Irregulators
Breaking the chains of chokepoint capitalism
Organizer:
- Organized by
-
-
Comparing Irregulators Info to Technology Policy Institute via Chat GPT
-
Comparing Irregulators Info to Technology Policy Institute via Chat GPT
We compared using https://chattpi.org/ to having uploaded the book Diss-connected to Chat GPT. We asked the same question of each. What sources can we cite to validate the claims in the book Diss-connected?
Did telecommunications companies bill customers for fiber that they never delivered?
chatTPI answered:
Based on the provided documents, there is no explicit mention of telecommunications companies billing customers for fiber that they never delivered. The documents mainly discuss topics such as investment in fiber by telecommunications companies, the effects of unbundling regulations, the benefits of facilities-based competition, and the potential drawbacks of overly focusing on fiber optic infrastructure. However, the documents do not provide specific information about billing practices related to undelivered fiber services.
Source:
– “whence-competition-in-network-2007077”
– “communications-broadband-and-c-2007029”
– “the-real-benefits-of-gigabit-n-2007574”
– “There’s too much fiber in our broadband diet”
– “scientific-american-s-flawed-b-2007433”
chatDiss-connected answered:
Yes, telecommunications companies have billed customers for fiber upgrades that were never delivered. The evidence indicates a pattern of misappropriation and misrepresentation by these companies:
-
Collection of Funds for Undelivered Fiber Upgrades: Big Telecom companies collected billions of dollars from utility customers for fiber-optic upgrades that were never completed. They diverted these funds to other business lines, notably wireless, instead of fulfilling their fiber upgrade commitments​​.
-
Broken Promises Post-Telecommunications Act of 1996: Following the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which aimed to foster competition, telecom companies pledged to upgrade their entire state utility networks to fiber. This upgrade was supposed to provide high-speed fiber-optic services to all residential and business customers in the U.S., but it did not materialize as promised​​.
-
Over $500 Billion Paid by Customers for Unfulfilled Upgrades: According to the New Networks Institute, Americans have paid over $500 billion since 1992 for fiber-optic upgrades that were never delivered. This situation has been exacerbated by the use of outdated accounting rules by telecom companies, allowing them to allocate expenses across their businesses in a way that obscured the lack of fiber deployment​​.
-
Misrepresentation of Fiber Deployments: Telecom companies have misrepresented their fiber deployments, focusing on wireless infrastructure at the expense of promised fiber to the home and office upgrades. This misallocation left many customers with outdated copper lines, despite paying for fiber upgrades​​.
-
Selective Deployment and Digital Inequality: The Baby Bell companies, which include major players like AT&T and Verizon, selectively deployed fiber only in more profitable areas, neglecting rural and low-income urban areas. This practice contributed to the widening digital divide​​.
-
Underutilized Fiber Infrastructure: A significant portion of the fiber-optic infrastructure laid by AT&T and Verizon has never been put into service. This “dark fiber” remains unutilized, even though it could be used for municipal open access networks​​.
-
FCC’s Role in Overlooking Commitments: The FCC has been criticized for not adequately addressing the issue of overcharging for undelivered fiber-optic services and for not holding telecom companies accountable for their state-based broadband commitments​​.
-
Diversion of Funds to Wireless Networks: Funds intended for upgrading copper lines to fiber were instead used to build fiber lines for wireless networks, benefiting the wireless affiliates of the telecom companies but not the customers who paid for these upgrades​​.
In summary, there is substantial evidence that telecommunications companies have charged customers for fiber upgrades that were either not delivered or were grossly misrepresented, contributing to digital inequality and a lack of accountability in the industry.
You
What is the evidence that dark fiber remains unutilized?
Broadband Community Advisor
The evidence indicating that a significant portion of dark fiber (fiber-optic infrastructure that has been installed but is not currently in use) remains unutilized comes from the following points highlighted in the document:
-
Underutilized Fiber Infrastructure: It’s noted that a substantial amount of the fiber-optic wires installed by major telecom companies like AT&T and Verizon have never been activated. This ‘dark fiber’ could be repurposed for use in municipal open access networks, but remains unutilized as of the document’s writing​​.
-
Misallocation of Resources: The telecom companies have been criticized for their misallocation of resources. They focused on developing wireless infrastructure at the expense of the promised fiber to the home and office upgrades. This implies that while significant investments were made in laying fiber-optic lines, the primary focus was not on activating these lines for the intended purpose of providing high-speed internet access to homes and businesses​​.
-
Non-Fulfillment of Upgrade Commitments: The context of unutilized dark fiber is also linked to the broader issue of the telecom companies’ failure to fulfill their commitments to upgrade their networks. The companies collected funds for fiber-optic upgrades but instead diverted these resources to other areas, such as wireless networks, leaving the installed fiber-optic infrastructure underused or inactive​​​​.
The combination of these points paints a picture of a telecommunications industry that has invested in the physical infrastructure of fiber-optics but has not fully utilized this infrastructure to deliver the promised high-speed internet services to all customers, especially in less profitable rural and low-income urban areas. This underutilization of dark fiber represents a missed opportunity for enhancing broadband connectivity and reducing the digital divide.
-
-
7 Replies
-
@bruce-kushnick Ron has copied this from Bruce’s email to better utilize our website and keep the discussion in one place.
Bruce replied:
yeah — pictures worked — So, let me get this straight — the stuff took the DISS-CONNECTED book contents and generated the answers???
and they are d9ametirally opposed to TPI stuff using CHAT —
Is this dreaming? not sure how we make money from it — but —
Ok, the interface to add docs to out library, or to create a specific state of FCC filing, etc —
As i know where everything is —
Time to talk wednesday or thurs? I have some appts I’m waiting on – but —
What do you think of it All? im kind of shocked at the tests so far — it isn’t simply our stuff — but the comparison with TPI — right?
We can have it rip into the other analyses– including the 5 year plans
But, we need to monetize this — as well as use it for PR —
ie, comparing the book’s analyses — (with the 5 year plans created — but then having it summ up the stuff — if that was possible —
so, it seems easy to use — and i’ve been playing with the Bing AI stuff –
-
@bruce-kushnick yes, since the book was in PDF format, I was able to easily upload it into ChatGPT. We can upload additional work to build our own language model. I am curious about the discrepancy between what you have written about and what TPI has written.
It would likely take a while for us to be able to monetize this.
There is another video, that will be embedded in the reply to this reply
-
Custom GPTs
-
There are lots of videos for how you monetize a custom GPT:
-
i just replied and it didn’t post — probably human error —
1) first — I spoke to Chuck — monetize — would you like us to create a package to pitch, say Public Knowledge or others who have databases, filings, etc — and you would get paid to build their stuff.?
2) I’m closing up the NJ filing — due at 5PM
So if you have any time, the stuff I sent about jersey in the last email had the last version of what we’re filing
the TPI stuff is crazy — because it shows that if a reporter asks the same question — they’ll see these guys are clueless about basic facts
and this is what will happen if we do the 5 year plans and our workl including the filings we did in the other states — MA, NY and RI are due next week —
-
I would love to work with Public Knowledge, and Gigi Sohn’s new organization, American Association for Public Broadband.
-
we’re playing the hand — Gigi is a separate item, as is PK, as is what we’re doing to get them to play with us in general–
So, after i file — etc – let’s talk about options —
but the first is not to pitch gigi or harold on tech updates… we need to show them what it does
this is about getting them to play with us on the accounting, and the failed deployments, etc — and because it’s tied to a school year — as sascha and chuck are pulling these strings —
the next step should be — we file using the AI ij the next round — and use it for PR — and then whether we meet about the 5 year plans with an alternative we’re creating — and
then get these other people to sign on to that —
and then — oh by the way– did you see our AI filings, etc — we can help you — blah
but tech is not the first step– it’s we prove we have it –and can show it
Log in to reply.