The Farmer Who Built Her Own Broadband (bbc.com) 157
An anonymous reader writes from a BBC article: "I'm just a farmer's wife," says Christine Conder, modestly. But for 2,300 members of the rural communities of Lancashire she is also a revolutionary internet pioneer. Her DIY solution to a neighbour's internet connectivity problems in 2009 has evolved into B4RN, an internet service provider offering fast one gigabit per second broadband speeds to the parishes which nestle in the picturesque Lune Valley. That is 35 times faster than the 28.9 Mbps average UK speed internet connection according to Ofcom. It all began when the trees which separated Chris's neighbouring farm from its nearest wireless mast -- their only connection to the internet, provided by Lancaster University -- grew too tall. Something more robust was required, and no alternatives were available in the area, so Chris decided to take matters into her own hands. She purchased a kilometre of fibre-optic cable and commandeered her farm tractor to dig a trench. After lighting the cable, the two farms were connected, with hers feeding the one behind the trees. "We dug it ourselves and we lit [the cable] ourselves and we proved that ordinary people could do it," she says. "It wasn't rocket science. It was three days of hard work."
And if you tried this in America (Score:2, Insightful)
You would be arrested and thrown in jail for endangering the livelihood of some mega corp.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The cable or phone company would come after you for violating the terms of service. Or it would be too expensive to get the service and start a small ISP here. Even if it was possible, it would be tough to find enough neighbors that would be willing to try a small ISP anymore.
Re:And if you tried this in America (Score:5, Interesting)
Very much this! I've personally looked into doing this in my neighborhood. For what ever reason, getting "business" gigabit internet where I live is in the range of $3000-10000/mo. But for what ever reason, the EXACT same company can provide "residential" gigabit internet for only $79/mo. It is literally the same wires going to the same data center in town. The only difference is the terms of service.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
You are paying for the ratio of users to data capacity. The ISP has a uplink to the rest of the internet at a fixed capacity (T5 link = 480 Mbps), which is then shared out between customers. Business customers get exclusive use of their share, but have to pay the full cost. Residential customers get a discount because not everyone is using the internet at the same time, so the ISP can have 2 or more customers "sharing" capacity because not everyone is reading Email or web surfing at the same time. The more
Re:And if you tried this in America (Score:4)
Residential customers get a discount because not everyone is using the internet at the same time [...]
That's bullshit, and everyone who has to "share" his bandwidth knows it. Over here you can get "up to" bandwidths, which means that you're clinging to some cable that you share with others. What this essentially means is that you take the maximum bandwidth the cable allows, divide by the number of subscribers you share it with and that's what you can reasonably expect from your cable.
And no, we're not talking about people leeching bittorrent dry. We're talking about Mom and Pop Randomsurfer. With webpages bloating from more and more bandwidth-swallowing ads and everyone and their dog watching videos on YouTube and using Netflix instead of TV, everyone is using as much bandwidth as they possibly can.
So please spare us that "but we can oversell because customers don't use that much in reality" bullshit. Yes, you oversell like crazy, but actually your bandwidth is well saturated outside the 1 to 6am time slot when everyone's sleeping.
Re: And if you tried this in America (Score:2)
Typical oversubscription ratios pre Netflix and YouTube era was around 20 to 1 now your lucky to do 7 to 1 in the wireless isp world. So ya fiber to POP will be necessary in the very near future. I would like to see some improvements in the regulation area for smaller players to be able to enter. This would help in the last mile approach and allow more bandwidth per user
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You're thinking is is almost right. The infrastructure is where the problem actually lies. What is needed is a way to avoid the last mile issue being the monopoly /oligarchy model that we've been running for the last 30+ years or so. Stop viewing the last mile as a "Franchise agreement" and start treating it like a road, where anyone can deliver the packages (FedEx, UPS, USPS ...).
My solution is municipal owned Fiber Plant, brought back to a COLO facility where you have the choice of providers to bring cont
Re:And if you tried this in America (Score:4, Interesting)
Key words there, "same service". My ISP makes no real distinction between business and residential. Both can get static IP blocks for cheap, uncapped dedicated bandwidth, individual strands of fiber back to the CO. If you want an SLA, prepare to pay through the nose.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, no. It's not exactly the same.
Within the same telco, the business fiber and residential fiber might use different strands, different routers, offer dedicated vs. shared bandwidth, etc. They are quite different.
For multi-thousands per month, a business customer is paying for dedicated bandwidth. They know that another customer is not going to slow down their access rate. This type of service also offers the option of redundant entrance facilities, diverse routes back to the C.O., etc. For some busines
Residential uses it 0.001% of the time (Score:3)
When a residential user reads Slashdot over a gigabit connection, here's what happens:
1) The browser requests the 150KB web page.
2) At 1Gbps, that 150KB is transferred in 0.00015 seconds.
3) The user reads the page for 15 seconds.
4) GOTO 1 for next web page.
So it's 0.00015 seconds using the connection to fetch a page, 15 seconds looking at the page, 0.00015 loading, 15 seconds reading. You're actually using the connection only 0.001% of the time. During the 99.999% of the time that you're not loading a page
Re: (Score:2)
I guess I should have clarified. The "home" connection is allowed to run a home based business on it. I have an entire server rack at home connected to it and run several TB of data a month over said connection.
Which ISP? Most don't allow "servers" (Score:2)
I'm curious which ISP that is. Most don't allow servers* on a home internet plan. Some block ports 25 and 80, some just disallow it by written policy but don't enforce it.
* Where "servers" means business-type use, not just anything that accepts a connection.
Re: (Score:2)
*Assuming it's not generating complaints, e.g. sending spam or something.
Re:And if you tried this in America (Score:5, Insightful)
No you wouldn't. In a related note, hyperbole is universal. Maybe what you meant is that they wouldn't let you connect it? And who is they? The US is pretty big. Your ability to do your own last mile varies based on where you are. Americans often don't seem to know or even appreciate that different parts of America are different.
Re:And if you tried this in America (Score:5, Informative)
In this case note that they had to connect a local university network. The main broadband providers in the UK, basically BT and in some areas Virgin, won't supply service to people who lay their own fibre. I know because I asked. Their green boxes, where their fibre terminates and they go back to shitty old copper, are fairly close to my house. Even if I lay in fibre to the cabinet myself, they won't allow it to be connected.
Re: (Score:2)
They refused because even if you are a qualified and registered telecommunications installer, you're replacing their cable and they still have to have their PCIs to verify that you did it right. They'll do it for large installations, such as for a building where it connects to their network, for a hefty fee, but it's too much hassle for them to give permission to screw around in a box they own and have an engineer come out and check your work. Remember how long it took for third (major) parties to be able t
Re: (Score:3)
Oh, I offered to pay to have them terminate and plug the cable in and all that. I just offered to lay it, which is apparently the expensive bit that they don't want to do.
Re:And if you tried this in America (Score:5, Informative)
You would be arrested and thrown in jail for endangering the livelihood of some mega corp.
Correct, this could never happen in the US [arstechnica.com]. Definitely, never in a million years [vice.com].
Or, you could JFDI.
Re: (Score:2)
You would be arrested and thrown in jail for endangering the livelihood of some mega corp.
Or for running your cable trench through a muddy patch of ground that the EPA retrospectively declared to be "waters of the United States."
Re:And if you tried this in America (Score:5, Informative)
So your saying Tennessee Republican attorney general Herbert H. Slatery III didnt sue the FCC over the ruling that allowed local internet service providers?
http://money.cnn.com/2015/03/25/technology/tennessee-fcc-internet/
Or that states dont have laws preventing local internet service providers?
https://consumerist.com/2016/08/10/appeals-court-municipal-internet-is-great-but-states-can-still-restrict-access/
Re:And if you tried this in America (Score:5, Funny)
Now now, this is all Main Stream Media and fake news. Got anything from breitbart or infowars? :-/
[John]
Re:And if you tried this in America (Score:4, Insightful)
But you need to even it out, find out what RT and Al Jazeera have to say about the subject.
News is dead. What you can get is opinion. Try to get opinion from both sides and you might end up with something that could allow you to make up your mind. It's not exactly an informed decision you'd be making, but at least one that you're making yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd forgotten about Al Jazeera. I'll have to add that to my reading list. I've checked out RT a few times over the past couple of months. The font is hideous :)
[John]
Competing with city hall (Score:2)
That case is entirely different, because it is about local governments competing with private businesses. Such competition is inherently unfair, because the governments have a conflict of interest — they can smoothly issue all the necessary permits to themselves while sabotaging private enterprises.
The lady described in the write-up is a private entrepreneur — if true, more power to her.
Re: (Score:2)
So what you are saying is the local governments should also be forced out of the business of providing running water now that private companies are providing bottled water and water delivery services.
Re: (Score:2)
Bottled water does not compete with pipes. But, yes, I'd like to see a transition of water-supply (and other "natural" monopolies [mises.org]) from governments to competing businesses.
Then, maybe, we'll finally see some 21-st century innovation in those markets too.
Re: (Score:2)
Bottled water does not compete with pipes. But, yes, I'd like to see a transition of water-supply (and other "natural" monopolies [mises.org]) from governments to competing businesses.
Then, maybe, we'll finally see some 21-st century innovation in those markets too.
The WMF has been pushing those schemes for a while now, people are not happy where it has happened, on the other hand there's Flint where the infrastructure has been neglected for decades and the people are not happy either; somewhere between the two should be the sweet-spot.
Re: (Score:2)
Citations needed.
Re: (Score:3)
Privatizing natural monopolies never works out cheaper then public. How do you have competition in laying pipes? Government gets the cheapest interest rates on loans and does not have to show a profit beyond a contingency fund and enough for future expansion.
Even when the privatized infrastructure doesn't result in cost hikes, there is still the problem of the people losing control of the future of their local infrastructure.
Re: (Score:3)
"Natural monopoly" is a myth [mises.org].
This often-asked question has a simple answer — by laying them side by side. The cost of the process is, actually, a small fraction of the overall cost of maintaining the infrastructure.
OMG, "people losing control"? Are you not afraid of losing control of your area's supermarkets? There is no argument f
Re: (Score:2)
Are you seriously suggesting that the cost of ripping up 15 miles of road (the only road for about half the distance), dynamiting the bedrock, to lay another pipe is minor? All to add another outlet to the lake that supplies the water? Then there is all the roads in town that would need to ripped up for the last mile part. We haven't even mentioned the need for the government to enforce the regulations involved in delivering clean water and leaving the road capable of handling traffic without collapsing
To c
Re: (Score:2)
However difficult it may have been to do, maintaining it is still harder.
With proper competition this regulation becomes unnecessary — cellular phones, TV-sets don't need to be regulated to "enforce delivering" anything. If they aren't performing to customers' s
Re: (Score:2)
The water line here was put in over 30 years ago and the only maintenance I've seen done is the addition of an ammonia plant to combat bacteria.
As for cell phones and TV's not needing regulating, for a starts they are regulated, see that UL in a circle where the electrical components have to meet certain regulations as to not electrocute people or burn down their houses. I guess we could just check a web site for whether such and such model has killed many people. Better example is automobiles where the man
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Cell phones are highly regulated. As are TVs, at least in the tuners. Not a very good example of no regulation.
Just imagine that Nokia decided to come out with a phone for back country use that had 10x the transmit strength of a standard cell phone. This phone, when used in a city would cause the entire city's cell network to be unusable on the frequency the phone was running on. This is why the FCC regulates the airwaves. This is important and useful regulation.
Re: (Score:2)
Only the radio emissions.
Only inasmuch as they are part of the government's way to inform the entire nation.
Seriously? Is it really that simple to knock a city's entire cellular phone system? Don't tell ISIS... Of course, it is not. Reminds one of the "phones on the planes" scare-mongering — for decades w
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? Is it really that simple to knock a city's entire cellular phone system? Don't tell ISIS... Of course, it is not. Reminds one of the "phones on the planes" scare-mongering — for decades we were supposed to believe, a cell-phone could "interfere" with the plane's electronics...
Yeah, maybe we should fear ISIS learning about ECM...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Yes, if you broadcast in the right frequencies, it is entirely possible to interfere with a wireless signal. Do you not know how wireless stuff works? This is the entire reason that the FCC exists, to regulate wireless frequencies.
Re: (Score:2)
Bottled water does not compete with pipes.
Apparently, it does [theprovince.com]), at least for drinking water. Oh, but you were talking about the consumer side of the transaction? Well, some people think that competition is happening there as well. [polarisinstitute.org])
But, yes, I'd like to see a transition of water-supply (and other "natural" monopolies [mises.org]) from governments to competing businesses.
Great - even more shared-infrastructure disputes, and more wasteful duplication of infrastructure. And no, von Mises' nuance-challenged Randian 'either / or' arguments don't impress me.
Then, maybe, we'll finally see some 21-st century innovation in those markets too.
Oh... you mean like the modern tracking and advertising innovations we're now enjoying at the hands of Google, Facebook, et al? Or do you
Re: (Score:2)
Distinction without difference. What is an "ISP", if not the means of connecting to the Internet? Seriously, a BBS? I scarcely care for the ISP-provided e-mail server — and they've shut down their Usenet nodes ages ago. What else is there I need from them, beyond the connecting cable?
Not at all. It may be the only e
It does take a PhD though... (Score:1)
Post Hole Digger.
Re: It does take a PhD though... (Score:1)
Scratching itch, with a ditch witch and a switch...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Would a few lines from "Firefly" be out of order?
Dr. Simon Tam: River, b- uh, be careful with that, that's, um... What is that?
Kaylee Frye: That's a post holer. You dig holes. For posts.
Dr. Simon Tam: It's, uh, it's dirty and sharp.
Many people are just afraid of things that are dirty and sharp so they leave that to other people. Turns out if the other people are uninterested, either because they are also afraid of things that are dirty and sharp, or they see no profit in it, then things don't get done. Ci
Re: (Score:2)
I was part of a comedy duo back in college called
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They were my favorite alt-country rap group.
Re: (Score:2)
In this case the investment is slightly larger than just a fiber cable and a few days of work. It just happens that the person already had covered the cost of the tools involved with the farm business. If you don't have the tools needed the cost of the fiber will be insignificant compared to your other costs.
You can rent the tools. A backhoe costs about $200 per day or $30 per hour, and you'd need it for one day to dig the trench and one hour to fill it in.
Re:It does take a PhD though... (Score:4, Insightful)
For some reason we have the idea that farmers today are some dumb hicks. While modern farming is very advanced. They had self driving tractors for decades. They use big data to help analyze weather and crops. Robotic cow milking... I am a Tech worker and I don't have nearly as much technology to play with than what most farmers have.
Hey look at that web form I made on your phone see how much more sufficated and advanced we are over our rural neighbors. In many ways our city life in terms of technology skills are behind the farming life. Who needs advanced technology to survive and keep up. While in the cities we can still operating with faxing or just giving a letter to a carrier to send to the next office.
Where's a telco when you need one? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
I mean, really, someone has to put a stop to this sort of thing, or next thing you know everyone will be doing it and then where will the monopolies and the billionaires be?
Out on their tractors listening to their favorite music being streamed to them over the internet?
Reminds me of an old joke, do you know the definition of a farmer? A man out standing in his field.
Re:Where's a telco when you need one? (Score:5, Interesting)
Reminds me of a joke about farmers:
What's the fastest way to become a agribusiness millionaire?
Start as an agribusiness billionaire.
Internet isn't the only choke hold business has on Americans. Some seed providers (who shall remain un-named by me, as I'm no fool and I don't want any more torts from that company) sues it's own customers, and even farmers that never used their seed. If a single seed blows over from another field and sprouts in your field, this company can (and does) sue the farmer down to his toenail lint. Then turns around and transfers the property to it's own farming conglomerate. Doesn't matter if they win, because in the long run that farmer they sued will likely end up bankrupt from the tort.
Same thing is going on with chicken and hogs. You can't raise your own stock anymore, you have to buy it from the packers, buy the feed they demand from distributors they specify, then once mature, sell it to only the packer that you bought the livestock from, all at prices the conglomerate sets.
If a farmer or rancher doesn't want to work that way, they are left with finding their own stock in a market that is all but dried up, and hope to sell on the spot export market because they won't be able to sell to national chains in the US.
Now, let's turn to our President Elect - will he do something about these inequalities? Doubtful. While he doesn't engage in agribusiness himself, I seriously doubt a serial bankrupter and contract violator will welcome any sort of increased oversight or reform.
I'd like to be wrong on that though.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Monsanto. Also, it would be nice if you didn't imply to be something that you're not.
Re:Where's a telco when you need one? (Score:4, Informative)
If a single seed blows over from another field and sprouts in your field, this company can (and does) sue the farmer down to his toenail lint.
Not true. This accusation has been made many times and in many places. It is a myth, and has been repeatedly debunked. Monsanto has never sued anyone for unintentional cross fertilization. The myth first started with the wildly inaccurate "documentary" David vs Monsanto.
Monsanto has sued for deliberate and repeated cross fertilization. The most famous defendant was Percy Schmeiser [wikipedia.org]. He was warned several times, and openly admitted that he had isolated, copied, and benefited from the patented Monsanto gene, but claimed he had a right to do so. Several of his co-workers and neighbors testified against him.
Re: Where's a telco when you need one? (Score:3, Informative)
You must be a stockholder, since your claims are false, they can and do regularity sue for as little as 1% cross polenation:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/agricultural-giant-battles-small-farmers/
http://naturalsociety.com/monsanto-sued-farmers-16-years-gmos-never-lost/
https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2016/01/04/gmo-patent-controversy-3-monsanto-sue-farmers-inadvertent-gmo-contamination/
http://www.fooddemocracynow.org/blog/2014/sep/6/monsanto_has_sued_farmers_16_years_never_lost_case
Re: Where's a telco when you need one? (Score:4, Informative)
Good job! None of those links support your statement that Monsanto sues farmers "for as little as 1% cross polenation [sic]."
In fact, one link says the exact opposite. From the Genetic Literacy Project link:
"To conclude this series, I have found no evidence that farmers are sued by Monsanto for inadvertent contamination. The lawsuits that I examined were for cases where farmers knowingly and admittedly used Monsanto seeds without licensing contracts. The fact that seeds are patented is not exclusive to GMOs: as outlined in the first post, many other traditionally bred seeds are patented. For some seeds, both genetically engineered and traditionally bred, farmers sign annual contracts with seed developers. However, farmers have many choices and in no way are forced to plant these seeds or sign these contracts."
Re:Where's a telco when you need one? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Slavery made the Roman Empire great, slavery makes the American Empire great. So no, not much chance of Donald changing anything, especially something that is making America great again. It is what people voted for no?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Still trying to wrap my head around the notion that this country isn't great
America isn't great, because if it's great, it's much harder for those not currently in power to use the tried and true method of acquiring it:
1) Tell you that you have a big problem.
2) Sell you the solution of that problem.
Re: (Score:2)
If a single seed blows over from another field and sprouts in your field, this company can (and does) sue the farmer down to his toenail lint.
A single seed? [Citation needed]
Re: (Score:3)
Monsanto is one of the world's great evils for a variety of reasons, and their toxic debt will never be paid. But so far I haven't seen any record of them suing anyone who didn't turn out to deliberately harvest and re-use "their" seeds.
Mind you, I think the whole idea is horrible, and you should be able to re-plant anything from seed that you want. Once you buy a seed, the seed and any plant coming from it should be yours. The legal system is twisted beyond any semblance of serving the people. But I still
Re: (Score:2)
"Mind you, I think the whole idea is horrible, and you should be able to re-plant anything from seed that you want. Once you buy a seed, the seed and any plant coming from it should be yours. "
What? Next you'll want to be able to watch your DVDs in the rec-room of your retirement home.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When I was a kid and we would occasionally visit a rural church for whatever reason I always heard the farmers talking about how because of the government and big agribusiness there wasn't any money in farming anymore. Then they all got in their brand-new Cadillacs and drove home.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, lets just ignore that each of his attempts were quashed by agribusiness's lackeys in the GOP controlled House.
the same lackeys who now face a willing rubber stamp puppet in the oval office.
Re: (Score:2)
See the Register for bills introduced within the past 6 years that were tabled without a hearing on this very point.
As a point of constitutional law, POTUS is unable to enact laws unless congress sends them to him for a signature. At most, he can veto a law, but he is unable to enact one.
My point is that I have doubt that Mr. Trump will canvas his party to support reform, both because I believe he would not welcome more oversight (both by his own words and by his own actions), and because the agribusiness c
Re: (Score:2)
Anti-capitalist terrorist (Score:1)
Incredibly, many B4RN customers had been surviving on dial-up services or paying high fees for satellite feeds. Chris says that some still are.
Clearly, she's an anti-capitalist sociopath terrorist, depriving the hard-working and honest telcos of their honourable business!
Exterminate exterminate exterminate!
Free enterprise used to be legal in 1910 (Score:5, Informative)
CO-OPERATIVE VERSUS COMPETITIVE TELEPHONES
A VALUED friend, Mr. Arthur E. Harris, of Boston, has kindly given us the following impressive illustration of the difference between a public utility controlled by a modern commercial corporation, and the same monopoly under co-operation. In the one instance we have avarice as the master spirit actuating the promoters, huge dividends for the favored few and poor service for the people being the result. In the other case we have a fine illustration of fraternalism in business, in which the interest and benefit of the people is the first concernâ€"something that should ever be insisted upon in a government that pretends to represent the rule and interests of the people.
"Some twelve or more years ago," says Mr. Harris, "in the town of Mercer, Maine, where I was born, and where my father still lives, a telephone system was installed among the farmers as a branch of the New England Telephone Company. Stock was sold and the rent for an instrument and the use of the line was fixed at $10 per year.
"Several of our neighbors bought some of the stock and took great delight in boasting to the less fortunate in the neighborhood that it was paying 18 per cent dividends.
"But they were not satisfied with making that profit by the exploitation of their neighbors and began to talk of raising the rental fee.
"The promoter, a man from an adjoining town who had the line put in and who was a member of the trust, was overheard to say: 'We've got to get this up to $15 before we quit.' ' But,' he was asked, 'will the people stand for it?' 'Of course they will. They like it and can't get along without it. We've got themâ€"now squeeze them.'
"Well, in the country money does not come easily and some, including my father, felt that they could not afford to pay any more, much as they wanted to keep the telephones.
"They talked it over and an indignation meeting was called.
"There were two Socialists present, who organized the farmers and put in an independent line upon a Socialist basis - for use, not for profits.
"Each member contributed $25 in money, material or labor, and received an instrument which he owned, and was entited to one vote at all business meetings.
"This amount ($25) from each member of the organization paid all the expense of putting in the new line and left something in the treasury. It was a success in every way and has been running about ten years and costs less than $2 per member each year to maintain it.
"They bought instruments that were much better than those put in by the trust - in fact, two-fifths better.
"In the place of six, as with the trust line, 20 could now talk without the use of the switch, and could hear better than the six could with the trust line because of the superiority of the instruments.
"There are no restrictions upon its use and all are satisfied and contented; whereas with the trust line they were kept in a state of irritation by the mean acts of the managers, who were always on the watch for every penny they could grind out. If company - a visitor or a friend - was heard talking, the question promptly came from central 'Who's that talking?' 'Well, collect ten cents.' Their methods and purpose were like those of all big corporations and trusts - their motto, 'First profits, last use'; or, in other words, the maximum profits for the minimum service.
https://books.google.com/books?id=v0fZAAAAMAAJ&lpg=PR4&ots=puFXQk-1BD&dq=twentieth%20century%20magazine%201910%20competitive%20telephones&pg=PA364#v=onepage&q&f=true
Re: (Score:2)
It is. That's why they are called "public companie (Score:2)
> Yeah, because collective, public ownership is exactly the same as corporate ownership.
Indeed it IS exactly the same. Corporate and collective are synonyms.
The difference between the two approaches you're thinking of is that you'd prefer to FORCE people to pay for my idea, while the public corporation gives them the CHOICE. With the approach you think of when you say "corporation", you can choose to help pay to expand my internet-related service and then share in the profits. Somehow you think it'
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
This is one of the most tragic truths in American history. Anything moderately left-leaning instantly became the devil in American society. The result is Big Business controlled policy and economy that is directly and indirectly responsible for the losses of millions of lives that continues to this day.
Re:Free enterprise used to be legal in 1910 (Score:5, Insightful)
22 years ago... (Score:2)
I got a fine from the county for using a CB channel for a radio modem, today someone lays a wire from point A to point B and its the effing transalantic cable
you know what the sad part is, its still 10x faster than than upper end cable modem connection
Re: (Score:2)
ps posting from Tennessee where battles against public networks have been fought for decades now
Re: (Score:2)
>CB
Find a local radio club. Get yourself a Technician class license and do all the packet radio you want, and give the county the finger. You don't need to learn morse code.
A friend of mine went from Novice (when they still had a Novice class with code) to Extra Class in 9 months, which is one step below Radiotelephone Operator license - the kind of license you need to run a commercial broadcast TV or radio station, for example.
--
BMO
Re: (Score:2)
Find a local radio club. Get yourself a Technician class license and do all the packet radio you want, and give the county the finger.
As long as it's unencrypted and non-commercial.
Or at least that's what Amateur Radio was like back when I had a Technician class license. Last I heard it still applied to Ham Packet Radio. Have they changed those rules?
Re: (Score:2)
Send whatever you like, so long as it's unencrypted, non-commerical, and not obscene. Modern-day, it's a bit tricky to do browsing, as so much uses https, which is traffic that can't pass over amateur radio legally.
'73's.
Re: (Score:2)
I got a fine from the county for using a CB channel
The county? Local governments don't have diddly to say about radio spectrum use. The FCC is a different matter.
I'm not saying that this didn't happen. But if it did, you must live in one of those places with a corrupt local government that takes a financial kickback for everything. Like California.
Re: (Score:2)
Tennessee, and yea its all boss hog type hillbilly's wallowing in a pit of favors
Entrepreneurship (Score:1)
The examples I've seen were in rural area, and I suspect that helped. In more urban areas, the difficulty is getting a right of way from the local government (who is often in bed with incumbent ISPs).
Re: (Score:3)
There's been multiple examples of people deploying their own connectivity solution and starting local broadband services.
It was like that in the early days of the Internet, too. I recall one of the first ISPs in Silicon Valley was a guy with a bunch of equipment in his spare bedroom.
Instead of actual 19" "relay racks" to hold the rack-mount electronics, he built a frame out of two-by-fours, spaced appropriately, and used wood screws to hold the equipment to the frame. Worked like a charm.
I used to call th
Three year old dupe :) (Score:5, Informative)
Thought this story sounded familiar
https://tech.slashdot.org/stor... [slashdot.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe, but this time it's the BBC posting the dupe.
Best Quote Ever (Score:2)
"It wasn't rocket science. It was three days of hard work."
Best News Quote of 2016, hands down. Or 2013. Or sometime. Still the best.
Small wonder (Score:2)
Digging a hole in your own property is no rocket science, digging holes in other people's property is.
Re: (Score:3)
Also, if you become profitable, well a company like AT&Fee can come in and undercut you, stealing all your hard earned customers. One could try 2 or 3 year commitments, but that will scare off many.
I'm sure a lot of people would not consider that a bad thing. They want internet and are willing to pay for it. If AT&T at first says that there is no profit in running a line but someone else comes along and proves them wrong then we now have competition. There desire was not to get in the internet business but to get people internet. If AT&T comes along to do better, or buy them out, then the problem was solved.
Competition is good, no? It's not like these people didn't have any internet acces
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Also, if you become profitable, well a company like AT&Fee can come in and undercut you, stealing all your hard earned customers. One could try 2 or 3 year commitments, but that will scare off many.
I'm sure a lot of people would not consider that a bad thing. They want internet and are willing to pay for it. If AT&T at first says that there is no profit in running a line but someone else comes along and proves them wrong then we now have competition. There desire was not to get in the internet business but to get people internet. If AT&T comes along to do better, or buy them out, then the problem was solved.
Competition is good, no? It's not like these people didn't have any internet access, they just didn't like how slow and expensive it was. These people created their own internet to compete with satellite, dial-up, and cellular internet. They were able to do so with lower (or at least comparable) prices, faster speeds, and no data caps (or much higher ones).
This is how business should be done, allow people to go out and compete in the market. All too often though we see people that, instead of trying to do better in business, lobby the government for price controls, government should require that businesses need to offer services to people where there might not be a profit, etc. They see the force of the government, rather than the invisible hand of the free market, as the best means of bringing products and services to market.
Part of a free market is that businesses should be free to fail.
The problem is the competition can be unfair. If a big company wishes to kill a smaller company they can either buy them, or simply reduce prices until they are dead, then jack them back up, effectively bankrupting the people who did the hard work. They could then, if it was useful buy any infrastructure that was left for pennies on the dollar. A variation on the above it to value add things like free data from their partners video streaming company, and, well the little guy can't even begin to compete.
W
Re: (Score:2)
What I proposed previously was for the last mile (or whatever) to be intelligently managed by a co-op...
Good luck with that. I'm sure there will be a few outliers that can find someone to manage their neighborhood network, but in most cases you'll see the same mess you see in any HOA or government. A lucky few would even have some nice embezzlement/nepotism going on.
Re: (Score:2)
This is true so long as the big telcos care.
Had this experience about a month ago:
Big Telecom (Rogers) comes to the door
"Hi! I'd like to lower your internet bill. If I can't give you better service for less, I won't waste any more of your time. Are you using Bell?"
"No, Teksavvy"
"OK, I won't waste any more of your time then. Have a nice evening" :)
Min
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
continues unabated. Well at least now MI6 and NSA can spy on farmers too.
And AC trolls can continue spewing crap.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not really laws blocking you but apathy
Re: How did she do it? i.e. inet source and fundin (Score:2)
I have very recently looked at becoming a isp. Cogent will work with Small ISPs, hundred megabit connection is around $325 per month and a one gigabit connection is around $1200 per month. My intention was to bring it out via wireless and that Equipment is easy to figure out and do the problem is that it ended up being around $1500 a month to get roof rights to get the darn data out from a carrier center which was only 100 yards from my first POP.
The capex "capital expenditures" you can expect to be a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
He's been doing that a lot in this story. I just have to think it's an intentional part of the charm.