Slashdot Mirror
National Broadband Access
InterlockingP writes: "The Canadian government, after promising high-speed internet access for every community in the country by 2004, has concluded a report on the cost of implementing such a scheme. The total cost, from $1.85 billion to $4.5 billion ($CAN), would be shared by all levels of government and the private sector. Has any other country even addressed this issue yet? It looks like Canada is leading the way (again) with increasing availability of cheap internet access for all to enjoy. The story is covered in the Toronto Star and in The Globe and Mail."
Great, so when's it comming to the rest of the states?
One hundred and fiftly dollars a year?
That is the cost per month of decent health coverage. Do you realize what 4.5B could do for health, or education.
And since about 5 million canadians do not pay taxes, the cost is even higher.
And 80% of the country already has access, and i can't see this being cheaper.
Now please try explaining how, in this day and age, you can be a fully functioning member of society without electricity. Unibomber doesn't count.
Nice troll, though.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Knowledge, after all, is power.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
To even begin to compare the need for electrification with the perceived "need" for www.hot-sluts.com is laughable, at best.
--
Forget Napster. Why not really break the law?
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
Just for the record - content filters haven't gotten any traction with Canadian politicians (*knocking on my wooden desk). I've been really happy to see the more hysterical aspects of the various internet debates quite muted up here.
Uh... Zorkon... read it again. Geekboy was mocking an earlier post ("What are they gonna do up there?") by turning it around ("What are they gonna do down there?").
It made sense. And there's nothing more irritating that an uppity Canadian intent on showing up an American. Gawd. And yeah, I'm Canadian...
I like it. It's a good idea. The US should do something similar to this, the same way they funded the Interstate Highway System and funded the Electrifcation of rural areas in the 1930s-1960s.
Rural areas are being left behind when it comes to broadband, and in some places (Cheyenne River Indian Reservation of South Dakota) you can't even get a local dial-up number.
Those two people (three if you include Conrad Black) are dual citizens: they're also British. What the hell is Jean Cretin's problem? It might be an 80 year old law, but nobody has made this much fuss about it, and they are British citizens anyway.
"In other words, you're socialists. "
;)
No, I'm not socialist. It's funny, Maggie Thatcher was considered quite right wing, but in my experience of America, some of her policies seemed quite left of the Democratic party! I guess that the term "socialist" boils down to what you're used to... only in the US would any of my points of view be considered socialist, everywhere else I would be accused of being a conservative (central though (liberal), not particulary right wing these days).
"Compare this with health-care. Citizens of USA pay twice as much for health-care (total cost of various health insurance systems including private and medicare) than their European counterparts, and probably get on average about same level of service (everywhere with enough money you can, of course, get even better health-care from private hospitals... but I'm talking about basic health-care majority of people have) "
r tmo=qKqdudR9&atmo=rrrrrrrq&pg=/et/00/6/21/nwho21.h tml.
I think the US pays 11-14% of GDP for health care compared with 6-9% in Canada and western Europe. Last year, World Health Organisation ranked the US 37th in the world: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/et?ac=005310846313580&
"With my libertarian ideals"...
Most people who start off like that are Americans. This isn't meant as flamebait, but Americans seem to have a rather unique perspective in the western world concerning society and trust of government. As far as Canada is concerned, I think Stockwell Day and his Canadian Alliance party may have been taking lessions from south of the border. But for a majority of people in the north western hemisphere (excluding the US), there is more trust of governemt and an expectation that the government will do what is right for society in general, providing a better standard of living the poor, potentially at the expense of the rich. This contrasts highly with the US were people seem more interested in themselves and getting to the top at everybody else's expense. Americans have such an obsession with money!
Canada has twice the space, a tenth the population.
The issue is DISTANCE.. We're already more wired then anybody (depending whos study you believe) in the cities, it's getting a fat pipe out to no-where-land-up-north that's an issue.. Goverment takes care of digging up the landscape (railways, roads, fibers, they're good at that), private companies ultimatly run the ISPs..
I grew up in a rural location living on crappy copper I could hardly "CONNECT 1200BPS" on, even if there was a BBS in my tiny little local calling area..
I'd be happy to spend my tax dollars getting it so any kid, anywhere in Canada, gets the same deal online..
Communications is what ties a nation together and say what you will about the Canadian goverment, they understand that Canada has some issues with 'together'.. For my money, some kind of national ethernet would really help with that..
Besides, Canada is also one of the home of Nortel and JDS-Uniphase, we do know how to do some tricks with fiber and networks..
Maybe internet access should be entirely funded by the government just like public roads and highways.
Given the moon-crater-like surface of the highways around here, I'd say NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!
Now, if local governments would kindly get out of the way and let folks string up neighborhoods with new fiber someone could build decent Internet access. Unfortunately, they granted these things called LEGAL MONOPOLIES to the cable company in exchange for taxes--er, "franchise fees"...
Hope InterlockingP is also happy when the Canadian Government decides that "256Kb/sec is plenty fast enough", or that the children should be protected by mandatory access filters.
You're usually safe to assume that Government-provided services are more expensive and/or more intrusive than privately paid for services. The last US-Government program that was cheap and worked really well was the Homestead Act, which resulted in the death or displacement of thousands of Indians.
Potato chips are a by-yourself food.
Someone please tell me why one of the government's jobs should be spending taxpayer money on something as unnecessary as internet access? If I lived in Canada, I'd be horrendously disappointed.
Face it, as nice as the internet is, it shouldn't be the government's responsibility to make it available to everyone. This is like guaranteeing cheap HBO for your populace... it's silly.
Only on slashdot can a posting be rated "Score -1, Insightful".
People in the US have phones because there is a universal phone charge on the bill to collect money that goes into a fund to build out phoine service to rural and poor areas that can't afford it or where the telco doesn't want to. It sure wasn't because the silver haired angels at the phone company just wanted to out of the goodness of their hearts or because they thought they might make some money at it some day. In fact what is happening now in the US west is that USWEST and PacBel are pulling whole towns off the grid because of some 'changes' in the law that allows them to charge the 'full cost' for dragging service to some far off off village. When the phone company presents a $100,000 or so charge to a town of a 100 people they say 'Stuff It' and go wireless.
It's like the rural electrification program which I'm sure some blockhead Libertarian would say is bad because if people WANT electricity they should move to the city.
The real problem is that countries like the US and the UK for example auction off G3 spectrum to the highest bidder and the phone companies spent more money to snap it up than it would have cost to actually provide broadband service to every household in the country. This is true of the UK at least. So in order to keep the services away from you or I they buy the bandwidth and put it on a shelf. This protects their oligopolies in local and long distance service and keeps the other providers from encroaching through the wireless space. Oh an BTW since the auctions cost so much money the telcos get to petition for rate increases for all of the other services because now they're so leveraged.
Does the privacy commish actually have teeth ? :(
Here in the States we have 'self-policed' privacy
laws which of course mean they apply to us as citizens but not to the corp's
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
There are 4 cable companies and 2 dsl providers, not to mention oodles of folks who will be a 3rd party for your connect here in Calif.
The cable deregulation is FINALLY starting to pay off in the SF bay area at least. It took nearly 12 months of infrastructure work to get there though.
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
One thing you fail to notice.
;) Or, even better, the Democrats can get back to thier roots and stand for *gasp* democracy. ;)
While the US does all those things you say it does, Libertarians are fighting to reverse that and again become the shining light of Liberty the USA once was. Now if only more of the Republicans will realize that thier party has sold out and become so much like the democrats few can tell the difference and defect we'll be on our way.
Here, cheese-breath, chew on this *American* bit of media coverage of our healthcare system: [Canada's Burning! Media myths about universal health coverage].
You've been lied to by corporate interests in your country. And you *believed* what they told you. To shame!
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
But the rate would be regulated: the (Canadian) monopolies had a profit cap. The telcos weren't allowed to earn more than x%; anything above was translated into lower consumer costs.
It was a great system. The telcos got to make a very fair coin, but had to toe some pretty important lines to do so. IMO, I think we consumers were better off with the old system.
Currently, there's bugger-all for control, and that means the providers get to come across all Verizon-like: fuck the consumer, he's stuck with us... and if he leaves, someone else will take his place. Service and standards have dropped like the proverbial rock.
Anyway, my original point was just to provide some info re: how Canada came to have telephones everywhere.
(Note for geeks: lots of microwave towers to connect population centres; and lots of radiophones in the most remote corners of the country.
These days, though, it's fiber everywhere, even to rinkydink communities; and I think the radiophones are pretty much history, the telcos having run copper or fiber within most every remote community, though perhaps they're still connected to the rest of us using microwave or satellite.)
(Speaking for BC, at any rate. I suspect bits of rural Alberta are still being serviced through barbedwire fences...)
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Our privacy commish bashed the government in the chops, when it tried to integrate a half-dozen unrelated information systems into one system, all in the name of efficiency.
There was a helluva outcry about having a whole bunch of our records all in the same database.
The privacy commish made the government revert back to the old separated databases, out of concern that the uncivil servants shouldn't be able to look willynilly through our data. Revenue Canada employees simply don't need to know my medical records, vice versa, etc.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
The USA is already behind Canada wrt broadband access, and per-capita use of the Internet. Canada is in position #2. Believe it's one of the Scandinavian countries (perhaps Finland?) that's #1 for being wired.
The USA has always lagged behind Canada when it comes to telecommunications. Our monopoly telcos were permitted under the provision that they provide universal service.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Everyone in Canada got a phone connection because our telcos were guaranteed monopoly control *in return for* universal service.
:-(
This was a Very Good Thing.
The telcos benefitted: they had a secure, non-competitive market, with readily predictable costs and profits.
The consumers benefitted: we had service guarantees and rate restrictions.
For the longest time, the telco supplied the phones and were responsible for *every* problem with them, from the central office to the speaker. Inside or outside your house, the repair bill was on their tab.
And for the longest time, we had extremely low monthly lease fees, free local calling, and moderately low long-distance fees.
With the introduction of telco competition, we now have to pay outrageous hourly rates for any repair work done from the outside wall of our homes, pretty much have to buy our own phones, pay double to triple the monthly lease fee, still have free local calling, and have cheap long-distance.
Overall, I think we're on the losing side of things: except for the people who really yack it up on long-distance, having a phone is more expensive than it used to be.
Ironically, the monopoly telcos are still quite healthy, while all the would-be competition is struggling to stay afloat. In the end, we may wind up with monopolies once more... but this time, monopolies that aren't controlled by a consumer regulatory board. Ouch.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Bullshit.
It's the Americans who got bitchslapped with the DMCA. It's the Americans who got put over the barrel with education funding tied to school Internet filters. And so on.
America is not the home of the free. Not any more. Not since the corporations became powerful people.
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
No doubt, some people slip through the cracks, and some fuckups happen.
But do you really think you'd be any better in any other country? In the USA, f'rinstance, your insurer would do everything possible to avoid paying out: try to blame it on your genetics, blame it on something you did, blame it on anything to just avoid paying.
We need to fix the problems our system has, but we can't just throw it out; that'd be a cure worse than the problem!
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Here, chew on this *American* bit of media coverage of our healthcare system: [Canada's Burning!
Media myths about universal health coverage].
You've been lied to by corporate interests in your country. And you *believed* what they told you. To shame!
--
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Something else that you forgot was that MTV won't even play videos that Muchmusic will, and oh yeah, now that Much is in the States, they can't play those videos on the channels in the States... What's up with that?
Has any other country even addressed this issue yet?
I believe Sweden has already started construction of its national broadband plan. They also intend to cover the whole country including Swedish Lapland. In this matter the Swedes seem to be way ahead of everybody else.
I think that beautiful saying is written on the giant Statue of NataliePortman that stands at the entrance of Halifax Harbor. Not many people know this, but that statue was a gift from the people of Israel, to the people of Canada. At first, the Canadians didn't really like it. After all, it wasn't a blanket, it couldn't make fire, and you couldn't eat it. But now, the people of Canada love their statue, and would never part with it. This is probably because of the millions of immigrants who passed through McEllis island on their way to live their dream of a free, if freezing, life in Canada. Long live the Queen! Amidala, that is.
If tits were wings it'd be flying around.
Here's a great link for anyone intersted learning a little about Canada and not applying the standard stereo types to Canadians. Even though I agree it is humorous. Education is good. http://www.icomm.ca/emily/
An exploration of mixology, spirits and bartending.
Look on the bright side, the doctor who will see you will be using a VR rig because he can afford to live in TO while you have to live in Hamilton because of your tax bill.
But you'll still get a good doctor.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Our government is less intrusive and far less restrictive that the US's. (We get cable porn disguised as "art," we smoke pot and don't risk arrest, a criminal record and anal probes by nasty goons for a crummy joint. :-)
At least Chretien knows how many mukes everybody's got. Did you see Dubya's face when somebody told him how many he's got to play with.
The rest of the world needs a shield from the US, NOT the other way around.
You elected him...Uh, you didn't. Bwahaha...
No I sit corrected. You're not a democracy either.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
I have broadband access because i live in the dorm
at a university. I plug a 10baseT ethernet cable into the wall. I get fast download speeds. This is a good thing. Hopefully the canadians will hook up the rest of us with ethernet to your living room.
Hamsters are at least as feathery as penguins. HamLix
God save me from governments that decide what benefits "society as a whole." Of course, that means "god save me from most governments." Why would Canada be wasting perfectly good loonies on a project like this, instead of trying to salvage what's left of their healthcare system?
What do you mean "loss entirely on paper"? Based on that, ALL losses are on paper. Nortel is admitting that (x) bazillion bucks of the shareholder's equity is now worthless. That isn't a paper loss.
Imagine you buy a diamond from me for $1,000,000. You put it on your "books" as a $1m asset. The next day you find out you have a worthless piece of glass. Is your $1m "loss" just on paper? I think not.
What the hell else are they going to do down there? Drink beer and bomb another country? Speak bastardized slang english? Rip more vowels out of all their words until they are all one syllable?
********************************************
Speed limits exist because you are not a good driver. Sorry, mate.
from the can-I-get-DSL-in-my-igloo? dept.
/. crew making them too.
Err, ok. So Canadians are "Leading the way" but we live in Igloos? Come on Mike, most comments of that nature here in the forums would be modded down. We have enough trolls making ignorant comments like that, we don't need the
Yes, I am Canadian, and no, I don't appreciate the comment.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
Heh, I know. It makes me wonder if there is going to be anyone left to use all this broadband capacity. The Canadian goverment will probably be increasing the already-high tax rates to pay for this, driving the Canadian dollar downward ever closer to the value of the peso, resulting in an increase of the more well-off Canadians moving to the U.S.
And no, this isn't some anti-Canadian troll — I think the Canadian people have been great neighbors (recent booing of the U.S. flag notwithstanding) and the government has been a great ally, but it sure seems sometimes that their government is determined to turn Canada into a ghetto. How many wealthy Americans move to Canada versus the tons of wealthy Canadians moving to the U.S.? Note: Wealthy people spend money, employ people, and generate most of the taxable income that the goverment wants.
As a big sports fan, it's just sad. Yeah, I know my Cubbies are losers, but I've always felt more sorry for the Expos, who year after year develop great talent only to have it bolt for the U.S. at the first chance. The Raptors are a great team to watch, and it sucks that it's just assumed that Vinsanity's going to split, not because the team doesn't have a bright future, but because it's in Canada. And the Grizzlies leaving the beauty of Vancouver for a hole like Memphis? It's going to be a sad day if the current trend continues with hockey, leaving the NHL with zero Canadian teams, but it pisses me off that U.S. teams are having to subsidize the Canadian teams just because the Canadian government is so short-sighted. Anyway...
Cheers,
Nice idea, but here in the US they'd probably want the States to raise their drinking age again to get the Federal funding, just like they did with the Interstates. Before you know it, I'll be an underage drinker again.
--
--
"Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next.
The Canadian Government has guns?
Reality has a liberal bias
Hmm... the only thing north of Canada is the former USSR, if you go past the pole and keep going south.
If you mean the USA, the only thing north of them is Canada, and we're having trouble replacing our 30 year old rescue copters.
I guess it's true what they say about Americans' lack of geography skills.
It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
Given that it's so cold in winter and now cheaper broadband access, I guess more Canadians would stay in front of the computer and do less exercise. Sooner or later, more people would be getting too fat, and you know what, they will spend more on Hospitals. (Cutting down is not a solution anyway.)
That's the way they get rid of income inequality, compare to US, as the poor in US couldn't afford broadband, so they do more exercise and live longer, while the rich die sooner.
A sig is redundant.
Yup. The unintended consequences still haunt us today.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Okay, somehow has to offer up the standard libertarian opposition to this proposal...
Freedom means the absence of coercion. The non-initiation of force. In order for this proposal to be implemented, there has to be a hell of a lot of coercion going on, namely in the acquisition of taxes. You will give us your money or you will go to court, and possibly jail, and if you resist going to jail we will shoot you. You do not have a choice. You will do what we say.
Now how does internet access work in the rest of the world? The same way the internet itself works. Through the free market. I don't know what's happening in southern North Dakota, but in *rural* California high-speed internet access is popping up everywhere. A friend in the middle of nowhere gets megabit connection speeds over Sprint Wireless. DSL, cable, wireless. It's all happening without anyone needing to be taxed.
I have no idea how everyone in Canada got a phone connection. But everyone in the US living in a community of over 500 has one. My grandparents got hooked up in 1930 when their nearest neighbor was two miles away and the nearest town was fifty miles away. Granted, this is dense suburbia compared to Canada's Yukon, but it still happened without the government creating a national phone service initiative.
If I haven't pissed all of the geeks off yet by not proclaiming my allegience to socialism, the following statement will. Not everyone needs high speed internet access. Hell. No one needs high speed internet access. They may want it but they don't *need* it. No one died last year for not having it, and I seriously doubt anyone will die next year for not having it. It's so nice to know that Canada has solved all of its problems except for this last little thing...
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
If reducing the speed to 55MPH saved so many lives, then why not reduce it even further? What if the speed limit on I-5 were 25 miles per hour? Boy, that would save a lot of lives! If the Bush Administration wasn't so Evil, they would deny highway funds to any state that doesn't lower the speed limit to 15MPH. Because they don't they must intend for people to die.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
When a corporation wants to charge you something you can refuse. When the government wants to charge you something, and you refuse, you go to jail. If you resist going to jail you will be shot.
I didn't like what Microsoft was selling, so I didn't buy it. I didn't like what the government was selling, but they sent their goons to collect anyway.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
This isn't about just building a government controlled network. Far from it.
This is about how the government can assist the private sector in building this network. This means grants, right of ways, etc. This means subsidies for small communities so they, too, can have broadband.
I don't like the in-your-face-canada-rocks attitude (And I'm canadian) either.
On one respect, folks, we dont' want the government 'dictating' what we can do. In other respects, isn't it the job of government to set certain standards of living, and help society accomplish them?
please excuse him....all that Celion Dione...well, you know.
Plus sane legislation and hundreds of Computer Science graduates who would really prefer to stay at home...
Canada could kick some ass this century, we should start encouraging our politicians!
"It looks like Canada is leading the way (again)"...
Uhhh. Leading the way into erosion of individual
liberty, maybe. Remember, folks: Liberty, good. Government, bad.
Government is a necessary evil whose sole purpose of existence is to protect its citizens' liberty.
Government == coersion.
Please don't let the wonderful, but incorrect conception of "free" broadband disturb your ideological foundations.
If you think that every Canadian should have free broadband access, form a Foundation, donate to it, and petition philanthropists to donate to it. Don't take the Canadian citizens' property and money at gunpoint and use it for 'their own good'.
Logical
True to a certain extent, but not in the way that Americans might think of it. The Canadian government tends not to tie government money to moral judgements the same way the U.S. government does.
I suspect that a Canadian politician that seriously suggested cutting off money to NGOs that talked about birth control would get some guffaws and bad press, but not much else.
Not too dissimilar to what they've done already with funding public libraries.
--
You're a suburbanite.
I would be afraid that government-provided net access would be subject to taxes, censorship, restriction and whatever else the legislature throws in there.
Net access is best left in the private sector, where consumers have choices over who they do business with.
It's only because of what the last NDP government did to us, that we did that to them.
For those outside of BC, the 95% majority government of the past 5+ years went to a 1% minority overnight in a truly democratic election. Wasting C$400M on fast ferries we REALLY don't need and blatantly lying about budgets didn't help.
If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
Well, its easier for a small country to do it.. small surface area, not much natural obstacles.. Anyway, read it here. http://www.s-one.gov.sg/s1netinf/oview01.html
In fact, if the infrastructure is owned by the people (that is, citizens of the country, via the government) then it'll be a lot less suceptible to pushing around by the megacorps. What ISP do you know that won't roll over if AOL/T-W comes knocking? Oh yeah - AOL. They just start in a pre-rolled-over state.
The Signal/Noise ratio can be improved in two ways. Remaining silent is the OTHER way.
Note that I said, "useful" - this does not imply it's useful to everyone.
The Signal/Noise ratio can be improved in two ways. Remaining silent is the OTHER way.
Having A)lived in Canada all my life, and B) knowing a thing or two about governments in general, I have to ask the question:
Who seriously thinks this will cost anywhere near the projected cost? This is the *government* we're talking about here. Granted, some private companies are involved, but still I'd be surprised to see this come out less than double what they're saying.
Cost considerations aside, I also take issue with the priciple in general. Yes, I would love to have cheap broadband to my door, but if it comes at the cost of some other guy forcibly being made to pay for something he doesn't use (through taxes) then it is wrong. Sure you can argue this is the same case as with public roads, but I ask where are you going to stop? Will we have subsidized natural gas next? How about subsidized car repair? 'Everyone' needs a mechanic after all, right?, and we know how corrupt they are 'ripping people off' just like those large telecom corporations. Toothpaste, anyone?
We're sliding down the slippery slope of socialism.
Malloc
___________________ I want to be free()!
The way that Israel dealt with this type of problem when introducing cable television was to divide the country into regions in a way where being awarded the local monopoly for a large city (Jerusalem, Haifa, Tel Aviv, Tel Aviv Suburbs) also means that you were awarded an area with lots of land mass but smaller population (Negev Desert, Gallilee). They then worded the law such that if you didn't give everyone that wanted cable access by a certain date you'd lose your license. Of course they also included wording that if you didn't have a certain percentage of Israeli-created, Hebrew-language programming, you'd lose your license. Neither of those commitments have been taken seriously and there are still plenty of remote towns without cable and very little Hebrew-language programming. Of course I'm happy enough to watch ER or reruns of The Partridge Family and drool over Lori. ;)
how many inhabitants does Canada have? 20 millions?
31 million. Australia is in the 20-million range.
Sounds like they're in trouble. Maybe it's the BSD license. GPL == immortality.
Are Americians really this stupid?!?
Hey, it's a valid concern now that global warming is causing the ice blocks that the Parlaiment buildings are made out of to melt!
If I were a poor person in Canada I would be outraged that I was forced to pay for highways for everyone in the country when I couldn't even come close to affording a car for myself!
Interesting but a little short-sighted. Most poor people can afford to ride a bus. There's also a clever phrase "if you've got it, a truck brought it." No modern economy or society would function without a massive transportation infrastructure. You are critically dependent on this whether you own a car or not.
Hehe. You do realize that the V-Chip was invented, and patented by Tim Colins, a lab engineer in the Engineering Department at Simon Fraser University, in Burnaby BC right? And besides, imho there's nothing wrong with the V-Chip, since, well, the control rests with the parents, not with any larger organization.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
Yet.
...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
"The last US-Government program that was cheap and worked really well was the Homestead Act, which resulted in the death or displacement of thousands of Indians." Um... I think it's fairly obvious in the article that the Canadian government is behind this project. Not the US government.
Does it make you happy you're so strange?
http://www.usda.gov/rus/electric/
Maybe internet access should be entirely funded by the government just like public roads and highways. After all, it is called the information superhighway. Besides, society benefits as a whole from increased communication.
If it wasn't in the government's red book from before the election, I could have more liscence with this. But their timing is something else. Who do you think is going to profit heavily from this expansion? I'll give you a hint. They've got a blue logo, located in Ottawa, and no, it's not IBM. Methinks the boys in Ottawa are a little concerned their RRSP's went south in a hurry because of said-unnamed company. In my humble opinion, anyhow.
Is this a good thing? Maybe. On the surface it's great, but most of the time in Canada (and yes, I am Canadian) private-public partnerships usually mean that the little guy (e.g. mom and pop ISP's) take it up the a$$ because they don't have the political connections, and that makes me sick.
..don't panic
It WILL end up being a slave to pro-government interest groups as the CBC is.
Do you ever listen to CBC radio? CBC television is another issue - I'd be more in favour of getting rid of that some of that rubbish - but CBC Radio and Radio Canada, along with snow removal, are one of the few things my near 50% effective income tax rate buys me in this country. The news reporting is actually good and insightful, more importantly, it's the most balanced reporting you hear anywhere IMHO. Their programs are excellent, and they actually play music that isn't top 40. Wow! I won't even get into nifty things like internet streaming, which anyone can tune into - even you Americans. (I highly recommend a good shortwave reciever and Radio Canada tho..)
This has to be a troll.. oh well, IHBT.
..don't panic
There would also be some very cool Canadian internet appliances, given the abundant address space and autoconfiguration capabilities.
And I'm not even talking about mobility...
I apologise for this blatent IPv6 plug.
------
At least the Canadian government is thinking about spending it's tax dollars on something that might actually be useful to its people.
I gots ta ding a ding dang my dang a long ling long
How will this kind of scheme avoid the same kind of pitfalls that plague nationalized health schemes? I'm not saying that this is a bad move, only that there is a place for competition, and we all benefit from it. For example, does anyone believe Pac Bell would be selling flat-rate DSL if they weren't being forced to fight for customers by other providers?
So you're saying that I can protest the government in public in China and Iran and not fear arrest, but I can't do that in the US? And let's not even try to compare McCarthyism to Reaganism. McCarthyism was about weeding out the communists in the public and giving them a bad name so that no one would deal with them (black listed). Reaganism was about getting rid of communist governments world-wide in an effort to make the world more free, but that doesn't mean you can't be a citizen with communist feelings and protest your Democratic government if you want. They are distinctly different. I will admit that we had a few very bad politicians a few years ago (McCarthy), but people seem to be getting enough intelligence to not let those people get into very high public offices (they are still sometimes elected as local mayors in small towns, but to my knowledge, nothing beyond that).
"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
It looks like Canada is leading the way (again) with increasing availability of cheap internet access for all to enjoy.
Maybe internet access should be entirely funded by the government just like public roads and highways. After all, it is called the information superhighway. Besides, society benefits as a whole from increased communication.
If I was, then I would be slightly outraged that I was forced to pay for broadband internet access for everyone in the country when I couldn't even afford a computer for myself. Or are paying for computers for people also included in this?
Where is the money coming from? Isn't the tax rate in Canada high enough already?
I heard a while back Japan was supposed to be adding in systems that could handle 4 terabytes for there telephony systems. I would think that Japan would be leading the way if anyone.
At the next eco-hypocrisy-meeting, count the private jets used to get to the meeting. Should be interesting to see that
There was a report, I believe yesterday, on BBS World Service (though might have been on an NPR show) saying that Sweden was working on 100% broadband service, making the top four Finland, Norway, Sweden, and Denmark (I may have that order off a bit) with the U.S. lagging behind in fifth place.
We call them "laws". And -- guess what? -- they apply to private companies too!
What can't your ISP do whatever they want with your internet connection -- sniff, monitor, log, terminate? They do own it, after all.
Actually, the Supreme Court of Canada backed Jean Chretien in his block of Conrad Black's (the newspaper magnate) peerage to the House of Lords when Black appealed. The United States has a ban on US citizens recieving foreign honours, as does the UK, why shouldn't Canada be able to have this right as well?
The reason behind Canada's objections are twofold: The first and most imporatant is that peerages and knighthoods and other titles are archaic leftovers from an oppressive class-system that Canada wants no part in perpetuating and has objected to since the Nickel Resolution of 1919.
The other is that Canada, as a former colony of Britain, sees this as an infringement on her sovereignty.
Done.
i agree.
but dumping the queen just isn't on the public agenda, something that has to do with the 30% of canadians that are of british descent. some 60% of canadians still favour the monarchy for purely sentimental reasons. but the government has taken the steps that it can against the class system without rankling the voters too much.
your link says nothing about canadian regulation of cyberspace.
it cites a media ban on the karla homolka trial, which was put in place by the judiciary to ensure a fair and unbiased trial.
Not that there aren't "certain entities" out there that are trying.
Also, government funded access means you can pretty much forget about privacy. They can do whatever they want with your internet connection - sniff, monitor, log, terminate - they do own it, after all.
It it worth $44.95/mo to give up your privacy?
Yeah, but you can switch to a different ISP in that case.
When there's only one option, though...
Speaking as someone who has to live in America ..
... let me revel in the computer stores of Spadina, and use a realy public transportation system!!!!</WHINE>
yes yes they are.
<WHINE> Get me out of here!!Take me to Toronto
Code softly but carry a big magnet.
First Michael screws over the CensorWare project and now he's extolling the wonders of having the government deliver broadband where users will inevitably get to play by government rules. Not surprising.
Well, it seems that more clueless people than we thought were gung-ho for community net. (Not just the slackers at Sasktel). Anyone who is being forced into going with community net, who doesn't see the problems inherit with giving a goverment company full control over the outside connection of their network, is just as clueless as Sasktel is as far as implimenting network strategies. I for one want to keep control of my outside connections, firewall logs, port forwarding, IPSEC tunnels, and internet access. Sasktel can't tie their own shoes without asking 3 people how, and starting up 3 change requests to deal with the problem. Sure, the high speed is nice, but I'd rather take the hit in bandwidth, than to have to deal with Sasktel everytime I want an outside port forwarded, or add a new IP on the network. Big brother control sucks, it always has, and it always will. Everyone who knows anything about networking, and is being roped into Community net, is fighting this, and hopefully our cries will not be ignored. If you can't handle managing your own internet connection, DON'T WORRY. The boys at Sasktel will screw it up even better than you can.
But bear in mind: their acquisitions were made with Nortel shares (presumably newly issued shares). These would appear on the balance sheet at issue cost, which has now collapsed (down 90% or so from peak).
So, Nortel bought now (nearly) worthless assets with now (nearly) worthless shares.
There is cosmic justice in the world...
---
Book(n): Utensil used to pass time while waiting for the TV repairman
Besides, there's no Nortel plant in Shawinigan.
---
Book(n): Utensil used to pass time while waiting for the TV repairman
And I've seen the show you describe a couple times (and a couple other worthwhile shows on the Canadian station that airs around here, too). Thanks though.
XML causes global warming.
XML causes global warming.
I can see this ending up like the healthcare system. The goverment taking it over, closing unneccessary ISPs, then making all but the students and extremely elderly pay for it. That's alot of money to come up with just so that everyone can watch streaming porn.
Was this meant to be flame bait? Or are you another uninformed person who likes to think they know it all.
Joe McGuire
tinfoil.music
tinfoilmedia
No worse than spending hard earned cash on deadbeats with no jobs and no intention of getting one. Perhaps your afraid that once everyone in Canada has access to quality internet services, they may become a little better informed and perhaps the states will look at this and say that's one hell of an idea. Japan is doing the same thing as well. Looks to me like someone is getting lift behind.
And for crying out loud, your giving protestants out there, myself included, a bad name. Rampant bigotry should never have been let in as a form of free speech.
Joe McGuire
tinfoil.music
tinfoilmedia
Ya.. Other than the snow it is the same here too (southern Ontario). And I am sure it is the same in small towns in the states and elsewhere thoughout the world. And hell, CRTC or Bell.. Not a tough decision to me. Bell has, in these parts atleast, a stranglehold over the DSL market, and @home over the cable market. Sure, I can get DSL through another company. Only deal is that company gets the lines from Bell anyways, so it is all the same. What's the point.
Joe McGuire
tinfoil.music
tinfoilmedia
Loosing a net connection. Egads. Only in Canada.
*sigh*The problem was not the government, it was the moron admin that didn't set up the connection properly with redundancy to make of for technical glitches that effect the entire world.
Joe McGuire
tinfoil.music
tinfoilmedia
they pull this off and I'm gonna start saying "eh" and moving to canada
-
Funny. I live in Nova Scotia, and we have been hearing the "Fast Internet Access" story for too long. First, it was the DSL, but that only covers a certain SMALL percentage of the population. Then, our wonderful cable company was going to have cable access for all. Yet, it keeps on being changed to "availible in 6 months", "availible next year". I'll believe this when I don't have to wait 2 minutes to get to see the headlines on Slashdot. How do you set up 30 million people on the internet, without any network latency? Its impossible. The tech support team needed to cover all these customers would be about 60 million techs. I hope we get a lot of immigrants that have their certifications, because other then that, I think I'd rather stay on my horrible dialup, I'll get less latency.
Hey, asshole, show me anywhere in that post where I suggested that I was leeching anything. The odds are that I paid more in taxes last year than you did. In your tortured mind, anyone who advocates basic liberties (like, say, not being deported just because you have an opposing political opinion) is a "bloodsucking liberal"? It shows your how tenuous your connection with reality is.
blessings,
"Only in their dreams can men truly be free 'twas always thus, and always thus will be."
--Tom Schulman
WE are the Evil Government. It responds to US at election time. The corps don't vote, we do. Acting as tho it's some alien lifeforce is schizophrenic and dangerous to our democracy. It shows a lack of understanding of what we are And we claim to lead the world, when we won't trust our own elected government?
Oh yes -- the "government" created the internet protocols by redistributing tax dollars to learning institutions and the military. Business didn't. Business took a government-funded protocol and added a bit of magic, and kazam, it is a business matter only, this "Net".
What if the interstate highway program had not been built with government money? Would we be whizzing at low cost from small town to smaller town, all over the continent? Nope. The best roads would be toll roads, owned by conglomerates, and spurs would be added to outlying towns when it was financially viable to do so. We'd STILL be waiting for roads in areas witho no financial incentive to invite contruction. Ditto the phone company.
The Canadians are simply using logic, common sense, and an educated grasp of history unclouded by economic religion. They are building the infrastructure needed to wire their nation NOW, at a relatively small cost. How much as we spending, in all the private efforts, and what do we have to show for it in the "last mile"? Where will our choices lie when one company owns the only accessible broadband in a home area? Don't laugh. If they don't now, a few buyouts will concentrate ownership quickly and legally, and defacto monopolies will result. Markets are not naturally free. They need regulation to stay free.
Canada is simply creating an interstate highway system for the internet. They will have high-speed to every home for a reasonable price, soon, and we will just look on and snort, "Hah! Socialism!" as we pay $150US a month for high-speed symmetrical DSL that the Canadians will be getting for $40US. Who's more crazy?
Puhleeze. First, Canada is "up" there from y'all. Secondly, as for bastardized slang english, if you *are* American, you're certainly in no position to comment on bastardized english. Canadians may have an "accent" (wake up: every regional locality has their own distinctive "accent" - which is why the British sound British, the Canadians sound Canadian, and so on...) but our english is *much* closer to the "mother tongue" as it were, as far as spelling and vocabulary are concerned.
Finally, the comment on beer and bombing does not even rate a response.
Now, I agree that the PM is going a little overboard when it comes to Terry Matthews, as he is from Wales. However, Conrad Black is Canadian-born and obtained his British citizenship for the sole purpose of circumventing the law - in his case, I'd agree with Jean - he shouldn't be allowed to get it.
> from the can-I-get-DSL-in-my-igloo? dept.
Yes! Given that "iglu" is Inuktitut for any "house" not necessarily "temporary snow shelter," that's exactly what the article describes, assuming your house is of the normal, everyday type found in most developed countries such as Canada, UK, and (surprisingly) USA.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Of course , being a proud canadian, you've never tasted individualism.
What kind of a mindless, moronic statement is this!! I know there are idiots everywhere, but...
Why don't you leave that wonderful dreamworld of yours and see other parts of the world. A lot of these places have different points of view with different ways of doing things. What is wrong with that. Why is it, that americans think that if you don't do things their way, it's socialism, communism, liberalism, [place label here], etc. Must be brainwashing, and yes, you are brainwashed if you actually believe what you wrote in your post.
America built on freedom! My ass! You don't even know the meaning of the word.
'Men never commit evil so fully and joyfully as when they do it for religious convictions.' B. Pascal
Has any other country even addressed this issue yet?
Yes, I believe another country has.
The Swedish government promised broadband to all citizens of Sweden about a year ago, as far as I recall. Don't know when it's due to be implemented though, or how much progress there's been since then, as I am not a citizen there.
1.85 billion to $4.5 billion probably what it would cost to install infrastructure in just one US state such as NJ. Personally I don't want my tax dollars to go toward speeding people's access to porn.
love is just extroverted narcissism
Previous Slashdot stories have covered it
;)
And beacuse of that, we know it's the fastest.
Reading this article about attempts to get connectivity all-across Canada reminds me of the reports by the guy who proposed doing the same thing in Israel. You can use old, cheap 486 boxes running linux with inexpensive 100mb network cards to act as routers and since everyone in Israel has to do military service you have the unused labor, they can be running the wires all over the country and putting up the boxes in places. The only costs would be for the cables and that's not much. Run this stuff everywhere and you'd give internet access everywhere in the country. (But, of course, since it would also give it to the palestinians and maybe they wouldn't be kept in the dark and thus continue to be treated the way the U.S. treated negroes in the 1940s they didn't like the idea)
The lessons of history teach us - if they teach us anything - that nobody learns the lessons that history teaches us.
According to the plan, they are only bringing it to communities with educational, health, or government facilities, but that still covers a huge portion of the province.
Actually, if sum up all the taxes, and then factor the user costs of health care in on both sides of the border, Canadian taxation rates (adjusted in terms of local cash/buying power in the local economy) work out to a figure within 10% of combined US taxes... (and that's 30% vs. 33%, not 30% vs. 40%). Of course, these figures are from a few years ago, but come out of an Macro-Economics class at Waterloo University, and before this whole "Surplus, surplus, who stole the surplus" business you've got going now. -vaalrus (who is currently paying CAN $38.oo/mo for asymetric but happy broadband)
__
__
I can just see the topics to come...
The Canadian internet access project is finished, the entire country has a working and free connection to the internet!
Only to be followed by:
Canadian's all over the country are put on hold as the backbone becomes clogged with movie grabbers and pron!
Hell, it's happening already in some backbones and some sites, ever visit AdCritic.com about a year ago? You should see the blazing speed now.... Took me half an hour to download one commercial from the Ethernet connection at school...
And for those of you who really want to know what's going on in Canada's healthcare system, ask a doctor. They're the ones who really know what's working and what's not in the system.
-----
Never overestimate the intelligence of the individual, and never underestimate the intelligence of the masses.
$4.5 billion Canadian? That's about 35 US dollars and 22 cents isn't it?
speaking as a Canuck, I find our government's pronouncements about the very tiring on a good day and bloody irritating on a bad one.
Did anyone pay attention to the last election. One of their more ridiculous promises was to fund and build a "Canadian" portal to keep Canadians away from nasty american imperialist things like yahoo. This wondersite is supposed to be the one-stop solution to everything Canadian on the web. This is worrisome on several fronts:
1) It WILL end up being a slave to pro-government interest groups as the CBC is.
2) It's unfair to use government money to comete directly with private companies such as canoe and the like.
3) It will be a huge beast that sucks yet more of my tax money for a service that I don't need...
Canada has a few advantages, but these are overshadowed by our sad, pathetic anti-Americanism and self-righteous condemnation of sucess.
I didn't see Canada creating the internet...
. --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
You know, I'd laugh if this wasn't the sad truth...
. --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
no we just have gun registration that is turning out to be horrendously expensive and hugely ineffective. Don't get me wrong, I'm actually pro gun control, and I don't believe that gun ownership is a right, but I have to take issue with your implication that the Canadian governments isn't heavy handed and dictatorial when it suits them. Just look at Chretien's hissy fit when the British government tried to bestow honours on a newspaper owner who critisized him.
. --- If you're looking for free e-mail you won't find it here! http://www.noemailhere.com
I also haven't heard of a kid being expelled from school for posting a website about the faculty at the school in Canada, although in the states...
Oh. Required filtering on school computers if the school wants federal $ is also another wonderful "American" invention.
TBYP
The slashdot 2 minute between postings limit: /.'ers since Spring 2001.
Pissing off coffee drinking
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
The real problem with Canadian health care is that about a decade ago the various governments were looking to tighten their spending, and saw that our Healthcare system, relatively healthy at the time, was cutting deep into our expendatures. As a result, massive cut backs occured, and continued to occur for an unhealthy length of time. Now that the dust has settled we are faced with an underfunded and understaffed system, all thanks to the short sighted actions of politicians desperately trying to garner votes. If the funding had been left alone in the first place we wouldn't be in the state we are today.
As voters, we only have ourselves to blame.
-Medgur
If @Home terminates me I could just hook up with Sympatico (A pretty much Canada-wide DSL service). I could also hook up with various other ISPs around Saskatoon, there are lots, thoses two are just the big ones. The beauty of Canada is that, while there are monopolies, the government regulates them to keep them fair for consumers. Sasktel, our local Telco is a Crown corp, and a regulated monopoly. Its service is quite good.
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
The freedom isn't fucked with that often. Really the only times they aren't allowed to publish a name or anything else is when it concerns a young offender (Perfectly Valid imho) and elections. I don't know what you're talking about.
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
"Give us your wretched, your tired, your huddled geeks yearning to surf free"
Brings a tear to the eye
Check out the Vinny the Vampire comic strip
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Unfortunately, the problem with a government funded Internet infrastructure is that you have to abide by government rules.
Let me tell you, Canadians trust their government and value its social institutions - unlike Americans, who have fetishized the free market and sufficiently McCarthy-ized the idea of their gummint enough to Confuse the unwashed...
I would *MUCH* rather see the plan be handled independantly and owned by the nations people - *not* see our government enter some bastard plan to extort us.
I find that cost really cheap actually. But leave it to Nortel Networks to already have implemented a broadband infrastructure stretching across the country. The Canadian Version of Internet2 is hardly used at all because our Universities and Private Sector Investors dont have enough projects that require that sort of Bandwidth. I forget the figure, but I believe its the fastest network in North America. Previous Slashdot stories have covered it.
Harder.. Better.. Faster.. Stronger
Sure, getting fast, cheap internet acces is a good thing, but what are the ramifcations of government subsidised net access? You need to be licensed for the privilege of driving on the regular highway system, with police monitoring your behavior. How much government funding of the "information super highway" do we need before it becomes easy to take the same approach there?
I know -- cheesy analogy, but the point is the same. I think I might prefer a fully free-market capitalistic internet to a heavily subsidized one.
<nationalism pride>
;-)
In belgium, there's broadband access about everywhere in the country. the Govt plans to provide DSL access to even the most rural places by 2002. I don't know what you guys consider cheap, but basic access (1.1Mbps and a 10Gb max ul/dl combined) costs about 40 [$34]/month
Besides leading the way in broadband access, it also lead (and leads) the way in terms of cable for TV, the entire country has benefited from it (cable TV) since 1979 EVERYWHERE in the country. (www.teledis.be for french speakers). Internet through cable is not very spread yet though, mainly because the equipment is old (that's changing)
Ok, belgium is a small kingdom with high population density, so the job is probably easier to do here than in, say, USA or Canada but we're leading the way anyway.
Après des siècles d'esclavage,
Le Belge sortant du tombeau
A reconquis par son courage
Son nom, ses droits et son drapeau...
</nationalism pride>
One shall speak only if what one has to say is more beautiful than silence
This isn't meant as flamebait, but Americans seem to have a rather unique perspective in the western world concerning society and trust of government.
I'll take that as a compliment.
For a majority of people in the north western hemisphere (excluding the US), there is more trust of governemt and an expectation that the government will do what is right for society in general, providing a better standard of living the poor, potentially at the expense of the rich.
In other words, you're socialists. We have those here in America also, but we call them liberals.
This contrasts highly with the US were people seem more interested in themselves and getting to the top at everybody else's expense.
Yeah, and Canadians seem much more interested in drinking beer and watching hockey. But let's stop throwing stereotypes around for a minute, eh?
Americans have such an obsession with money!
You say we're obsessed with money; I say we're obsessed with freedom.
I would much rather live in a place where the government does not control what I can do, take money out of my pocket, take freedom away from me in order to give it to someone else -- at their discretion. If I want to donate my hard-earned money to the needy, let me make that decision, don't force it on me. That's all that income tax is -- taking money away from me to use towards programs I wouldn't normally support by threat of force.
But really, your response has less to do with Canada vs. America than it does to do with Socialism vs. Libertarianism.
"And like that
Does the privacy commish actually have teeth ? :(
Here in the States we have 'self-policed' privacy laws which of course mean they apply to us as citizens but not to the corp's
Take a look at the links above. The Privacy Act applies specifically to government and public sector entities. PIPEDA applies specifically to corporations.
The Commissioner can audit government and corporations, and investigate complaints. It is illegal to interfere with such an audit or investigation.
I can spell. I just can't type.
British Columbia has a half-decent privacy law. nowhere else does. the federal privacy commissioner only regulates what the government does.
Actually, the phase-in plan for PIPEDA states (don't remember exactly where) that all provinces must either implement a PIPEDA-like law by 2004, or else PIPEDA will apply provincially. I believe Quebec has this already, and I know Ontario is working on it. I don't recall if the federal Privacy Commissioner will preside over this, or if each province will have to appoint one.
But you're probably right -- these laws may not have much to do with PI practises. (There are exceptions for "law enforcement" purposes; I don't know how PI stuff fits into this.)
I still think it's a step in the right direction.
I can spell. I just can't type.
Unfortunately, the problem with a government funded Internet infrastructure is that you have to abide by government rules.
Yes, including Laws, like the Privacy Act (Public Sector) and PIPEDA (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act -- Private Sector.)
In Canada, we have a Privacy Commissioner to help prevent violations to personal privacy from both the government and corporations. The Commissioner acts as a privacy watchdog -- the role is non-partisan.
It's not perfect, but it's pretty good.
I can spell. I just can't type.
See, here in the U.S., the land of "freedom", things aren't quite as convenient. Many people only have cable modem service because their Baby Bells refuse to deploy DSL service to them, saying it's too far away from the central office. Some of us are lucky enough to get service from a company like Covad which doesn't give us a BS story about being too far from the CO, but the powers-that-be (including Intel!) are trying to put a stop to this and restore the Baby Bells to their full monopoly status.
Anyway, in summary, most people have at most three options for broadband: their cable monopoly, their local telco monopoly, or some kind of high-ping satellite service. That's if your telco bothers to roll out DSL in your area.
So what? FBI's Carnivore is already sniffing all your email, and your ISP is checking to make sure you aren't running any servers. What's the difference? At least if the government-run ISP pulls your access, you have legal recourse. If @Home terminates you, you're outta luck unless you have DSL available (haha).
If you're really worried about privacy, you'll encrypt everything anyway. That's what PGP, VPN, Freenet, etc. are for. These things weren't created by people worried about a government-run internet service.
I'm a Canadian who knows a little bit about his nation's privacy laws.
British Columbia has a half-decent privacy law. nowhere else does. the federal privacy commissioner only regulates what the government does.
For god's sakes: we don't even have laws against shotgun mikes and the like. Want protection from recording in Canada? Get a white-noise box.
Really.
for what it's worth, I love Canada. but my god, what private eyes do here... eek.
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
we would sometimes lose the _entire_ connection to the 'net from our upstream/downstream (god, I hate these boating metaphors; which one is it?) ISP. This is an entire government department. It would go off for maybe two or three hours.
No joke.
So while I like the idea, and I know there are people especially inside Industry Canada who are all gungho about bandwidth everywhere, I also know that government politics may spice things up a little & I'll wait until I see it working. ;)
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
Really. I've never seen a place where security is both so prized and so heavily misunderstood. (Yes, let's "improve" security by turning NAT on on the routers. Geesh.)
my old sig used to be funny, but then slashcode ate it and now it's not funny anymore
This is of course because Canada deems the Internet an essecntial service along with Telephone and water. Proud to be Canadian! :)
--- tracer.ca
So, 1.85 billion canadian, that's like 10 bucks in real money, right?
Rolling out DSL in a country that is about the same size as Metro Toronto is not comparable to getting access across Canada. Singapore is so tightly controlled that they have banned the sale of chewing gum because someone was jamming the elevators with it.
Canada has always lead the way. This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. Grande Prairie, Alberta, Canada, is I believe (based on an older study I read maybe 2 years ago) the most wired (per capita) of any city in north america. It was one of the test cities for this (or maybe another) government initiative for bringing internet access to canadian citizens. Hahah how can you tell I'm Canadian!?! max inglis
With my libertarian ideals, I see internet access as a sector in which government has absolutely no role whatsoever. I would hate to see my tax dollars wasted by wiring every home in the country when it could be being spent on much more rewarding efforts such as direct funding to education. I love my high speed internet access, but I believe its expansion rate is satisfactory without the need for Big Brother to lease a deal of this magnitude to the lowest bidder. I cringe at the thought of my money being used to run cable into the most remote locations of my country for no better reason than my ruling authority can make a meaningless claim.
- Hey Anthony, what's that tape on your nose for? - Exactly. Bottlerocket
You also ignore the fact that it helps give everyone equal access to information and an equal chance to learn from everything on the 'net. Isn't that one of the foundations of the US? Freedom and that stuff?
Second, the Canadian government doesn't believe in filtering what its citizens see. it has stated that it won't censor the 'net many, many times.It believes that we are intelligent enough to form our own opinions.
Oh by the way, people who live in the city also have the choices you have. Imagine that!
This plan is trying to help those in rural areas that DON'T have choice and are stuck with >56k or, worse, nothing.
That's the beauty of the Internet in its current form - no single entity can pull the plug on it if they don't like what's happening. Or so the theory goes.
Living in SK myself, I think that the people here are used to this idea.
The population is sparse, and the services that are delivered to rural areas would be unaffordable to those communities if the cost wasn't shared by the urban areas. SaskTel is a crown corporation, and along with the other crown utilities (SaskPower, SaskEnergy), has had a mandate to deliver service to all communities whether it is profitable or not.
This wouldn't happen if they were private companies, and probably will diminish since the deregulation of utitilies has happened (we now get hassled by AT&T and Sprint for long distance service too).
In the '80's and early '90s, SaskTel converted the entire phone system to underground, SaskEnergy pipelined natural gas to everyone, and in alot of these cases, like my parents farm, they ran 5 miles of underground cable to service 1 customer, and there was no charge to them for upgrading the service from overhead lines.
Part of the reason that this is acceptable here, is that something like 6 billion a year is generated from agriculture in this province, which is most of the gross product. The urban people generally know that their income is probably either directly or closely derived from agriculture. The other thing is that people here are very socialist by nature.
Politically, there are only 2 larger cities of a population of about 180,000, and the rest of the million people that live here, are in the smaller communities anyway, so selling this idea isn't all that hard.
It's easy to write songs, you just sit down and write them?
As a Canadian who'd love to boast the "right" to broadband access, I cannot. This national pipedream will not happen. Why? Because the whole idea is nothing but political ploy that has nothing to do with the noble goals espoused in the cited report. Consider:
Hope this doesn't sound too cynical. Notwithstanding the fact that Canadians are the largest users of the Net (according to some UN report), people need to see this bogus ploy for what it is. In Canada, if the government is proposing something that sounds too good to be true, you KNOW there's an ulterior motive!
CrazyLegs
"Pork!!" said the Fish, and we all laughed.
Damned, I'm sorry my american friends but you sure are ignorant of us canadians. After reading all of the posts to this thread, I'm thoroughly disgusted at the level of ignorance, as usual.
(And that's not just relating to your knowledge of the state of our broadband and internet backbone)
First off, this is nothing new. The canadian government has been at the forefront of connectivity and research into related technologies for the past 15 years. Our cross-country backbone (which was recently upgraded again to Internet3 I believe) has been owned and provided by the government for the history of the internet in this country.
Because of our wonderful government, I've had access to
Look, we're the 2nd biggest country in terms of land mass on the planet and we only have some 32 million people living here, but we're the most connected country in the world next to singapore which is like comparing apples and oranges anyways.
Hey Billy-Bob way out in the boonies of louisiana, let me know when you get that tenth mortgage on your house so you can drop the tens of thousands it'll cost you to get high-speed access so we can play a round of Quake or whatever...
Now that I think about it though, your nastiness and ignorance does make sense, it's called jealousy.
No Comment.
This just prooves once again that Canada understands the value of the Internet. One of the things that I noticed while in Canada was the amazing knowledge of the average-connected user. In the US, most people with Intenet access are reserved to e-mailing and Instant messaging, usually using AOL.
However, in Canada, most people online have their own web page, which confirms the fact that Canada has the highest rate of personal domain resgistration per cap. In fact, most Canadians embrace the Internet, and are more connected than ever, utilizing it's true form.
It certianly is a great idea to connect and entire country. Especially the following:
Recommendation 1.1: All communities should be linked to national broadband networks via a high-speed, high-capacity and scalable transport link. This link should be capable of supporting an aggregate of 1.5 megabits per second symmetrical to each end user, as well as support a full range of higher bandwidth requirements to all users and institutions regardless of location.
They're going to offer 1.5 mbps up/down to every person. This is fantastic, much better than what any broadband provider in the states is able to do.
Clearly, Canada understands the value of an open public Internet which is not subject to any one organization or company and is controlled and owned by the people. I just wish Dubya and other politicians would realize the benefits of this ~ Canada is just looking too good with its free WORKING public healthcare, public broadband, and anti-DMCA type consumer protection laws.
"I'll just chip in a bit for RedHat: I actually have that installed on my university machine." - Linus, '95
They arent the first to do this, doesn't Japan have 10/100 Ethernet for 40 amerikan dollars? Or at least they will soon, I heard.
Question
http://www.ironfroggy.com/
Oh yes. The whole of Luxemburg (all 37 families) have been connected for a couple of years.
NEVER voluntarily put a project you work on under the GNU umbrella, -- Ulrich Drepper
The Dutch part of Belgium (Flanders) is almost completely provided with cable-broadband-access. It was a cooperation of the government and the tvcable-owners. It is now operated by US West. So it seems Canada is not the first country thinking about all this stuff since I have this cable-connection for more than 3 years now.
Although we know that its not the most favourable option and is quite pricy, why are the Canadian Gov and the other private sector crew involved not just concentrating on this, before spending forty five billion Canadian dollars on planting pipes?
As negative as this may sound, it is constantly amazing me, what a mess so many countries are making of broadband. Australia's DSL situation is a nightmare between ISPs renegging on AUP agreements, and mail outages that last a millennia. Does it really have to be this hard to deliver relatively simple peices of technology to the globe?
Australianus Geekus
I think this is a good thing. I live in Canada. I find it hard to think of the government as 'the other'. Really, our government is the expression of our collective will. You only need to see what we did to the last NDP government in BC to understand that. I dont' see how this could be anythig but a good thing.
Well, I am currently in the middle of a move from Canada to the US, and have discovered to my dismay that broadband access in the US is kilometers (er.. miles) behind that offered in Canada.
Here in Canada, I have a nice 1Mb DSL for $40/month CAN, while in the US, I have to pay damn near $70-$100/month US to get anything comparable in my area (Silicon Valley), and they are saying it will take anywhere from 3 to 16 weeks to get hooked up. It only takes 5 business days up here!!!
Cable is not an option either, as we will not have cable TV in the home.
While the thought of 'Big Government' scares many, having the government help keep the cable/phone companies in line with regards to broadband seems to be a benefit to the consumer
Big countries always think they are first. Singapore has had broadband access for everyone for a long time. It's about time other govnts begin doing it as well! :-)
Our problem isn't quite the same. Unless I'm being more ignorant than usual, honours are technically bestowed by the nobility, the UK queen = Canadian queen.
Yeah yeah, I know, but you gotta admit, a country that's busy having a hissy fit about the UK knighting a few of their citizens (even when it's all the same damn queen to begin with) must not have many more important things to worry about.
here's slipperly slope application #2. Do you want to know what the internet would look like after gov't funding? PBS. or worse. Government now is pressure group warfare. do you want Jesse Helms or Bill Clinton telling people what they can or cannot see? How does anyone see a free internet with the government's hand?
Listen, I get my net access through AT&T. They don't filter, as far as I know. Even if they did, I have DSL, dial up,... alternatives. Hell, for $375 a month I can get a T1 from Allegiance telecom, which would be 16 static IPs and 8 phone lines... I have a choice. With the government, I'm lucky if I get the Big Dig done 14 years after schedule.
*sigh*
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
However, Canada is forcing its wealthy citizens, or ANYONE who is taxed for that matter, to have this service. Even if they don't want it, even if they don't need it. It doesn't matter if this technology saved babies lives and multiplied IQ's by the hundreds, it was derived from the choice of a majority, not an individual. If you don't have individual rights, there are no others. There is no action forbidden to an individual (in this case robbery) but permitted to a mob (the gov't.)
Of course , being a proud canadian, you've never tasted individualism.
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
Up here in Canada, ISPs are having extreme problems with providing DSL access because the ILECs are running the show at $29.95/month for 1mb/128kb ADSL. People want cheap high speed and the actual costs to ISPs until they get 500 DSL clients range from $40-$100.
The current problem is that the Canadian Government WANTS everything but are NOT willing to offer government grants to ISPs who want to deploy these High speed networks and therefore the ILECs and Cable Cos up here are reaping it all. Currently DSL is underpriced here in Canada at $29.95/month ($19.32 USD) and once all the little ISPs disappears, the Cable and DSL prices will start to increase to "stick it" to the end users.
ISPs who want to self deploy DSL must apply for a CLEC or DLEC license which can cost in the hundreds of thousands of dollars $X00,000+) and thereafter must buy the DSLAMs and CPE. IF the Canadian Government allows ISPs to Co-locate DSLAM equipment and get CLEC pricing levels without the high cost of becoming a CLEC, then maybe individual ISPs can create a better high speed network.
Bell Canada and Cable Cos currently have poor support, fluctuating speeds, and major congestions that some are not even bothering with High speed services. If ISDN pricing had dropped in price, ISDN would be a great service indeed for those who are out of range of DSL.
*Headline News* censorship shuts down the Internet! More at 6PM!
that is Canadian tax dollars being used so that the already monopolistic broadband companies in Canada can have an -even larger- customer base without even paying for the expansion.
Of course as a member of slashdot you can bet that I'm probably online way too much and definitely would WANT broadband no matter where I lived in Canada, but that's a lot of money that could go to fund hospitals instead of giving it to some broadband ISPs (which will mean Bell, most likely) to allow them to reach more customers.
Of course it's hard to forget that I'm getting broadband baby! Let's just hope I don't get a heart attack and need some critical surgery only to find out that the money for the operation has gone to fund a project so kids in Yukon could play low-ping counterstrike..
-PYves
I have noticed however that it's very very VERY quiet in VA Linux land and I'm a tad annoyed myself that rumors on impending (new) layoffs at VA Linux are not posted on /. while profit reports for Redhat ARE posted.
Could it be that the project's real purpose is to give a helping hand to Nortel? They recently warned that they were losing 19 Billion dollars (sic) in one quarter.
-- Another senseless waste of fine bytes.
As soon as someone finds out exactly which companies will be contracted to provide for or build this network, let me know. I'll take cash advances out on my credit cards to buy that company's stock.
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
Good lord, who the hell comments on that site? Linux loses to TI 99/4A? What world (and century) do those users live in?
"There ought to be limits to freedom"
Heh... leave it up to most SlashDot posters to automatically take an Orwellian stance on the situation without first looking at all the facts...
My karma is -1 because I don't use AC posting. LOL.
that much closer to the national quake team, eh?
---
"i was saying gnu-rd"
My mom (US citizen) jumped her 1999 Saturn 61 meters while sleeping on the Canadian Highway. She was assigned two surgeons, liked them both. She had over 150 miles of Ambulance transfers, an MRI, spent six days in the hospital, and got a custom made neck brace built just for her. Total cost... $3300 US. She's been around hospitals and people in the hospital her whole life. She didnt think the Canadians had it any better or worse than we did regarding health care due to socialization.
What they are saying is that the Cost may be as high as C$4.5b. The story here is that they are unsure what the breakdown (cost) to the municipal level will work out to. I live in a smaller community north of Edmonton, AB. Until I get a better option than airlink ($100.00/installation fee, $60.00/month, 1/mbit/s) I will stick with dialup.
Now, having said that the (notso) recent takover of videon cable by shaw cable will make a diff. I'm not sure if any of the recent expansion into my area has anything to do with the goverment's decision or not.
But I have to think that perhaps giving us broadband in the country has something to do with establishing a consumer base. People are lazy. If they have something that (somewhat) works they won't switch.
Wrong
I was told by many people from the old cable regieme that I would never see broadband in my area simply because it was not profitable. Now we have it in most of the county (in a time-span of about 6 weeks.).
Think, what do you do with your high speed internet access. For the most part its do things of questinable legal intent. Although it would be good for a nation so it could download large things like game demos, and of course *nix isos :-) I say if it takes the goverment to ensure every man, women, child, and pet has the ability to access high speeds to get a good OS then so be it!
-------------------
Insert Witty Remark Here ===>____________________________
How ironic that in announcing the plans for introducing high speed internet access for its country, the servers are experiencing the /. DoS and everything is barely crawling.
Haw. Haw. Haw.
Guess they just don't believe in G-Zus Kryst...
- You'd be surprised at what one can do with a prolapsed rectum and a great deal of determination....
News reports on TV suggested that in order to pay for this grandiose expense, Canadian telephone companies would have to have American investment.
As much as I like fast net access, this sounds more like another way for American business to buy us out. It's already happening to the Alberta Oil & Gas Industry.
Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so. --Ford Prefect
Hmmm.What exactly is it you think canada has lead the way in before this? Socialized medicine that drives your population south of your border when they want quality medical advice?
Linux is user friendly, it's just picky about to whom it's friendly...
Imagine if, in 1998, the government had said it would spend $4.5 billion to bring 56K modems to every village by 2001! If this project finishes in 2004, will the rest of us be long past this technology?
Yes, of course. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, part of the Constitution of 1982, ratified by every province except those weird Quebecois... Always with the separatism cr**...
Here in Australia, the government and our now privatised main phone provider, Telstra, have gone into a joint effort to upgrade our technology. Here are a few parts from the press release from the 15th of May. It's not quite as good as what Canada seems to be getting :) It also seems a bit late in coming, but its mainly aimed at rural Australians who get very poor line quality
"The new help service for Internet users will be established under the joint Telstra-Federal Government Internet Assistance Program at a cost of up to $50 million over three years."
"A technical support service will be established to provide Internet users with access to Telstra technical assistance and Internet testing services to achieve the equivalent of a 19.2 kbps line speed"
Forum linked here...
or text link (for the goatse.cx wary):
http://forum.fuckedcompany.com/phpcomments/index.p hp?newsid=12959512566&page=1&parentid=0&crapfilter =1
The company i work for was promised DSL, by a gov. organisation, in the very area that i now live, last november. It didn't happen.
Government often has a hard time getting the private sector to follow it's timetable even if they throw lots of money at it.
Just wanted to post to this discussion regarding the impending involvement of the Canadian government in providing guaranteed broadband access to all Canadians. I just want to submit a post that I hope will help address some of the comments made by some of the US posters and hopefully provide some insight into Canada and why the Canadian government plans to do this. First of all, Canada is not the US. While that might sound inflammatory it is in fact the truth. I am not suggesting Canada is better, worse or otherwise, merely that it is different. In Canada we have approximately 30 million people. This is about the same population as the state of California. Canada is the second largest country in the world in terms of land mass. Slightly larger than the US. Total size 9,976,140 sq km . From the CIA factbook http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ ca.html
That means we have approx. 30 million people spread unevenly across a massive amount of land area.
This is an important fact as it underscores why in Canada it is often the case that the government needs to act in this way. To make sure the people in Iqaluit get the same access to the wonders of the modern world as those in Toronto. If this was left up to private companies it simply would not get done. I am not attacking private companies or capitalism. I am completely a free market proponent and believe in the efficiency of the market place. However as a Canadian I know that despite my personal leanings there is a point at which private companies can not or will not make the right choice for Canadians, all Canadians.
In some cases special requirements of Canada require special intervention by the government. There is not some big ideological purpose at work here, merely the fact that Canada, due to population density has developed a different role for government in creating infrastructure.
This project comes as no suprise to Canadians and is part of a long tradition of successful government involvement in projects of this nature.
- Trans-Continental Railway: without which there would be no Canada at all as it was a requirment for British columbia to enter confederation.
- TransCanada Highway: A 7800km(approx 4900mile) stretch of road that goes from the tip of Newfoundland in St. John's to Victoria on Vancouver Island in British Columbia.
- Telephone System: All telephone companies in Canada are or were run by provinial "crown" corporations. These private corporations were run by non government employees and often chaired by government appointees. The government was also the major, or primary stock holder. Their goal was to provide self sustaining access for all Canadians to quality telecommunications. In the early to mid 90's these companies for the most part were privatized, but not before they gave Canada a telecommunication system second to none. I remember having my cable modem installed in Saskatoon Saskatchewan while I was going to school in 1996, and DSL was available even earlier. Actually DSL was original intended to provide TV and movies over Twisted Pair. That was an utter failure by the end of 1995, but soon Sasktel caught on that they could actually make money providing access to this new fangled Internet. :)
Countless other crown corporations and utilities were created, run and then deregulated by the government. Some were to provide infrastructure, others to create new industries (eg. Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan).
So when the Canadian government says we are gonna spend $4.5 billion to provide broadband internet access to Iqaluit Canadians for the most part say ok, regardless of political affiliation.
We know that as a nation this is the only way that all Canadians can get access to the same services. Yes it costs money, both private and public, and yes it requires government intervention. No it is perhaps not 100% capitalist in its efficiency, however the fact is as Canadians we accept that this type of government involvement is necessary to make life work here. If we did not do things this way we would have 1 or 2 modern cities and the rest of the country would still be in the 19th Century.
So please take into consideration when trying to place idealogical motives on this latest in a long line of Canadian government sponsored projects. We do it this way because that is how we make things work here.
All things considered I think we do a pretty darn good job of keeping our country always near the top in terms of technology, standards of living and education. We cannot be doing things too terribly wrong, even if we do things a little bit different from our neighbors to the south.
So I think I will go play some online games with my friend in the Yukon. She happens to have cable modem too, just like I do in Calgary, one of our most prosperous cities. Hmm it seems like we are not far off that universal broadband access as it stands thanks to government regulation of the cable industry. :)
Cheers. :)
Just wanted to post to this discussion regarding the impending involvement of the Canadian government in providing guaranteed broadband access to all Canadians. I just want to submit a post that I hope will help address some of the comments made by some of the US posters and hopefully provide some insight into Canada and why the Canadian government plans to do this.
First of all, Canada is not the US. While that might sound inflammatory it is in fact the truth. I am not suggesting Canada is better, worse or otherwise, merely that it is different.
In Canada we have approximately 30 million people. This is about the same population as the state of California.
Canada is the second largest country in the world in terms of land mass. Slightly larger than the US. Total size 9,976,140 sq km . From the CIA factbook http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ ca.html
That means we have approx. 30 million people spread unevenly across a massive amount of land area. This is an important fact as it underscores why in Canada it is often the case that the government needs to act in this way. To make sure the people in Iqaluit get the same access to the wonders of the modern world as those in Toronto.
If this was left up to private companies it simply would not get done. I am not attacking private companies or capitalism. I am completely a free market proponent and believe in the efficiency of the market place. However as a Canadian I know that despite my personal leanings there is a point at which private companies can not or will not make the right choice for Canadians, all Canadians.
In some cases the special requirements of Canada require special intervention by the government. There is not some big ideological purpose at work here, merely the fact that Canada, due to population density has developed a different role for government in creating infrastructure.
This project comes as no suprise to Canadians and is part of a long tradition of successful government involvement in projects of this nature.
Countless other crown corporations and utilities were created, run and then deregulated by the government. Some were to provide infrastructure, others to create new industries (eg. Potash Corporation of Saskatchewan). So when the Canadian government says we are gonna spend $4.5 billion to provide broadband internet access to Iqaluit Canadians for the most part say ok, regardless of political affiliation.
We know that as a nation this is the only way that all Canadians can get access to the same services. Yes it costs money, both private and public, and yes it requires government intervention. No it is perhaps not 100% capitalist in its efficiency, however the fact is as Canadians we accept that this type of government involvement is necessary to make life work here. If we did not do things this way we would have 1 or 2 modern cities and the rest of the country would still be in the 19th Century.
So please take into consideration when trying to place idealogical motives on this latest in a long line of Canadian government sponsored projects. We do it this way because that is how we make things work here.
All things considered I think we do a pretty darn good job of keeping our country always near the top in terms of technology, standards of living and education. We cannot be doing things too terribly wrong, even if we do things a little bit different from our neighbors to the south. So I think I will go play some online games with my friend in the Yukon. She happens to have cable modem too, just like I do in Calgary, one of our most prosperous cities. Hmm it seems like we are not far off that universal broadband access as it stands thanks to government regulation of the cable industry. :)
Cheers. :)