Re: Muni Fiber and Politics

[Owen DeLong <owen () delong com>]

> On Aug 5, 2014, at 10:56, Eugeniu Patrascu <eugen () imacandi net> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 8:26 PM, Owen DeLong <owen () delong com> wrote:
> >
> > > > This one is a bad idea cause you have lots of people pushing fiber through
> > > > pipes with active fiber in them... and their incentives not to screw up
> > > > other people's glass are... unclear?  :-)
> > >
> > > Not really, if one company starts making mistakes, the other will also
> > > mistake their cables. It's like a working mexican standoff :)
> >
> > In reality, Mexican standoffs are often fatal.
>
> If you blink.
>  
> > > > Oh, wait: the conduit installer isn't a contractor, they're a monopoly?
> > > The people pushing fiber through the conduits are contractors. There are a
> > > handful of companies licensed to operate this.
> >
> > May be workable, but seems more expensive than operating cross connects in a serving wire center with little or no 
> > plausible benefit.
>
> So how is blowing microfibre in some tubes more expensive? You pay a one off installation fee and then a small 
> monthly rate for the circuit (payable yearly).

And then when you switch providers, you pay all of that again instead of a quick move of a cross connect inside a 
building. 

> The really nice and geeky part is that you can actually choose how your fiber will run, so if you want diverse paths 
> to a location you can achieve that with certainty.

Not particularly important to 99.999+% of residential users. 

>  
> > > > No, that's even worse.
> > >
> > >
> > > It's not perfect, but it works.
> >
> > People say that about windows. I don't use it, either.
>
> :) It works because it's very cheap to get high speed internet into all kinds of areas, especially residential ones.

So is what I am proposing. In fact, I'm pretty sure my proposal is cheaper, especially in the long run.