Slashdot Mirror
Why You Don't Have a Broadband Connection
blandthrax writes "I ran across this article on The New Republic. The long and short of it indicates that the reason why almost 90% of Americans don't have a broadband connection is because current broadband providers are preventing other ISP's from entering the fray. The result: higher prices for broadband connections and a general lack of innovation. An interesting read full of good details. And, as usual, we learn that countries such as Japan and Korea are far ahead of the US in terms of innovation and technological saturation."
There are lots of people out there who just don't care about having faster Internet connections. You always hear about some freak out in the sticks, salivating to get his paws on a fast pipe. What about the millions of people who have access to broadband connections but don't sign up!?
Let's face it: People like us are not normal at all. Most people dial in, check email, buy a CD from Amazon on occasion, and that's about it. I've told several people that DSL or cable is easily 50x faster than dialup. They look at me like I'm crazy, "Now why would I need to go so much faster? And doesn't that cost a whole lot?" It's like, you just want to bang your head against the wall. But when you consider how much TV normal people watch, it makes perfect sense. They don't really want unfiltered knowledge. They can't handle it. Why go looking for information when all most people want is the pap and pizzle the spews from the their TVs?
You can promote socialism all you want, but you cannot discredit an economic system that doesn't exist.
free-market.net
In most cases, the cable internet situation is in fact a monopoly. If Cox, RoadRunner, AT&T, et. al. actually went head-to-head in THE SAME MARKETS, then you'd have oligopoly. Unfortunately, most municipalities have one cable franchise with a long-term license. Here in Mass., it doesn't really matter whether Cox offers cable modem service for $30/month in Georgia (I know, probably not true, just a hypothetical situation); Cox isn't an option here. If you want cable modem service, it's either AT&T for nearly $50/month or "Hit the road, Jack." A situation where one must spend several thousand dollars to move to a town with a different cable company is not my idea of competition at work.
In terms of broadband access as a whole, many places are lucky to have a duopoly (cable plus a single DSL provider). Slightly better, but still not enough competition for my blood: when one raises prices, the other is just as likely as not to sacrifice an increased market share and choose a higher price and profit margin.
Granted, there might be places where there really is an oligopoly at work, but my belief is that those places are the lucky, small minority. Now, if you had no choice (i.e. like auto insurance in most states, doing without was not an option) but to buy cable modem service from your city's franchisee, then I suppose one could say that cities with a less expensive cable company were competing on the cost of living there. I really hope the U.S. doesn't reach that point of corporate domination, however...
It just struck me that the USA is increasingly seems to be getting behind when it comes to new technology.
Broadband is just one example where the USA lags behind other parts of the first world. Mobile telephones is another where the Euros and Japanese seem to be in the lead. With technologies such as Digital Cameras, Camcorders, DVD etc. Japan seems to be clearly in the lead. The XBox is trying to catch up with the Japanese PlayStation and Gamecube. With cars, it seems that the Germans increasingly have the lead.
Thinking through all the technology I have, hardly any of it is American. My laptop is Sony. My mobile phone is Ericcson. My car is German. My watch is Swiss. My DVD, television, Playstation, PDA etc. are all Japanese. My building architechture is European. About the only American technology I have is a HP printer.
The funny thing is that this is probably going to provoke a load of responses from Americans saying what bullshit it is to suggest that the USA does not lead the world in technology and it will probably get modded down to -1. Go on then. Whatever.
You're just noticing this? Not that I disagree with most of it, but you're neglecting a minor point-- Most of the R&D is "made in the USA" when it comes to technology, and farmed out to foreign markets for production. And just for something to chew on, who developed the technology for the CPU in your computer? Your high end graphics card? Who has been the leader in computer developemnt and innovation for the last few decades? Not saying your wrong, but it's a relevant point to study. When it comes to stuff like this, I think America is on the wrong side of the scales. It's not national pride when I say more stuff should be made in America... It's financial security. Hey, lets go to war with... China. Ow. That's gonna seriously hurt the marketplace for a bit. We're way over-leveraged when it comes to our relaince on foreign markets for daily items. World trade is good... To a point. Unfortunately, the US is past that point.
Fact is (speaking as an American if it isn't already obvious), the US is the leader in technological development, not always, however, in its application into the market at large. I think Japan has everybody beat in that arena...
You need a FREE iPod Nano
In Canada, which has nearly twice the geographic area of the US and a tenth the population, I and many of my friends have had 2 MBit DSL for over 4 years now, and now I can get cable modems for 8 MBit for the same price. How much, you ask? US$25.66 per month.
So the argument that "The US is full of big empty spaces and would better compared to Russia or China as far as how many people are connected" is moot since it could be compared to Canada and still be a disgrace to free enterprise. It is a good speculation, though: Korea and Japan do have the benefit of greater density. With the absence of Canada (and Sweden, I might add), the influence of population density might be a more reputable argument for the dearth of US broadband services. But I find it highly suspect to call 'geographic area' a significant factor in broadband rollout in lieu of the successful distribution of broadband in Canada.
More likely, I would speculate, is the presence of public and regulated telecoms in Canada (Bell & subsiduaries) and Japan (Nippon Telegraph & Telecom).
I am not sure why you listed Korea for DSL rollout; last I heard, the North was ignoring us, and the South was very rural except for Seoul and a few other cities. Any Koreans available to clarify that?