Running extra fiber optic cable during initial installation, even if it seems excessive, is a highly recommended practice. Future-proofing your network infrastructure with spare fiber significantly reduces cost and effort later on. Pulling new cable is disruptive and expensive, while having readily available dark fiber allows for easy expansion, upgrades, and redundancy without the hassle of major construction or downtime. This upfront investment pays off in the long run by providing flexibility and adaptability to unforeseen technological advancements and increasing bandwidth demands.
The American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) is discreetly funding community-owned fiber optic networks, bringing affordable, high-speed internet access to underserved areas. These networks offer gigabit speeds for just $50-$65 per month, significantly undercutting incumbent ISPs often providing slower speeds at higher prices. This funding is helping bridge the digital divide by empowering communities to build and control their own internet infrastructure, fostering local economic development and improving access to essential services.
Hacker News commenters generally lauded the ARPA-funded community-owned fiber initiatives. Several pointed out the significant difference between publicly owned/community-owned networks and the usual private ISP model, highlighting the potential for better service, lower prices, and local control. Some expressed concerns about the long-term sustainability and scalability of these projects, questioning whether the initial funding would be enough and if these smaller networks could compete with established giants. Others noted the importance of community engagement and technical expertise for success. A recurring theme was the frustration with existing ISPs and their perceived lack of investment in underserved areas, with commenters expressing hope that these community projects could serve as a model for broader change. Several commenters also discussed the regulatory hurdles and lobbying power of incumbent ISPs, emphasizing the need for continued public support and advocacy for these alternative models.
The IEEE Spectrum article argues that the current trajectory of 6G development, focused on extremely high frequencies and bandwidth, might be misguided. While these frequencies offer theoretical speed improvements, they suffer from significant limitations like extremely short range and susceptibility to atmospheric interference. The article proposes a shift in focus towards utilizing the existing, and largely underutilized, mid-band spectrum for 6G. This approach, combined with advanced signal processing and network management techniques, could deliver substantial performance gains without the drawbacks of extremely high frequencies, offering a more practical and cost-effective path to a truly impactful next-generation wireless network.
HN commenters largely agree that focusing on 6G is premature and driven by hype, especially given 5G's under-delivered promises and niche applications. Several express skepticism about the need for the speeds 6G promises, arguing current infrastructure improvements and better utilization of existing technologies are more pressing. Some suggest focusing on improving coverage, affordability, and power efficiency instead of chasing higher theoretical speeds. There's also concern about the research itself, with comments highlighting the impracticality of some proposed technologies and the lack of clear use cases beyond vague "future applications." A few commenters point out the cyclical nature of these G cycles, driven by marketing and telco interests rather than genuine user needs.
Google Fiber is expanding its ultra-fast internet service to Las Vegas. While specific neighborhoods and timing aren't yet available, Google Fiber confirms it's actively planning and designing the network infrastructure for the city, promising more details as the project progresses. This expansion marks a continuation of Google Fiber's recent growth into new metropolitan areas.
Hacker News commenters express skepticism about Google Fiber's expansion to Las Vegas. Several recall Google Fiber's previous entries into markets with much fanfare, followed by quiet retreats and scaled-back plans. Some doubt Google's ability to compete with existing entrenched providers, while others question the long-term viability of Fiber given Google's history. A few commenters welcome the increased competition and hope it will lead to better pricing and service, though this is tempered by the prevailing cynicism. Some discussion also revolved around the technological aspects, including the possibility of using existing fiber infrastructure and the challenges of deployment in a densely populated area. Overall, the sentiment is cautious, with many commenters adopting a "wait-and-see" attitude.
Summary of Comments ( 86 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43471177
HN commenters largely agree with the author's premise: running extra fiber is cheap insurance against future needs and troubleshooting. Several share anecdotes of times extra fiber saved the day, highlighting the difficulty and expense of retrofitting later. Some discuss practical considerations like labeling, conduit space, and potential damage during construction. A few offer alternative perspectives, suggesting that focusing on good documentation and flexible network design can sometimes be more valuable than simply laying more fiber. The discussion also touches on the importance of considering future bandwidth demands and the increasing prevalence of fiber in residential settings.
The Hacker News post "If you get the chance, always run more extra network fiber cabling" generated a lively discussion with several insightful comments. Many commenters strongly agreed with the premise of running extra fiber, emphasizing the relatively low cost of the cable itself compared to the labor involved in installation, making it a worthwhile investment for future-proofing.
Several users shared anecdotes reinforcing this point. One commenter recounted a situation where pre-running extra fiber saved them significant time and money when they unexpectedly needed to expand their network infrastructure. Another highlighted the difficulty and expense of retrofitting fiber in older buildings, emphasizing the wisdom of over-provisioning during initial construction.
A few commenters offered practical advice on implementing this strategy. Suggestions included labeling cables clearly, using high-quality cable for longevity, and considering future bandwidth needs. One commenter specifically recommended using OM5 fiber for its higher bandwidth capacity, while another cautioned against going overboard and advocated for a balanced approach based on reasonable future needs. This commenter argued against running exorbitant amounts of fiber "just because," and instead recommended a sensible approach to over-provisioning.
The discussion also touched on the importance of proper documentation. Commenters stressed the need for accurate records of cable runs, including detailed diagrams and labeling, to facilitate future maintenance and upgrades. This was highlighted as particularly important in larger or more complex installations where tracking cable runs can become difficult.
Some users also mentioned the potential benefits of dark fiber – unused optical fiber – for future expansion or leasing opportunities. This was presented as another argument for installing more fiber than immediately necessary.
Finally, a few comments addressed the broader context of network planning, emphasizing the importance of considering not just fiber but also other aspects of network infrastructure like conduit space and power distribution. These commenters argued for a holistic approach to network design, considering all interconnected elements.
Overall, the comments on Hacker News strongly supported the idea of running extra fiber cabling whenever possible, citing cost savings, future-proofing, and the challenges of retrofitting. The discussion provided practical advice on implementation and highlighted the importance of documentation and a comprehensive approach to network planning.