[TriLUG] TWC data breach

Tue Sep 5 11:20:57 EDT 2017

 Scott,
You give Google too much credit for being a good steward. I don't. The explanation you are looking for can be shortened to my earlier comment. It's about increasing bandwidth period. Google has a direct relationship of bandwidth to revenue. Google is not some benevolent organization. They are just as greedy as MSFT. What they have done is show the world new markets to provide advertisements. Android as the best example. In this case, we agree bandwidth and cost are not aligned and Google forces the ISP to up their bandwidth and reduce cost or face their own solution. They do this in markets where they think they will benefit from the increased bandwidth with young active professional communities. It's just a calculation to determine how to accomplish this task. They do not really care if they succeed in a prosperous fiber network. Just how to get more people going through more ads and clicking on them. 
I think they are brilliant in their methods and their plans are working. I also think they will eventually get significant networks built. Do not be surprised to see them sell it once they are built.

>I suspect it is a calculation on their part. How much do we (Google) have to spend to increase overall bandwidth? 
    On Tuesday, September 5, 2017, 11:05:53 AM EDT, John Vaughters via TriLUG <trilug at trilug.org> wrote:  

  The new kid in town always takes their lumps before getting any respect. `,~)

    On Tuesday, September 5, 2017, 11:03:04 AM EDT, Scott Chilcote <scottchilcote at ncrrbiz.com> wrote:  

<wandering a little further into the thicket> I never thought of Google
Fiber as much more than a PR attempt, with the purpose of showing the
American public that broadband can be much faster and less expensive
than what the majority of the country is getting. 

Their initial approach appeared to be to select smaller markets that
were not heavily encumbered with the existing monopolies, and ninja
their way into the existing political structure by offering a service
that no one facing an election would want to give the appearance of
opposing. 

They got great momentum from this approach, initially.  News outlets
loved it.  Google was showing the country what we had already learned
from several successful small scale introductions of municipal broadband
had proved (not to mention other nations all over the planet) - that
optical fiber service with comparatively huge bandwidth can be built,
provided and managed at prices much lower than we're paying America's
corporate monopolies.

The big question is, what was Google's end game? 

If informing the US public was their intention, they've already done a
pretty good job.  Anyone who's at all curious can find out that we're
getting screwed on broadband.  A little more research shows that we have
been for decades.  US taxpayers paid Big Telecom several billions in the
1990s for a national fiber network that they totally screwed us out of -
but most of us here know that.

Perhaps Google did not expect that the major providers would rally as
quickly, or work as effectively as they have to make Google's progress
as costly and slow as it has been.

I never had the impression that Google intended to go big on creating a
national fiber infrastructure.  It's not their area of expertise. 
Perhaps they were hoping to lead by example, and guilt the major telecom
providers into rolling over and doing what they're being paid to do.  If
so, that's a pretty big fail.  They upgrade to fiber wherever Google
sets up shop, as far as I can tell, and do almost nothing anywhere
else.  I'd like to be wrong about that, if anyone knows better.

Does anyone have a better idea of what Google's intentions are?

  Scott C.

On 09/05/2017 10:22 AM, John Vaughters via TriLUG wrote:
>  
> Well without going down a deep rat hole, let's face it... decades of Gov. regulated businesses and existing infrastructure are the advantage. Google has plenty of lobbiest and plenty of money to buy the Gov. Just like the others, but they are behind the 8 ball in this territory. I applaud the effort, but it was seriously over promised and underestimated. I have always believed this was more bark than bite. It got the other players to ramp up their services and Google makes more money with more bandwidth. I suspect it is a calculation on their part. How much do we (Google) have to spend to increase overall bandwidth? 
> We all benefit from serious competition such as Google Fiber. Just the threat is good for consumers. I am however still hopeful they get to my house within a few more years. I would love to ditch the TWC/Rectum.
> John Vaughters
>    On Tuesday, September 5, 2017, 10:03:55 AM EDT, Scott Chilcote via TriLUG <trilug at trilug.org> wrote:  
>  
>  
> I suspect it's substantially harder when profit-drenched, heavily
> lobbying telecoms have already entrenched.
>
>  Scott C.
>
>
> On 09/05/2017 09:56 AM, John Vaughters via TriLUG wrote:
>>  If I could get google fiber they would already have the boot, but alas, they are the only decent high speed connection I can get. Price/value not even close to other options in my area. 
>>
>> Google Where are you??? I guess building out a solid network is much harder than everyone expected. You could say that the existing ISPs are laughing a little bit. Maybe alot.
>>
>> John Vaughters
>>
>>    On Tuesday, September 5, 2017, 9:41:22 AM EDT, Matt Flyer via TriLUG <trilug at trilug.org> wrote:  
>>  
>>  There are a growing number of reasons why I have seen this "new"
>> company referred to as Rectum.  
>>
>> Overall, I have NOT been impressed.  One of these days I am going to
>> get off my backside and just give them the boot.
>>
>> On Tue, 2017-09-05 at 00:53 -0400, John M. Harris Jr. via TriLUG wrote:
>>> I dream of United States v. Spectrum
>>>
>>> On Sunday, September 3, 2017 8:29:53 AM EDT Mauricio Tavares via
>>> TriLUG wrote:
>>>>      Can we sue them since they chose to keep our credit card
>>>> info?
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 12:27 AM, MG Monza via TriLUG <trilug at trilug
>>>> .org> 
>>> wrote:
>>>>> Y'all <i> do </i> know about this?
>>>>>
>>>>> http://gizmodo.com/millions-of-time-warner-customer-records-expos
>>>>> ed-in-thi
>>>>> -1798701579 --
>>>>> This message was sent to: raubvogel at gmail.com <raubvogel at gmail.co
>>>>> m>
>>>>> To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org
>>>>> from that
>>>>> address. TriLUG mailing list :
>>>>> https://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug Unsubscribe or
>>>>> edit
>>>>> options on the web  :
>>>>> https://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/raubvogel%40gmail.c
>>>>> om
>>>>> Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome
>

-- 
Scott Chilcote
scottchilcote at ncrrbiz.com
Cary, NC USA

-- 
This message was sent to: John Vaughters <jvaughters04 at yahoo.com>
To unsubscribe, send a blank message to trilug-leave at trilug.org from that address.
TriLUG mailing list : https://www.trilug.org/mailman/listinfo/trilug
Unsubscribe or edit options on the web    : https://www.trilug.org/mailman/options/trilug/jvaughters04%40yahoo.com
Welcome to TriLUG: http://trilug.org/welcome