“In other news, the sky is blue”
As much as this seems like a no brainer, peer reviewed studies like this are an important step, because they carry credibility and can be used to progress community-run broadband. Criticisms of big telecom on this topic now have even more evidence supporting them
Which is EXACTLY why we need it. Competition drives innovation.
If we have cheap/free access to decent internet, big telecom will have to adapt and provide a product that outperforms our free internet to attract customers again.
THAT's how we get to the next step for internet providers, because until now big telecom was satisfied with giving us an outdated product with shitty service and laugh at us because we didn't have any other options.
We're building a community-run wireless ISP in Los Angeles, www.LACBP.org
It's amazing how accessible the tech is nowadays. It's easy to learn and understand, and the entry costs are very low. With a handful of dedicated people, a community can build their own network. Building and managing an ISP can be done locally, you just need a community that supports you and takes pride in being a part of the effort.
Precisely. They're afraid of competition. If states/cities are allowed to set up their own broadband, then the big ISPs have to compete with them and make way less money in the process. So of course they're going to do everything in their power to make community broadband illegal.
That's why in rural areas where Comcast is your only choice, they charge you out the ass for barely-DSL speeds, but in areas where you have other ISPs, they actually offer good speeds for a decent price. I remember hearing stories from people who lived in areas that Google Fiber was being rolled out, how other big ISPs in the area started offering super good services and really cheap prices to try and deter people from using Google Fiber.
That would be because 'community-owned internet service providers' are actively trying to provide a service -internet broadband- while the telecom industry exists purely to separate consumers from their money.
Also, internet has *insane* profit margins. The bulk of the costs associated with municipal broadband goes to paying off the capital costs of installing the fiber. The cost of actually *operating the service* is between $1-10 a month (depending on population density). (You're paying, what, $80-100/mo?)
No company is going to willingly hand over a fucking ATM.
Edit: Was going to link to Comcast financials, but [HufPo did an analysis of TWC.](https://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruce-kushnick/time-warner-cables-97-pro_b_6591916.html
I'm with a community owned and run broadband provider. Better customer service and prices than the larger telecom providers.
competition bitch. the bedrock of true capitalism.
Is there a step by step guide/paper that explains how a small community could construct this type of apparatus?
community-run broadband? where do these even exist? i've never seen them
They serve as a reminder that the isps have been, and actively still are, lying to everyone in the country. They tell you about the data caps and the shitty speeds and the high price for a service thats a fraction of the quality it could and should be. As long as service is shitty everywhere then most people just accept that that's just how it is here in the United States and might otherwise never know any different. More importantly they accept that it's the best it ever will be. That is, until they see people living in cities like Lafayette that pay what others pay for shit service but they're getting gigabit speeds. Isps hate municipal broadband because it exposes just how terrible of a job they do and pass off as "acceptable". That and it forces them to take some of their money out of their disgustingly high profit margins to actually compete. It makes them get up off their asses and actually have to try to sell a decent service. They don't like having to do the work.