Slashdot Mirror
Broadband Is The Secret To South Korea's Success
An anonymous reader writes "What makes South Korea so special in the world of high-speed Internet access? How can the U.S. and other countries learn from it? What separates South Korea from the rest is a clear agenda and execution process by the government. They wanted to be THE broadband capital of the world so bad, they never swayed from that goal. After the 1997 Asian financial crisis, South Korea was desperate for a savior. The government realized technology was going to restore the country's economic health so the entire country unified to push broadband penetration rates to the extreme."
But then again, he's also trying to get us to the moon and Mars.
I think that Americans could benefit from a committee established to promote the complete adoption of a nationwide FTTP network or other such network to connect us at faster rates.
Having broadband and a video cam, for instance, is no good for me, because my girlfriend has dial-up, thus limiting chat options. I blame lots of this on American capitalism, but perhaps if we get a Democratic congress again, this can be quelled.
I recently saw a 1.5 Mbps line referred to as "shitty" by a Japanese blogger. In America, that's supposedly pretty fast for a consumer. We need to look to countries like S. Korea for inspiration, stop trying to milk money out of customers by capping uploads and such, and just modernize our damn nation.
Help a college student
Many US executives and policy makers are quick to dismiss the disparity, noting correctly that South Korea's densely populated areas have made it easier for telecommunications companies to offer extremely fast service to large numbers of people. But even with such geographic and demographic differences, the United States can learn some valuable lessons from South Korea's experience in jump-starting a broadband powerhouse.
It would be a truly daunting and very expensive task to retro-fit the US with South Korean-like broadbrand. Especially with all the bureaucracy in telecommunications. The point is we should look to them and try to learn from their experiences and mistakes.
I think that the fact that South Korea is smaller in size than the US gives it an advantage of reaching that goal of theirs... On top of that, they might not have a bunch of communications giants (Cox Communications, Charter Communications, AOL-Time Warner, Sprint (DSL), Verizon (DSL) and Aldelphia, to name a few) fighting for customers left and right. When you have a fairly large country in size with a ton of providers offering different types of services at different prices it's harder to achieve a goal like "Broadband for Everyone".
Wal-Mart would turn the broadband industry upside down. They'd do it cheaper than the others, and more "common" people in America would flock to the Wal-Mart name because of brand recognition. This alone would force the broadband companies to innovate.
This could also be applied to the cell phone industry.
I'm all for broadband, but I don't see the wisdom in doing it through government any more than I see wisdom in having the government provide food, shelter, charity, religion, education, employment, health care, etc. It might sound like a nice eutopia, but it's not sustainable without the competition introduced by a free and open market. The best example is our food. Food is THE necessity, even more than health care, etc. If the government provided it there would be little selection, less supply, and less quality.
You might look to the government to (at the threat of inprisonment) take money from everyone else to pay for what you want or need, but I'd rather people have the option to pay for what they want and help others in the way they see most fit. Most sane/intelligent people see the former as theft, but it's obvious that some view it as a way of life.
That's what government can do to improve broadband adoption. Stop trying to regulate businesses, and don't have any "initiatives". Let the free market take us where we want to go. I don't think that long run any of our problems will be solved by government, especially broadband adoption. Sure the government can make us pay more for broadband while we think we're paying less, since 30% income tax, tax on food,clothes,medicine,cars,travel are all acceptable, but $75/month for broadband is outrageous. Please, give me 5-10% flat tax and I'll be happy to pay more for market delivered goods, oh and give to charity and the needy.
My Linux Command of the Day site : LCOD
It's really quite simple.
Government involvement is good when it does things that I want. It's bad when it does things I don't want.
Government should protect my rights. Government should protect my right to infringe on your rights.
Government should take your money to implement my agenda. Government shouldn't take my money to implement your agenda.
Just follow these simple rules and "the slashdot position on government" is easy to understand.
1. Everyone in korea speaks korean.
2. Noone else speaks korean.
3. Koreans are mainly interested in korean websites.
Ergo, when they pay $5 USD a month for 4mb internet accesss, the ISP is betting on the fact that they wont hardly have to pay for any international traffic.
Official GOD FAQ.
Why is it the fault of "American Capitalism" that your neighbour has a no road to thier farm? Because somebody hasn't given her tarmac for free? I consider myself liberal, but really, isn't it going a bit far to expect your government to build you your damn roads?
Because state investment in infrastructure benefits everyone, sometime even in simple dollar terms. Even when large companies cannot make a profit from it.
It's funny because it's true -Homer Simpson
The slashdot position on government is same as the position on mass media, which is "Don't trust the mass media unless it has an article that I agree with. In that case, trust the media".
1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
+1 Insightful
I tend to agree with you - but I'm not sure how successful this would be in practice. What happens if you invest in the broadband lines and the promised resultant economic boom never comes?
The Keynesian economic model suggests that putting people to work building projects that will stimulate economic growth is a good idea. However there have been many cases where the promised benefit never came while the corrupt contractors who are hired to do the work bleed society dry.
(I'm thinking Boston's Big Dig, the construction of large domed stadiums, those "urban renewal" design communities that have faded into new ghettos...)
"Bumblethink" is exactly correct, Mr. HarveyBirdman, as in your bumblethink. "Capitalism" is what has brought us such wonders as Enron, M$, SCO, etc. as the list goes on...As for the internet, thank God that TCP/IP is basically public domain and not "owned" by something like M$ or SCO or some other evil capitalist organization. And your depiction of Korea as a "primitive place?" ROTFL. I've lived in Korea (and Japan, etc.) and also had the misfortune to visit the USA. At least in those "primitive states", I didn't have to worry about some idiot pulling out a gun, with or without provocation, training, etc. And people wonder why Americans are considered arrogant, ignorant, etc. Americans would do well to keep their mouths closed, their ears and eyes open, and travel more, rather than blustering about in their usual arrogant, gun-at-the-hip, ego-mode-engaged blunderings.
if a government can not even educate their youth, then they have no right to tell other countries and governments how to run their countries