cities at random, the cities have to put in a proposal of some sort. I'm sure technically they could have said no, but if it was unanimous, you can be pretty sure that the odds were indistinguishable from 100% that it would be accepted.

I do hope that they eventually get to Seattle as we have a crapload of fiber just sitting around and the incumbents don't seem to be particularly interesting in giving us fast speeds at any price.

Re:Like they'd turn it down... (1)

symbolset (646467) | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539235)

Can you imagine trying to run a "reelect me because I voted to turn away Google Fiber" campaign? That would be epic.

Not quite a fair deal (5, Informative)

therealobsideus (1610557) | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538011)

Not a bad deal, at least as far as Google goes. Considering what Google charges for the 7/yr 5mb service (which is just a $300 buildout fee), the city basically just covered the cost for that. Free gigabit service to 25 public institutions (schools, universities etc).. not bad. And Google is going to finish building out to homes that were not part of the original build contract. All in all, not bad. Especially if you look at iProvo's history - the city has been stuck with the bond payments the entire time, this just actually gets them something for holding that debt.

Re:Not quite a fair deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538399)

the one time cost is $30, not $300

Re:Not quite a fair deal (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,9 hours | (#43539597)

He's talking about google's standard buildout fee, which is $300 in their other 2 cities. But he's not really correct. With 32k households in the city, the $39M debt spread across that comes to $1200/houshold

Re:Not quite a fair deal (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538407)

Google is only charging a $30 build out fee for the 5Mb service in Provo, at least according to their web page. I assume it has something to do with fiber already laid.

Re:Not quite a fair deal (1)

c++0xFF (1758032) | 1 year,9 hours | (#43540089)

$30 for existing iProvo customers and $300 for new customers, if I understand right. Not a bad deal either way.

Google bailed them out. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538105)

The city is lucky, iProvo was a trainwreck in progress.

Nice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538173)

"The city also has to pay about $500,000 to a civil engineering firm to determine exactly where the fiber optic cables are buried ... "

I see. Somebody was paid to bury the cables, but couldn't be bothered to map it.

Then a different firm gets paid to find them again.

Small wonder everything still gets nailed to wooden posts.

Re:Nice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538647)

Cables, houses, rocks, etc, do move around in the ground. Also Utah is an mountain area right next to a lake. Crap is going to 'move'. My parents front yard in a midwest state? The crap is probably exactly where the builder put it 50 years ago. Other places where it is sandy or prone to earth movement. Not so much.

Did you know houses move around too? They are usually built like a 'boat' in the dirt.

Hell another company may have come thru and put lines over it... 3-5 year old plans. They give you a good starting place and will be 90% accurate. But it is that 10%...

The 1 dollar cost though. If I were a home owner in the area I think I would be rather ticked. They could have at least got a couple mil...

Re:Nice! (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538859)

What are you bitching about? Free Internet service for 15 years, and free completion of the failing and overbudget project that you were paying for. Now you just have to pay down the costs committed to already, not the growing behemoth and continued maintenance costs for the next 15 years.

Re:Nice! (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,9 hours | (#43539809)

They are in effect paying 1700 dollars a month per building for internet. Kind of high for internet access. I know I could buy from a incumbent telco some bad ass internet for that. Esp if I had already built it.

My point is they could have negotiated a better deal. Not that I really care. The state I live in sees no need for any competition from anyone other than the duopolys that are already there...

It is a sweethart deal for google though. The citizens of provo? Not so much.

Your definition of 'free' is ~40 million. Can I have some of your free money?

Re:Nice! (1)

PlusFiveTroll (754249) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538749)

It's likely they would have to do this anyway, for a good portion of the network. Even if you think you know exactly where a cable is, before you start digging to extend the network you have to locate it and locate any other utilities around it. One of my clients has done all kinds of pipe and cable laying across the U.S. When he explained the process they had to go thru to push a new fiber conduit in to a telco exchange in LA, I was like screw that. They were pushing a few hundred feet of pipe past thousands of other cables with only a few feet of clearance. One mistake and you cause a national communications blackout.

Re:Nice! (1)

HereIAmJH (1319621) | 1 year,9 hours | (#43539939)

One mistake and you cause a national communications blackout.

Or worse, you kill somebody. This [kshb.com] was caused by a sub contractor for Time Warner installing fiber to a new office building.

Re:Nice! (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539019)

From the story: Curtis admitted that the construction company that installed the fiber cables underground did not keep records of where they buried all of them.

We'll take $25k off your bill if we don't need to document where we buried the cables
Sounds good to me

gayness (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538199)

US gov lets telecoms shit on the consumer with their oligopoly (yes google is an oligoply too fuckfaces)

but just because google does it , it must be good!!!!! lets trickle out the technology little bits at a time until eventually in 100 years everyone has it.. ahh where have i heard that theory before? [educatinghumanity.com]

alll hail google!! praise all the telecoms who shit on us!

Way to soak the taxpayers, Google (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,12 hours | (#43538389)

Typical corporate raider bullshit.

at least this rollout isnt in (1)

nimbius (983462) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538835)

the hinterlands of kansas or bumbefuck missouri. for a while there it seemed like every new network technology from fios to dark fiber ended up in some rural midwestern or southern shithole hellbent on forwarding an e, i, or cyber industry and more than willing to hemmorage taxpayer money in the face of a familiar brand.

So.... (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | 1 year,11 hours | (#43538943)

$40 million to have Google Fiber free for 15 years. Yeah great deal *eye roll*

Re:So.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539281)

Actually, how many people are in Provo that can take advantage of the deal? 500k? So the cost per person is $80. $80 for internet for the next 15 years is not too shabby.

Re:So.... (2)

c++0xFF (1758032) | 1 year,8 hours | (#43540179)

Wikipedia says that Provo's population is 112,488. If you include surrounding communities it's 526,810 (but who knows how many of them would be reached). So, still not so good.

Re:So.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,8 hours | (#43540245)

Sure beats $65 million over 15 years to have nothing.... Provo already committed $39 million, and was losing over $1 million per year, and had zero benefit to show for it. So, while Provo remains on the hook for $39 million, they both save $1 million per year, and they actually get a working fiber network.

Approved! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539149)

High-speed cult fiber behind the Zion curtain.

The First Hit... (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539193)

...Is Always Free.

Google will lease the network to Provo city for free for 15 years.

Google Fiber in Provo? There IS a good reason. NSA (2)

i_want_you_to_throw_ (559379) | 1 year,10 hours | (#43539383)

The NSA Is Building the Country’s Biggest Spy Center [wired.com] (Watch What You Say) nearby in Bluffdale Utah. There is no coincidence.........

Re:Google Fiber in Provo? There IS a good reason. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,9 hours | (#43539509)

I don't get it. That data center's going to be in Bluffdale. TFA's about Provo's municipal network.
How would the presence of one thing several towns away in the next county affect the other thing?

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>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...