dslreports logo
site
spacer

spacer
 
   
spc
story category
Press Suddenly Notices Google is a No Show in Neutrality Fight
by Karl Bode 06:58PM Tuesday Jul 08 2014
The Google of 2006 really loved neutrality. The Google of 2010 and after (not coincidentally after they made a major push into wireless) didn't. In fact the last time Google posted something meaningful about net neutrality to their policy blog was this 2010 flip flop by Google lawyer Richard Whitt, in which he insists the company didn't sell consumers out by covertly working with carriers to kill real protections (despite ample evidence to the contrary).

Fast forward a few years and apparently the mainstream press is only just now noticing Google's meaningful absence from the latest round of discussion. Very similar pieces by Bloomberg and ReCode the last week belatedly inform readers that Google's no longer the net neutrality champion people assumed they were:
quote:
Federal regulators have received more than 625,000 comments about a controversial proposal to allow broadband providers to offer fast-lane service on the Internet. None, so far, has been from Google. The search giant and other large tech companies, including Facebook, Amazon, Twitter and eBay, may support net neutrality rules, but they don’t appear to be spending much time or money in Washington fighting for them.
Why? Because at this point, what we're really fighting over are business models like AT&T's controversial "Sponsored Data" effort, which allows bigger, deeper-pocketed companies to pay a premium so that their content gets preference over the content or services of smaller companies, which may not be able to pay such a troll toll. Google might have an interest in stopping creative ISP peering shenanigans, but Wheeler has made it clear that debate won't be included in these rules.

In short, if net neutrality supporters are trusting for Google to lend a hand like they did with SOPA/PIPA, they may not want to hold their breath. Google may overall be more consumer friendly than the likes of AT&T, Comcast and Verizon, but they don't want any regulations that could box them into a corner when it comes to profits gleaned from new and "creative" mobile pricing efforts by mobile carriers, content companies and ad networks.

Without Google's help, putting Wheeler's love letter to AT&T, Verizon and Comcast to bed will require the grass roots networks to be tougher, more vocal and more intense than they were with SOPA (which is considered the largest consumer revolt in Internet history). The problem is this is no longer 2007, and the net neutrality debate has become so politically toxic and the discourse so distorted, it's making it harder than ever for the station wagon of consumer advocacy to get real traction in the mud.

view:
topics flat nest 

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

The Google of 2006 really loved ...

...all the attention they got from SAYING the loved... neutrality.
In fact someone should name anything Google does that isn't for Google's own benefit.*

*Be it PR or research into future businesses.
Google is not mother Teresa, Gandhi, and ironman up into one.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

1 edit

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

said by tshirt:

Google is not mother Teresa, Gandhi, and ironman up into one.

No one ever claimed they were, except the people that hate them.

Most people that "like" Google understand it is not perfect.
ITGeeks

join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

This site and the blogger at the keyboard will claim otherwise. The same as Google claimed they'd shape the wireless industry with their unlocked cell phones- that project never took off. They purchased a great product called Grand Central only to ruin it.

Google+ a half baked idea. Google Earth? they never did anything with KeyStone after they purchased it besides street level mapping. Google just buys and does nothing just sells or clothes. They aren't really anything but another company sucking up money and taking what credit they can for their "national" fiber build that's a whole few burbs in KC area and a network they basically stole- who the Mayor and the goons of Provo should be sitting in jail for that one. They could have gotten more out of a telco.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

1 recommendation

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...



said by ITGeeks:

They aren't really anything but another company sucking up money and taking what credit they can for their "national" fiber build that's a whole few burbs in KC area and a network they basically stole- who the Mayor and the goons of Provo should be sitting in jail for that one. They could have gotten more out of a telco.

Do you realize when you post things like this your already shaky credibility is lost entirely?
ITGeeks

join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

Already shaky? Hardly. But that is what Google does and what should happen. Those poor suckers- aka tax payers are the ones on the hook for a bankrupted network that was SOLD for 1$. You really think Google saved the day? Hardly! And yes a telco would have paid well more than Google as Cinci Bell has done just that for an HFC network that was converted to all Fiber. And actually paid a fair price for the system.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

They would have paid more and given a lot less, if anything in return.

Thus those taxpayers you are saying were so harmed will benefit more by them giving it away then selling it to an incumbent.

I would even argue they could have completely removed the network and burned it for heat and they would have gained more than selling it to an incumbent.
ITGeeks

join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH
But yet some cities and bloggers still thing they're the oh mighty one of the Internet and they do no wrong.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

said by ITGeeks:

But yet some cities and bloggers still thing they're the oh mighty one of the Internet and they do no wrong.

See above.

No body says this but people that hate Google, and it gets old really fast.

People will, and should be, excited about getting uncapped Gig internet for 70 dollars. No amount of vested internet trolling is going to stop that.

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

said by DataRiker:

People will, and should be, excited about getting uncapped Gig internet for 70 dollars. No amount of vested internet trolling is going to stop that.

And some people said the same about FiOS, yet now vilify Verizon for risking it all, and then stepping away from the edge.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

3 edits

4 recommendations

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

Why would anybody get excited over Fios? How much does 70 dollars get you with Fios again? (50/25 according to their webpage)

Google offers 1000/1000 for 70 dollars.

fiosultimate

join:2014-06-09
San Antonio, TX

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

fios has about 10 million customers, google fiber has areound 100,000 , like comparing a dodge charger to a Ferrari, size changes everything

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

3 recommendations

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

said by fiosultimate:

fios has about 10 million customers, google fiber has areound 100,000 , like comparing a dodge charger to a Ferrari, size changes everything

Have no idea how this changes the reality of Verizon having nothing exciting or innovative to offer.

50/25 for 70 bucks is still lame no matter what excuse you make.
norm

join:2012-10-18
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Verizon FiOS

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

said by DataRiker:

said by fiosultimate:

fios has about 10 million customers, google fiber has areound 100,000 , like comparing a dodge charger to a Ferrari, size changes everything

Have no idea how this changes the reality of Verizon having nothing exciting or innovative to offer.

50/25 for 70 bucks is still lame no matter what excuse you make.

Just look at his (fiosultimate) post history... I can't tell if he's just joking and being a troll or if he's serious. If being a troll, bravo!

fiosultimate

join:2014-06-09
San Antonio, TX

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

That calling Google fiber an ISP is like calling a dollar a fortune to have...u are correct in a way, just not the right way
ITGeeks

join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH
what is innovative about Google Fiber? They didn't innovate anything. They simply did what VZ did and millions of others. I know several co-ops that are doing fiber and covering actual RURAL area unlike Google. You don't see them on this front page every day when they expand.

PapaMidnight

join:2009-01-13
Baltimore, MD
$70 (not counting taxes and the numerous creative "fees"), or, as Verizon calls it, "The gold standard in computing speeds", will get you 70/35 for FiOS (»www.verizon.com/home/fios-fastest-internet/). However, that is only applicable for the first year. It goes up to $90 (Plus taxes and fees) in year two.

To come even close to the $70 service that Google is offering, you'd have to pay $300 month to Verizon - and even then, you would receive 500/100 (a significant delta to Google's 1000/1000 for just shy of 1/4th of the cost). However, you would be getting what Verizon terms as "The ultimate in supersonic speed".
ITGeeks

join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH
Nobody knows how many customers Google has. That's the thing. that 100,000 is estimated and its only estimated based on a few select "fiber hoods". That's it. Nobody has gone door to door to count.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

2 recommendations

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

said by ITGeeks:

Nobody knows how many customers Google has. That's the thing. that 100,000 is estimated and its only estimated based on a few select "fiber hoods". That's it. Nobody has gone door to door to count.

It doesn't even matter. Google is having the effect they intended. To give other providers a push towards higher speeds.
ITGeeks

join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH

1 recommendation

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

that they intended? Do you have proof that's what they intended? And the push? Hardly. Speeds were on the rise well before Google ever decided to expand their hobbies into being an ISP.

ev

@74.140.91.x

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

Believe what you want, neighbor. A merger-hobbled TWC currently maxed out at 50/5 for $75+ sure as hell is NOT lighting a fire under Cinci Bell to introduce gigabit along the Ohio River. Just sayin.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000
said by ITGeeks:

that they intended? Do you have proof that's what they intended? And the push? Hardly. Speeds were on the rise well before Google ever decided to expand their hobbies into being an ISP.

They said it during their press release here in Kansas City and their very public challenge to ISP's.

»googlepublicpolicy.blogspot.com/···ake.html

»business.time.com/2012/09/14/wit···o-speed/

In a way we need more people to astro turf against it, since it invariably has the opposite effect. Most people can sense the fear and as such want to see what all the fuss is about.

ev

@74.140.91.x

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

I'm curious -- how is it that Google can offer a symmetrical 1000 (at frankly any price) and not something like 1000/500 or worse? At what point do all the throttles and meters and whatnot suddenly stop to scale and become far more trouble than they're worth to install?

Anonme

@142.205.241.x

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

Internet bits are free, they cost nothing
There is an initial cost for laying the cabling, and routing equipment.
Just becuase the fat ISP's with uber rich friends and CEO's told you 300 bits cost mroe than 200 bits to transfer over the exact same cable, doesn't make it so.

70/month leave plenty of room for maintenance (if done decently) and leaves 50% of that money to save for future capacity upgrades as more client sign on and/or more sites get the ability to even utalize those speeds

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
said by DataRiker:

It doesn't even matter. Google is having the effect they intended. To give other providers a push towards higher speeds.

It does matter because unlike swaying public opinion, businesses/other ISP's need to see a viable business case made, a model they can follow and profit from.
So far Google has released NO financial information to demonstrate that an investor driven company can, build and operate a new FTTH overbuild while offering a reasonable return to investors.
further No other business has be given the opportunity to cost shift so much of the risks on the local taxpayer while making a pathetic 7 year (much less by the time it's rollout) commitment to CONTINUE to serve at a reasonable price.
This is a terrible deal if in 5 years after all other providers have been driven off, google (or their selected spinco) says" the new price is $XXX, pay us or get nothing"

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

The hard part is building the last mile. After this is done I have a hard time understanding why fiber providers are artificially limiting speeds so low.

If Verizon is profitable selling fiber why wouldn't Google be?

tshirt
Premium,MVM
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

said by DataRiker:

If Verizon is profitable selling fiber why wouldn't Google be?

As you note there is a price difference, and Verizon left a path to faster investment recovery through higher prices for faster/bigger/ better packages.
Google's road to profitability or breakeven is a mystery they now seem less likely to share.
look at Elton Musk and tesla, they worked through the popularity/pay back questions and now freely share what they learned hoping others will build around and buy/license their battery.

If Google could really prove their business case (as they said they intended at the initial announcement of "GF experiment" (their words) then reveal it and others will flock to it.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

said by tshirt:

said by DataRiker:

If Verizon is profitable selling fiber why wouldn't Google be?

As you note there is a price difference, and Verizon left a path to faster investment recovery through higher prices for faster/bigger/ better packages.

There is not a faster recovery through higher prices if very few / nobody subscribes to the higher tier in meaning full numbers.

When you split the difference I bet Verizon is right around ~70 dollars average take on internet or lower. Very few people can invest 100+ dollars per month.

Again, not following this argument at all.
ITGeeks

join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH
And those same people were happy when VZ stated they didn't have any hard caps- and were moving their service in droves, now they come out with a cap several years later and their the most hated company ever. And I knew the entire time and posted it they had caps and were waiting for others to drop in caps before VZ did- and what'd they do- issue caps!
ITGeeks

join:2014-04-20
Cleveland, OH
And what areas are getting it? KS Metro area and Provo. Other than that NOBODY has it from Google. NOBODY. Austin isn't even started with much of anything and its been over a year. So why should I be excited for their $70 gig Internet? And btw the only time you're going to see it is in speed tests, I'm not going to download my Windows updates that fast. Your connection is only as fast as the server you are connected too. Hence- the reason why most people are happy with 50meg.

DataRiker
Premium
join:2002-05-19
00000

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

So we should be mad that Google is offering better speeds at lower prices?

Hmm...your motives seem real genuine.
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

Re: The Google of 2006 really loved ...

Yes, because that only makes the incumbents look bad and we certainly can't stand for that!
Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
Oh, you mean Google didnt wave that magic wand that makes fiber service all of a sudden available to everyone in the world?

They must have misplaced it as they are steadily rolling out fiber. Which none of the incumbents are really doing at this moment and they certainly are not doing it to the point that they are offering a great product for a great price as Google is.

MDA
Premium
join:2013-09-10
Minneapolis, MN
Reviews:
·Comcast
said by ITGeeks:

the only time you're going to see it is in speed tests, I'm not going to download my Windows updates that fast. Your connection is only as fast as the server you are connected too. Hence- the reason why most people are happy with 50meg.

Wouldn't be that way if everyone running a network would step up and upgrade for this speed Google is delivering (not to mention speed up the next fiber optical standard for backbone links).

Google is the kick in the ass, no matter how many yards or streets they tear up and I'd imagine it'd be a whole lot different without some big company like Google doing this for the industry.
Rakeesh

join:2011-10-30
Mesa, AZ
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..
·Cox HSI
said by tshirt:

...all the attention they got from SAYING the loved... neutrality.
In fact someone should name anything Google does that isn't for Google's own benefit.*

*Be it PR or research into future businesses.
Google is not mother Teresa, Gandhi, and ironman up into one.

Ghandi was a very outspoken racist, Theresa believed in suffering at her hospices, and Ironman is fictional.
dfxmatt

join:2007-08-21
Evanston, IL
This isn't really relevant.

Every company does everything to their own benefit. It's just that google happens to do more that also lets the public benefit, whereas a lot of companies see it as a problem to let others benefit. See: RIAA/MPAA for example, who think if money isn't flowing to them it's lost.

Infostack

@69.126.174.x

Google may not want web 4.0

Think of web 4.0 as full-duplex 2-way. This will only happen if we have open interconnect at the edge and balanced settlements which clear supply and demand north-south between horizontal layers and east-west between vertical boundaries in the informational stack.

This would be extremely disruptive to Google's domination of the ad-ecosystem model. Here's a write-up: »bit.ly/1670oOx