Ask HN: Why all the hate for ISP?
I worked for one. Contrary to popular belief; not just any "idiot" can run an ISP.
I can understand the frustration with poorly trained CSR, billing error and etc. After all it's a business to make money; we are not going to hire MIT graduate just to tell the customer to reboot their equipments.
Internet isn't "free"; it's expensive to run an access technology infrastructure. Running fiber, coax cost is not just a money problem but also political(town permit, pole rights).
All things aside the technology is interesting...
We are doing IOT, devOPS way before it was such a thing. Running data center, configuration management, automation, DDOS mitigation are our DNA. Granted not all the department embrace the "HN" culture but there are us who gets it.
I guess ISP is just a something that the tech people love to hate?
9 comments
[ 2.3 ms ] story [ 34.7 ms ] threadHowever if we take the time and think this logically; do you appreciated the challenges/technology to operate one?
ISP are similar to utility. Up front cost is astronomical. The town guarantee "monopoly" in order to attract business looking for steady ROI(similar to government infrastructure project: road, dam, train track and etc). This is the context of USA. There are no "government dark fiber" where anyone can just connected to and run a service provider.
Other things you mentioned are the decision by "business people" not the tech people per se. Part of it is also government mandate.
Not making excuses just trying to show view point from other side.
* lobbying & suing to prevent competition from municipal broadband
* lobbying against net neutrality, because apparently the fact that I paid for those bits from Netflix to be delivered isn't enough to keep Netflix from getting shaken down as well. Couldn't possibly have anything to do with most ISPs parent companies also being in the legacy video business...
* less of a problem now, but before DOCSIS got crazy-fast a lot of ISPs intensely oversold the lines (so you and 100 of your neighbors were all paying for "60 Mbps" internet on a line that could carry 60 Mbps TOTAL)
* MiTMing connections to insert ads and tracking
* lobbying for the right to, and then positively SALIVATING at tracking every site you visit and selling it to advertisers
* local monopolies / duopolies in most areas which mean you've got your "choice" of one or possibly two bastards who both do all of the above. Good luck!
What ends up being the anger issues are the purely commercial/business side:
The business decision to spy on users for advertising profits.
Their actual regional monopolies that skirt the law because there is national level competition.
The inconsistent pricing and massive numbers of fees that are just pure profit. (Not the few actual taxes.)
The close ties to legacy entertainment leads to a naked conflict of interests.
The political fallout from the FCC enforcing basic rules that actually built the majority of the internet culture before it went big business.
The service that ISPs provide are outstandingly expensive with a glacial pace of new technology roll outs. We know it's hard and expensive, but that's not an excuse to do literally nothing but collect profits. FiOS is the perfect example... NYC is suing because they took grant money and tax incentives, then utterly neglected the agreed upon course of action.
Internet service should be a deeply regulated utility like water and electricity. The strict price controls offset the regional monopolies model. The companies that run ISP should be legally required to be independent from non-ISP business interests, like cable TV, Entertainment, or phone services. ISPs being divided at the last mile from the core plumbing of the internet also sets up a deeply adversarial relationship with the backbone providers. Integrating those two realms into regional entities enforcing interconnectivity rules would reduce the Net Neutrality issue considerably.
None of those will ever happen, however. The lobbying against enforcing utility rules that mandate the profit margins would be extreme.
Edit: Typos/Autocorrect
In the U.S., we permit some private parties to use eminent domain reserved property in exchange for the distribution of telecom infrastructure. I dont have an issue with that principle like some folks do (1), and I dont care if they make a lot of money, but I do take exception to these 'utilities' ignoring the needs of their custimers. ISPs refuse to run fiber to our area and they it took them 3 weeks to figure out that someone accidentally flipped off the switch to my house on the utility pole MDU. No compensation for lost time.
Personally, I long for the day when scalable mesh networks (2) allow people to take the reigns back, similar to installing solar panels and cutting the power grid chord. Yes, I realize there is still a need for such networks to tap into the internet backbone, but it's a step.
1. https://www.forbes.com/sites/timothylee/2011/12/06/telecommu...
2. http://guifi.net