In light of the ongoing net neutrality battle, many people have begun looking to Google and its promise of high-speed fiber as a potential saving grace from companies that want to create an “internet fast lane.” Well, the fact is, even without Google, many communities and cities throughout the country are already wired with fiber—they just don’t let their residents use it.

The reasons vary by city, but in many cases, the reason you can’t get gigabit internet speeds—without the threat of that service being provided by a company that wants to discriminate against certain types of traffic—is because of the giant telecom businesses that want to kill net neutrality in the first place.

Hundreds of Cities Are Wired With Fiber—But Telecom Lobbying Keeps It Unused | Motherboard

Well then. At least the libraries can use this fiber in most places? But really, this has got to stop. However, this behavior is part of a larger set of policies, as noted by The Brooks Review.

Ever wonder why there is just one garbage company that serves your house? Because the city/town/county decided that was the garbage company, and you are actually not allowed to use a different company in many areas. How stupid is that?

“It is nonsense to say that Title II is this terrible, horrible thing that kills investment," Feld said. "As the wireless industry never gets tired of telling me, there’s nothing more dynamic and [full of] investment wonderfulness than wireless, where they spend billions of dollars on licenses alone in order to provide a Title II service.”

Report: Verizon FiOS claimed public utility status to get government perks | Ars Technica

Well now, here’s some awesome doublespeak going on here by Verizon at least.

“The changes in encrypted traffic can be directly linked to the surveillance revelations of Edward Snowden. As a result, the number of users of VPN services and other anonymizers increased sharply. In addition, Google and other web services turned on SSL by default.”
futurejournalismproject:

The Internet is a Series of Tubes
Mark Graham and Stefano De Sabbata from the Oxford Internet Institute map the world’s submarine fibre-optic cables to appear like the London’s Tube Map (PDF). But they also go a few steps further.
Via Information Geographies

For the sake of simplicity, many short links have been excluded from the visualization. For instance, it doesn’t show the intricate network of cables under the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, the South and East China Sea, the North Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea. The map instead aims to provide a global overview of the network, and a general sense of how information traverses our planet. (The findings reported below, however, are based on two analysis of the full submarine fibre-optic cable network, and not just the simplified representation shown in the illustration.)
The map also includes symbols referring to countries listed as “Enemies of the Internet” in the 2014 report of Reporters Without Borders. The centrality of the nodes within the network has been calculated using the PageRank algorithm. The rank is important as it highlights those geographical places where the network is most influenced by power (e.g., potential data surveillance) and weakness (e.g., potential service disruption).

Image: Internet Tube, by Mark Graham and Stefano De Sabbata.

A neat chart.

futurejournalismproject:

The Internet is a Series of Tubes

Mark Graham and Stefano De Sabbata from the Oxford Internet Institute map the world’s submarine fibre-optic cables to appear like the London’s Tube Map (PDF). But they also go a few steps further.

Via Information Geographies

For the sake of simplicity, many short links have been excluded from the visualization. For instance, it doesn’t show the intricate network of cables under the waters of the Gulf of Mexico, the South and East China Sea, the North Sea, and the Mediterranean Sea. The map instead aims to provide a global overview of the network, and a general sense of how information traverses our planet. (The findings reported below, however, are based on two analysis of the full submarine fibre-optic cable network, and not just the simplified representation shown in the illustration.)

The map also includes symbols referring to countries listed as “Enemies of the Internet” in the 2014 report of Reporters Without Borders. The centrality of the nodes within the network has been calculated using the PageRank algorithm. The rank is important as it highlights those geographical places where the network is most influenced by power (e.g., potential data surveillance) and weakness (e.g., potential service disruption).

Image: Internet Tube, by Mark Graham and Stefano De Sabbata.

A neat chart.

Comcast was the first last mile provider to recognize this and move peering from the realm of network engineers to the MBAs and started systematically refusing to upgrade existing private interconnects and in some cases systematically de-peering in other cases. Comcast neatly side-stepped the entire net-neutrality debate by degrading service to everybody who wasn’t willing to pay for a private interconnect. Comcast has had a relatively free hand because their customers are blissfully unaware of the politics of global peering and instead will just go somewhere else when a website is ‘slow’.

This has put a lot of pressure on companies like Amazon who know that a 100ms delay in the order process can result in a 1% decrease in sales. Since private interconnect arrangements aren’t public my guess is a lot of companies have caved and are paying Comcast to peer.

an anonymous network engineer commenting on The really strange Comcast-Netflix deal - Bronte Capital (via llimllib)

Not the best news on this front. It also shows what a lack of transparency can do to a market.

(via The internet is fucked | The Verge)

The FCC needs to do its job here.

(via The internet is fucked | The Verge)

The FCC needs to do its job here.