IMO, there is a very near zero chance of this ‘FiWi’ coming to fruition. No one wants it. I don’t want it, I see nothing but flaws, single points of failure, security issues, erosion of privacy in homes and business, and general consumer mistrust of such a model and well as consolidation and monopolization of internet access. I will actively speak out against this, is bad in just about every way you can talk about. I cannot find a single benefit it offers. On Mar 28, 2023 at 3:31:40 PM, rjmcmahon wrote: > Agreed though, from a semiconductor perspective, 100K units over ten+ > years isn't going to drive a foundry to produce the parts required. > Then, a small staff makes the same decisions for all 100K premises > regardless of things like the ability to pay for differentiators as they > have no differentiators (we all get Model T black.) These staffs are > also trying to predict the future without any real ability to affect > that future. It's worse than a tragedy of the commons because the sunk > mistakes get magnified every passing year. > > A FiWi architecture with pluggable components may have the opportunity > to address these issues and do it in volume and at fair prices and also > reduce climate impacts per taking in account capacity / (latency * > distance * power), by making that aspect field upgradeable. > > Bob > > https://sifinetworks.com/residential/cities/simi-valley-ca/ > > > I'm due to get it to my area Q2 (or so). we're a suburb outside LA, > > but 100k+ people so not tiny. > > > David Lang > > > > On Tue, 28 Mar 2023, rjmcmahon wrote: > > > > There are municipal broadband projects. Most are in rural areas > > > partially funded by the federal government via the USDA. Glasgow > > > started a few decades ago. Similar to LUS in Lafayette, LA. > > > https://www.usda.gov/broadband > > > > > > Rural areas get a lot of federal money for things, a la the farm bill > > > which also pays for food stamps instituted as part of the New Deal > > > after the Great Depression. > > > > > > > https://sustainableagriculture.net/our-work/campaigns/fbcampaign/what-is-the-farm-bill/ > > > > > > None of this is really relevant to the vast majority of our urban > > > populations that get broadband from investor-owned companies. These > > > companies don't receive federal subsidies though sometimes they get > > > access to municipal revenue bonds when doing city infrastructures. > > > > > > Bob > > >> https://www.linkedin.com/in/christopher-mitchell-79078b5 and the like > > >> are doing a pretty good job (given the circumstances) here in the US. > > >> At least, that’s my understanding of his work. > > >> > > >> All the best, > > >> > > >> Frank > > >> Frantisek (Frank) Borsik > > >> > > >> https://www.linkedin.com/in/frantisekborsik > > >> > > >> Signal, Telegram, WhatsApp: +421919416714 [2] > > >> > > >> iMessage, mobile: +420775230885 [3] > > >> > > >> Skype: casioa5302ca > > >> > > >> frantisek.borsik@gmail.com > > >> > > >> On 28 March 2023 at 7:47:33 PM, rjmcmahon (rjmcmahon@rjmcmahon.com) > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> Interesting. I'm skeptical that our cities in the U.S. can get this > > >>> (structural separation) right. > > >>> > > >>> Pre-coaxial cable & contract carriage, the FCC licensed spectrum to > > >>> the > > >>> major media companies and placed a news obligation on them for these > > >>> OTA > > >>> rights. A society can't run a democracy well without quality and > > >>> factual > > >>> information to the constituents. Sadly, contract carriage got rid of > > >>> > > >>> that news as a public service obligation as predicted by Eli Noam. > > >>> http://www.columbia.edu/dlc/wp/citi/citinoam11.html Hence we get > > >>> January > > >>> 6th and an insurrection. > > >>> > > >>> It takes a staff of 300 to produce 30 minutes of news three times a > > >>> day. > > >>> The co-axial franchise agreements per each city traded this > > >>> obligation > > >>> for a community access channel and a small studio, and annual > > >>> franchise > > >>> fees. History has shown this is insufficient for a city to provide > > >>> quality news to its citizens. Community access channels failed > > >>> miserably. > > >>> > > >>> Another requirement was two cables so there would be "competition" > > >>> in > > >>> the coaxial offerings. This rarely happened because of natural > > >>> monopoly > > >>> both in the last mile and in negotiating broadcast rights (mostly > > >>> for > > >>> sports.) There is only one broadcast rights winner, e.g. NBC for the > > >>> > > >>> Olympics, and only one last mile winner. That's been proven > > >>> empirically > > >>> in the U.S. > > >>> > > >>> Now cities are dependent on those franchise fees for their budgets. > > >>> And > > >>> the cable cos rolled up to a national level. So it's mostly the FCC > > >>> that > > >>> regulates all of this where they care more about Janet Jackson's > > >>> breast > > >>> than providing accurate news to help a democracy function well. > > >>> > > >> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_XXXVIII_halftime_show_controversy > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> It gets worse as people are moving to unicast networks for their > > >>> "news." > > >>> But we're really not getting news at all, we're gravitating to > > >>> emotional > > >>> validations per our dysfunctions. Facebook et al happily provide > > >>> this > > >>> because it sells more ads. And then the major equipment providers > > >>> claim > > >>> they're doing great engineering because they can carry "AI loads!!" > > >>> and > > >>> their stock goes up in value. This means ads & news feeds that > > >>> trigger > > >>> dopamine hits for addicts are driving the money flows. Which is a > > >>> sad > > >>> theme for undereducated populations. > > >>> > > >>> And ChatGPT is not the answer for our lack of education and a public > > >>> > > >>> obligation to support those educations, which includes addiction > > >>> recovery programs, and the ability to think critically for > > >>> ourselves. > > >>> > > >>> Bob > > >>> Here is an old (2014) post on Stockholm to my class "textbook": > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > https://cis471.blogspot.com/2014/06/stockholm-19-years-of-municipal.html > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> [1] > > >>> Stockholm: 19 years of municipal broadband success [1] > > >>> The Stokab report should be required reading for all local > > >>> government > > >>> officials. Stockholm is one of the top Internet cities in the > > >>> worl... > > >>> > > >>> cis471.blogspot.com [1] > > >>> > > >>> ------------------------- > > >>> > > >>> From: Starlink on behalf of > > >>> > > >>> Sebastian Moeller via Starlink > > >>> Sent: Sunday, March 26, 2023 2:11 PM > > >>> To: David Lang > > >>> Cc: dan ; Frantisek Borsik > > >>> ; libreqos > > >>> ; Dave Taht via Starlink > > >>> ; rjmcmahon > > >>> ; > > >>> bloat > > >>> Subject: Re: [Starlink] [Bloat] On fiber as critical infrastructure > > >>> w/Comcast chat > > >>> > > >>> Hi David, > > >>> > > >>> On Mar 26, 2023, at 22:57, David Lang wrote: > > >>> > > >>> On Sun, 26 Mar 2023, Sebastian Moeller via Bloat wrote: > > >>> > > >>> The point of the thread is that we still do not treat digital > > >> communications infrastructure as life support critical. > > >> > > >>>> Well, let's keep things in perspective, unlike power, water > > >> (fresh and waste), and often gas, communications infrastructure is > > >> mostly not critical yet. But I agree that we are clearly on a path in > > >> that direction, so it is time to look at that from a different > > >> perspective. > > >> > > >>>> Personally, I am a big fan of putting the access network into > > >> communal hands, as these guys already do a decent job with other > > >> critical infrastructure (see list above, plus roads) and I see a PtP > > >> fiber access network terminating in some CO-like locations a viable > > >> way to allow ISPs to compete in the internet service field all the > > >> while using the communally build access network for a few. IIRC this > > >> is how Amsterdam organized its FTTH roll-out. Just as POTS wiring has > > >> beed essentially unchanged for decades, I estimate that current fiber > > >> access lines would also last for decades requiring no active > > >> component > > >> > > >> changes in the field, making them candidates for communal management. > > >> (With all my love for communal ownership and maintenance, these > > >> typically are not very nimble and hence best when we talk about life > > >> times of decades). > > >> > > >>> This is happening in some places (the town where I live is doing > > >> such a rollout), but the incumbant ISPs are fighting this and in > > >> many > > >> > > >> states have gotten laws created that prohibit towns from building > > >> such > > >> > > >> systems. > > >> > > >> A resistance that in the current system is understandable*... > > >> btw, my point is not wanting to get rid of ISPs, I really just think > > >> that the access network is more of a natural monopoly and if we want > > >> actual ISP competition, the access network is the wrong place to > > >> implement it... as it is unlikely that we will see multiple ISPs > > >> running independent fibers to all/most dwelling units... There are > > >> two > > >> > > >> ways I see to address this structural problem: > > >> a) require ISPs to rent the access links to their competitors for > > >> "reasonable" prices > > >> b) as I proposed have some non-ISP entity build and maintain the > > >> access network > > >> > > >> None of these is terribly attractive to current ISPs, but we already > > >> see how the economically more attractive PON approach throws a > > >> spanner > > >> > > >> into a), on a PON the competitors might get bitstream access, but > > >> will > > >> > > >> not be able to "light up" the fiber any way they see fit (as would be > > >> possible in a PtP deployment, at least in theory). My subjective > > >> preference is b) as I mentioned before, as I think that would offer a > > >> level playing field for ISPs to compete doing what they do best, > > >> offer > > >> > > >> internet access service while not pushing the cost of the access > > >> network build-out to all-fiber onto the ISPs. This would allow a > > >> fairer, less revenue driven approach to select which areas to convert > > >> to FTTH first.... > > >> > > >> However this is pretty much orthogonal to Bob's idea, as I understand > > >> it, as this subthread really is only about getting houses hooked up > > >> to > > >> > > >> the internet and ignores his proposal how to do the in-house network > > >> design in a future-proof way... > > >> > > >> Regards > > >> Sebastian > > >> > > >> *) I am not saying such resistance is nice or the right thing, just > > >> that I can see why it is happening. > > >> > > >>> David Lang > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Starlink mailing list > > >> Starlink@lists.bufferbloat.net > > >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/starlink__;!!P7nkOOY!vFtTwFdYBTFjrJCFqT0rp0o2dtaz2m-dskeRLX2dIW_Pujge6ZU8eOIxtkN_spTDlqyyzClrVbEMFFbvL3NlUgIHOg$ > > >> > > >> > > >> Links: > > >> ------ > > >> [1] > > >> > https://cis471.blogspot.com/2014/06/stockholm-19-years-of-municipal.html > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Links: > > >> ------ > > >> [1] http://cis471.blogspot.com > > >> [2] tel:+421919416714 > > >> [3] tel:+420775230885 > > > > >