Post

There's a reason the GOP has been trying to ban communities from providing (affordable and generally better) broadband services for decades.

spoiler: it didn't work

FCC has been a pawn of the telecoms for decades so it was never going to happen

But they did stop at least one other city from doing the same with litigation. Probably more than one.

It still boggles my mind that it would cost ~$55 for 300mbps. 300mbps should be cheaper or they should offer a slower plan for less.This is perhaps the thing that drives me the most crazy about ISPs. Their cheapest package is still more speed than a lot of people need and it's still expensive

yep! I worked a little with Speakeasy, which was a cool indie ISP from Seattle back in the very early 00s

I have been calling for public Internet infrastructure for forever. Just like roads and bridges it makes sense for the public to own the data transport network, not to mention that it would make security and regulations much easier.

You mean investing in infrastructure and the poor has a return on investment? Wow, who could have seen that coming?

Moved to Chatt a little over five years ago, and when I eventually leave, EPB fiber might be the thing I miss most about it. Municipal internet should be the standard nationwide.

no, there's a certain beauty in the fact that these projects see huge bipartisan support, despite telecom and libertarian think tanker efforts to portray them as socialist boondoggles

We love our municipal ISP, Nextlight. 1Gbps symmetrical for $70 a month, and reliability so good that we now assume our equipment is at fault on the rare occasion that we have a service issue. So much better than any private ISP we've ever had. communitynets.org/content/next...

Information Choo-Choo innovators!

Plus it actually works