Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by listsfrin 2287 days ago
There's lots of evidence that internet is cheap. Too bad we don't have those ISPs to provide it. Have you ever thought how hard it is to dig a 50m hole in the ground to put fiber in it?
3 comments

It can be a lot easier than digging trenches. Where I lived I've watched various google & TW contractors running fiber on existing utility poles. It surprised me how fast those guys can move, I'm talking a couple guys and a truck can probably do a few miles a day. Last time I saw it, they had a couple trucks doing some prep work ahead of a guy literally walking along under the cable pulling that spinner thing. They had wired from the office building I was in, down the road a couple miles, by lunch.

(random youtube video) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUMjCvMxp-M

Most people move fast if they are paid accordingly.
I have thought about that problem a -lot-, actually. It used to be my job; determine the best route from a cost standpoint, draw it up, and then convince everyone to let you do it. (And thus began my love for LISP...)

You don't dig 50m into the ground, unless you were referring to the length and not the depth. But if you did mean depth, I've done designs where the dig depth was under 4 feet. Usually this involved either special products for purpose (Look up Vertical Deflecting Conduit) or literally just a straight trench along a state highway. (Not gonna comment on the security of that practice...)

But if you meant 50m in distance off the backbone, you're right. because that last 50M to a residence -is- the hard part in a lot of cases. That's why one of the things negotiated in a lot of franchise agreements (which range between a permission to build all the way to a locally sanctioned monopoly) includes is a 'minimum homes passed per mile'. Which basically states that if a route passes at least X homes in Y distance, the Cable co cannot charge a prospective customer for the buildout to their residence.

Doing the 'last mile' is the most expensive part of any network.

One might start to ask if this is part of why these Cable cos are so hyped on the 5G; It makes it possible for 'fringe' customers to still be offered wireless products.

What the Tele/Cable cos did with all of that federal grant money in the early 2000s and with the stimulus packages resulting from the 2008 recession was build up their backbone structure substantially. Many of the projects I did were designed to specs along the lines of 'Go up to the next 48 count interval, then double that.' So if we needed 28 fibers to feed a system, we'd put 96 in the ground in that case.)

Which means that rather than use that stimulus money to build out more of those last miles, in most cases it instead went into revenue stream of fiber leasing. Many of the projects I worked on involved Cable companies leasing that dark fiber they built up to the cell carriers for capacity in the rollout to 4G.

Bonus points because in most cases they weren't even doing any multiplexing on the fiber (something that could be done by adding additional equipment but not having to replace any fiber.)

After we the taxpayers paid them $400B to cover that expense, and the telecomms pocketed it, I have the world's smallest violin to play for this particular argument.

https://nationaleconomicseditorial.com/2017/11/27/americans-...