[capableweb]

This cable is not just to be used by Google right? Or am I misunderstanding something? Fundamentally, infrastructure should be publicly owned and then rented by companies to use it, in this case it seems like Google physically owns the cables and infrastructure which would be a massive waste.

[d1zzy]

Feel free to convince your government and fellow citizens to use tax money to pay for such infrastructure. Google laying down their own cable isn't stopping anybody from doing so.

[morei]

Why is it a waste? If Google has enough demand to fill the cable, then how is it waste?

(And I assume that Google has enough demand: If it didn't, why would they build such a large cable?)

[nabla9]

>Fundamentally, infrastructure should be publicly owned a

No. Good market socialist solution in situations where network investment (electric grid, railway, telecom) creates natural monopolies, is forcing separation of the network and content.

For example electric grid owner must allow other sell and buy electricity trough the network. They can only get maintenance fee determined so that it cant be used to distort energy markets in favor of the company owning the grid.

In telecom it usually applies only for the last mile.