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."
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".
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.
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.
The point is that it's not subsidized. These subsidies would provide the money to cover the cost of extending it to smaller communities, so that more people could get it. I imagine this is what South Korea did. Granted, they have a lot less area to cover, but I don't think that it would be too hard for the US to have 98% of its people able to have access to a 3Mb connection, so long as the government made a big push for it.
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
or deposing some dictator such as Milosevic or Saddam
just what we need, another war to throw hundreds of billions of dollars at. how bout spending money somewhere that needs it.. like our failing school system? the school system where i live is so broke that they had to cut all bussing, after school programs, art, music, sports, and they are restricting the number of classes seniors can take because they have like a 10 million dollar deficit.. i know people (12th grade) who go to school for one class a day and then have to come home because the school will only let them take classes required for graduation
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.
Development of the internet and the pace at which new developments take place, has more to do with the economy and the US Consumer (yes, that's you and me, not some schmuck in Washington). As much as we're led to believe to the contrary, the government has little control over the economy overall.
Broadband will take over not because the R or the D in the white house wants it to take over - it will take over because of supply and demand. The more people that want it, the cheaper it will become. Just look at Wi-Fi. Wi-Fi is spreading like wildfire (no pun intended) - mainly because corporations and businesses see the benefits and are willing to pay for it. They also see the fact that by offering free (or even cheap) Wi-Fi in their retail establishments, they will drive customers into the store. Even smaller mom-and-pop restaurants and bars are seeing this, and deploying Wi-Fi in their establishments. The government isn't driving this at all - but they want you to believe they are, because that's how they win elections!
I guess it's hard for someone to understand if they haven't seen it. If you can, take a trip through the coal region of PA. All these little towns are dying because there is no industry, no hope of a job for anyone. All the young people have moved away. Broadband availability could help to bring companies into these regions (where the cost of living and of land are very, very low). This would bring these communities back to life, getting the people in them off of welfare and other government programs. Eventually, people won't need it. It's like running electricity or paved roads into a town; it's an economic improvement, instead of a handout.
Contrary to what many 'pundits' think, people want to work and feel useful. Getting government handouts is what most people do to survive, but they don't want to live on it.
I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
But, just where the hell do you think the money comes from for these subsidies? The government can not give away anything it didn't steal from someone else (i.e., taxpayers), and then only after they filter it through 20 levels of bureaucracy to siphon off 70-90% of it.
And what would be the point of having 98% penetration of broadband, when so many Americans can't deal with the level of internet they already have? Look at the large number of open relays and proxies in Korea... Much of that comes from ignorance of how to deal with BB that rivals our own. How many of us have a sibling, parent, grandparent, or other relative that thinks that everything on internet is real and true, for whom broadband access would just allow them to screw up quicker?
"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