Daily Anarchist Forum
November 12, 2019, 07:05:08 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Welcome to the Daily Anarchist Forum!
 
   Home   Help Search Members Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Thoughts on Free-market methods to counter potential issues with this?  (Read 3363 times)
AgoristTeen1994
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 590


View Profile
« on: November 29, 2013, 11:31:49 AM »

http://news.yahoo.com/us-eyes-phase-old-telephone-network-023742404.html

Okay now then, I admit my understanding of this topic is more limited than I'd prefer, however based on that limited understanding, it seems that one of the main complaints some people have, about not forcing companies to keep the old "legacy" system of telephone lines, is for people in poor and/or rural areas who cannot afford the broad-band internet access they claim would be necessary to use a VoIP based system..I have a couple questions:

1. If most or all of the regional and national phone companies transitioned from the older copper wire and switching station, system to a newer VoIP-based system, would access to the new system require high-speed/broadband internet, or would a slower, and cheaper internet connection suffice?

2. If a higher-speed and more expensive internet connection is required, how would you propose a free market MIGHT deal with that, so that people in poor and/or rural areas, could still call emergency services if required?

I'm not asking out of some fallacious notion that the free market CAN'T do that, (obviously) but simply as a brainstorming session prompt, which hopefully might bear some ideas that could be used to make money...especially if offered through the counter-economy as any good agorist should do their best to accomplish.
Logged

Syock
Epic
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2427


Existing Beyond Time


View Profile WWW
« Reply #1 on: November 29, 2013, 12:07:51 PM »

I don't believe that the copper wires are actually cheaper to make or maintain.  The only reason they might be considered less expensive is because the installation cost is already expended.  The companies have to maintain two different systems to keep them.  As fewer people want copper, the cost will rise per person.  The pricing is marketing with essentially monopoly line status. 

The copper will do VOIP.  It might not do VOIP + video though.  There have actually been a few tech leaps on the copper lines over the years, such as going digital.  If you have seen commercials for magic-jack, that is essentially VOIP computer hardware that connects on old copper wires.  It works anywhere in the world.  

Another low cost option for a phone is a prepaid cell phone, if you are in cell-phone turf, which is nearly full coverage in some countries and basically all cities.  
« Last Edit: November 29, 2013, 12:11:08 PM by Syock » Logged

Krantz
Newbie
*
Posts: 18


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: November 29, 2013, 02:16:40 PM »

Neither the copper wire (nor electricity or other fancy-schmancy devices like organized water-supply network or (lol) kindle readers) are necessary for  humans to live - so they ARE NOT a monopoly and I don't give a flying damn if a certain government bureau is gonna take care to supply it for me or not. All of these modern devices (like everything else in the world) are better supplied by private, for-profit organizations and I don't even fucking believe that someone can even think  that we have world-wide network of mobile phones (or internet or home PCs for that matter ) because of some government supervision or something.. Government officials are rather known for not being able to use e-mails efficiently (or spending millions for a single, broken website).
Logged
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: November 29, 2013, 02:22:15 PM »

I didn't read the article. But I just want to point out that a person can get rid of their landlines at home, and with voip also be able to communicate with people on telephones by using the SIP protocol and a phone number purchased from a provider.
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
Seth King
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
*****
Posts: 3211



View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: November 29, 2013, 02:25:04 PM »

Okay, just skimmed the article.

This is only a "problem" because the government is involved. Why should the government give a shit what form of communication people use?

In the market-place if there is still a demand for telephones, then there may very well be a supply for telephone service. Where it's not cost effective to provide telephone service any more, then it will not. There's no telephone service on the North Pole. Don't like it? Don't live there.
Logged

When are you moving to New Hampshire?
toa
Newbie
*
Posts: 20


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2013, 03:05:25 PM »

I'm not sure I understand the conflict. The copper lines are ran, the people with phone service would still get service, but with a different protocal...? Phone lines are as expensive as internet access where I am. If you have internet, you also can have phone services. I don't understand how it could be a reliability issue, as it would be using the same infrastructure. I don't understand how it would be a pricing issue. I don't understand why anyone needs permission to increase bandwidth of existing infrastructure by running a different protocal, and offering more services, as well as the same old style services. And I don't know why anyone would complain. In short I don't see a problem to have a solution for.

If I understand this correctly, correct me if I'm wrong. They want to increase DSL bandwidth by getting rid of the voice range frequencies. Then whoever has those telephone lines can have a faster internet connection, and just use voip. Voip is essentially free, so you can basically for the same money, get phone service and any other ip product/service for the same money.
Logged
AgoristTeen1994
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 590


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: November 30, 2013, 09:57:50 AM »

Neither the copper wire (nor electricity or other fancy-schmancy devices like organized water-supply network or (lol) kindle readers) are necessary for  humans to live - so they ARE NOT a monopoly and I don't give a flying damn if a certain government bureau is gonna take care to supply it for me or not. All of these modern devices (like everything else in the world) are better supplied by private, for-profit organizations and I don't even fucking believe that someone can even think  that we have world-wide network of mobile phones (or internet or home PCs for that matter ) because of some government supervision or something.. Government officials are rather known for not being able to use e-mails efficiently (or spending millions for a single, broken website).

1. I never said they were necessary...I was just pointing out that one of the "concerns" mentioned is supposedly an inability to call 911 if necessary without an internet connection or cell phone coverage (as exists in rural/poor areas) if this switch is made

2. I also recognize that the free market can provide this device more cheaply and effectively than government...I was just asking for ideas on HOW that might occur with this particular topic, not IF it could occur, which I already know it can.



Okay, just skimmed the article.
This is only a "problem" because the government is involved. Why should the government give a shit what form of communication people use?
In the market-place if there is still a demand for telephones, then there may very well be a supply for telephone service. Where it's not cost effective to provide telephone service any more, then it will not. There's no telephone service on the North Pole. Don't like it? Don't live there.
I think the reason the gov't "gives a shit" is unease about losing the next election, or for a bureaucrat getting fired, if after this transition, some people in rural areas can't call 911 or something, and thus die. Not that they'd actually end up out of a job.

Logged

AgoristTeen1994
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 590


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: November 30, 2013, 10:08:21 AM »

I should probably also add, since I apparently wasn't being a clear as I meant to be, that
1. I admit my understanding of telephone systems, and VoIP, and the nitty-gritty of how internet connections work is limited..that's why I was asking if what seemed to be a transition from the copper-wire based system to a VoIP system for telephones would result in needing an internet connection to make a phone call, and if so would a high speed connection be needed. I was asking that since I know internet access can be difficult in some rural areas (My aunt uncle live in a rural area and don't have internet since it's apparently unavailable in their area.) and thus, if a high speed internet connection was a required for a VoIP system, and if that would be difficult to acquire in rural areas, what could an potential entrepreneur agorist do to provide internet access to people where it may otherwise be difficult to acquire.


If I understand this correctly, correct me if I'm wrong. They want to increase DSL bandwidth by getting rid of the voice range frequencies. Then whoever has those telephone lines can have a faster internet connection, and just use voip. Voip is essentially free, so you can basically for the same money, get phone service and any other ip product/service for the same money.

From my understanding their actually not trying to increase DSL bandwidth. What they're trying to do is lower the cost for the providers, since apparently it is cheaper for AT&T to provide telephone service through a VoIP system than the older copper wire system, but apparently there are regulations that prevent that. I could be wrong.
Logged

toa
Newbie
*
Posts: 20


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: November 30, 2013, 02:15:33 PM »

Quote
The Federal Communications Commission is working toward drafting rules in January to formalize the IP transition -- switching communications systems to Internet protocol.

Quote
"I don't want to stop technology, but we want to make sure we still have phone service for everyone, not just for people who live in cities who can afford it," said Harold Feld of the digital rights policy group Public Knowledge.

Quote
They encouraged the FCC "to prevent telephone companies from discontinuing plain old telephone service, especially in areas that have no other means of communication."



Questions on stability, reliability

Feld said wireless and IP phones are useful, but don't match the reliability of copper landlines for everyday use.

DSL is a way to broaden the bandwidth of telephone lines to include frequencies that don't interfere with voice range frequencies. The voice over phone lines are reproduced with analog signals to speakers. Meaning you produce a voltage with your voice, that voltage is transmitted in a wave format, and recompiled by a speaker. So the high frequencies sent over the telephone line add a little noise possibly, but gets filtered out, and used to transmit digital signals in the form of ip. So it is running dual purpose. So if you have a phone line, then you just need an ISP to get internet. And DSL is considered broadband as far as I know, but

Quote
Feld said wireless and IP phones are useful, but don't match the reliability of copper landlines for everyday use.

if you are using the reliable copper land lines for DSL then you are connecting to the internet just as reliably. Voice over Internet Protocal, is just another translation service that compiles your voice and translates to the speaker you are connecting with. Instead of analog it is digital. But the messages are delivered through the same wires, or at least can be with DSL.

Quote
A coalition of consumer groups, including the National Rural Assembly and National Hispanic Media Coalition, filed comments with the FCC underscoring "the challenges of many rural Americans that do not have access to wireless and broadband services."

If they have a phone line, then they do have access to broadband services, through DSL. If you don't want to consider DSL broadband, then ok, thats fine. But if we quit delivering voice range frequencies, we could broaden the bandwidth of those lines. There would be more range of frequencies to send digital information rather then analog. And it could be translated through voice over internet protocal. Thus delivering phone services through the same reliable network of phone lines, but also have a faster broadband internet. Not to mention you can then have free streaming video services which could replace tv services.

I can't imagine they are forcing AT&T to continue offering services they don't want to. They could sell off the phone line infrastructure if they want to. But instead they want to repurpose the phone lines. The article doesn't say how, but I can only imagine that it is to offer higher speed internet then was previously possible, due to the limited frequency range over a phone line.  

Basically this seems like a prime example of how ridiculous government has gotten. Trying to micromanage how a tech company translates a sound into a signal and back to a sound again.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2013, 02:28:06 PM by toa » Logged
toa
Newbie
*
Posts: 20


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: November 30, 2013, 02:40:15 PM »

Quote
In data communications a 56k modem will transmit a data rate of 56 kilobits per second (kbit/s) over a 4 kilohertz wide telephone line (narrowband or voiceband). The various forms of digital subscriber line (DSL) services are broadband in the sense that digital information is sent over multiple channels. Each channel is at higher frequency than the baseband voice channel, so it can support plain old telephone service on a single pair of wires at the same time.[6]
However when that same line is converted to a non-loaded twisted-pair wire (no telephone filters), it becomes hundreds of kilohertz wide (broadband) and can carry up to 60 megabits per second using very-high-bitrate digital subscriber line (VDSL or VHDSL) techniques.
In the late 1980s, the Broadband Integrated Services Digital Network (B-ISDN) used the term to refer to a broad range of bit rates, independent of physical modulation details.[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broadband

5 paragraphs down... So this paragraph is saying, if you don't carry voice range frequency over a telephone line, you can broaden the bandwidth of the digital ip signal, and get 60 mb/s rather then 56kb/s. Though DSL can be faster then 56kb/s usually advertised at 128kb/s. So basically AT&T could increase the internet speed of these people by 500xs, but the special interests don't want to allow them to do that, because they don't have access to high speed internet. If that makes your brain hurt, you are not alone.
Logged
AgoristTeen1994
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 590


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: December 03, 2013, 10:45:48 AM »

Soooo....no issue then? Alright.
Logged

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!