[ohsnapman]

This is something that works in theory, but not real life. Internet is becoming a utility, and most people only ever have experienced one utility in their life. People in the SF Bay Area choose between AT&T DSL and Comcast cable internet - two of the WORST providers, ever. Verizon FiOS eats both their lunches, yet, nobody rabble rouses to ask for fiber in that area. If people in Silicon Valley won't even pressure their politicians (there are FAR more urgent issues), why would people in other areas with far more pressing economic concerns?

[_greim_]

It seems plausible that apathy would prevent people from agitating for faster internet speeds, when speeds are only slightly below the national average (http://www.speedtest.net/local/san-francisco-ca). It seems implausible to claim that such apathy will remain absolute and unchanging if/when other cities started getting major upgrades (http://www.speedtest.net/local/kansas-city-mo), and especially if the national average began pulling away. Plus, the CA regulatory environment is somewhat of an outlier in terms of its conduciveness to infrastructure progress, so it may not be the best litmus test.

[sparkman55]

We have Sonic DSL as well (with significantly better customer service and uptime than AT&T or Comcast).

That said, I'd definitely be happy to 'cut the cable' with Google Fiber in Palo Alto. There's already a bunch of dark fiber spanning the city, Google Fiber is already active in adjacent Stanford property, the residents are (in general) willing to pay for quality service, and the city is not so large as to make the project untenable.

Of course, Palo Alto has a long history of community / municipal connectivity projects with mixed success, and a notoriously-fractious decision making process, so nobody here is holding their breath...