Slashdot Mirror
Increased US Broadband Adoption Could Create 2.4 Million Jobs
Ward D points out a story about a recent study that predicts significant economic growth through increased broadband adoption in the U.S. The study is based on a program in Kentucky that has, through the increased use of broadband, "saved an average of more than $200 per person per year" on health-care services, and decreased the average amount of time residents spent driving by 100 hours per month. From Computerworld:
"The Connected Nation model ... focuses more on broadband adoption and local needs than huge, government-funded programs. Several Kentucky businesses have benefited from the increased access, according to Connected Nation. Geek Squad, the Best Buy subsidiary, moved its headquarters to Bullitt County, Kentucky, in late 2006 because of the broadband availability."
A few lucky economic development wins doesn't constitute rapid job growth. I'm glad people shop online and glad they save fuel. But so far, no one has shown direct, only indirect benefits..... not job creation (save for nebulous 'tech' jobs) or anything else than infrastructure maintenance positions (truck rollers, moles, linemen, and so forth). It would be nice if there could be an easier quid pro quo data set that motivated communities (and not to get in bed with telcos without titanium strings attached to the deals). Look at the problems with muni-wifi, the failures of WiMAX, and the sheer dominance of the telcos. Community networking is in a sad state, and this study, sadly, doesn't help.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
And, I bet that free wireless will create even more! Better broadband is great, but most of our "surfing" isn't really useful, whereas searches on mobile devices likely tend towards needs. As with the iPhone and Google searches, and I can attest to it, making it available makes it happen. Quick, easy, and slow...
How much more gets done with 1gps versus 128k? Not much IMHO.
2.4 million jobs.
And what jobs are those? TFA doesn't say. Sure some temporary jobs would be created to build the infrastructure and a few more permanent jobs will be created to maintain it but what other jobs will be created? /.'s title is a bad one as TFA is more about money saved not jobs created.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Useless is right. Service based economy is the last thing we are. Try going to a restaurant there is no waitor/waitresses most of the time. Try calling tech support the wait time on average 10 minutes if you are lucky. Anything having to do with services doesn't pay well. People are not attracted to building a career off low paying jobs. Nobody wants to do it.
"decreased the average amount of time residents spent driving by 100 hours per month"
Huh? The average resident now drives 3 hours less per day? Is everyone in KY a truck driver or something?
Some might think 'what's done is done, it's in the past, it was done a decade ago'. Surely someone is keeping this issue alive because, even with all the time that has since past, there is still a huge public interest that needs to be served by ripping that money back, by whatever means necessary, to send the message that: 'for all of our belief in contractual agreements, and for all of our corrupt, lazy and intimidated politicians and government; no-one so vastly screws with our hard-earned money and future prosperity and gets away with it, regardless of whether it was committed a year ago, ten years ago, or whether the contract set performance penalties or not' I want to see the looks on the executives and senators faces who, long thinking they had got away with it, all-of-a-sudden get the f**k charged out of them. Someone needs to keep this issue alive.
Its very hard to run an online business on dial up.
Ah but what businesses, and jobs, will be created? TFA says 2.4 million jobs will be created but it does not name 1 job. All it is really about is money saved and not jobs created. Then again the study itself does not say what jobs wll be created.
FalconShould there be a Law?
This is a tech related jobs article which seems to have been accidentally truncated.
Increased US Broadband Adoption Could Create 2.4 Million Jobs in India
fixed
Whenever some one proposes a great govt. undertaking that will "create jobs"*, ask yourself what the opportunity cost is - in other words, what use would the money have been put to had it not been taken away and invested somewhere else.
*The challenge is not to create jobs, but to create wealth. If the govt.just wants to create jobs, they can hire a million goons to destroy stuff and hire another million people to rebuild stuff - boom, 2 million jobs created.
I've always wondered why a group of people that bite off heads of chickens for the amusement of others would organize themselves into a squad. Knowing their location, it all makes sense now.
From their document, this looks like a front for the cable industry and the telcos who are peddling what they call broadband. Their "broadband" is really at dumbed down legacy speeds compared to what other countries in the world are doing.
Real broadband is gigabit speed, bi-directional, to homes and small businesses. It allows every subscriber to become a content provider. The cable industry sees itself as being part of the entertainment industry, and the telcos would like to join the broadband-as-entertainment model. Real broadband scares the entertainment industry because they see it as a challenge to their business model.
The economic impact of real broadband would be immense. I like to analogize the comparison of legacy broadband to real broadband as the difference between animal power and engine power. If one horsepower is a fundamental limit, innovators will try to work out ways of getting two horses to work together. If power comes from engines, innovation goes to a much higher level. Innovators in countries with with real broadband can conceive ideas that American innovators can't even imagine.
The sponsors of this report are pushing legislation. I would urge people to examine the legislation to see how it defines broadband. If it doesn't talk about gigabit to the home, it is part of the trend in which the US is becoming a third world telecommunications country to protect entertainment business models.
Infrastructure reduces costs. Reduced costs increase consumption, which increases jobs. The question is not whether the infrastructure is beneficial (it is), but whether it is the best use of money given the risks. Of course AT&T thinks the government paying for their broadband network is good for the world.
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
Actually, I can almost believe this. I live in a small town, out in the middle of no-where. You know, Rural. If I want anything other than a Wal-Mart or Homedepot, I have to drive 70 miles over a mountain range. If the pass is nasty (and in the winter it is) I have to drive 120 miles north. Of course, groceries and other necessary items are in my town, but other things aren't. Internet shopping has saved me many trips. Not many small towns have places that specialize in "big and tall" I'm 6'5, with size 15 foot. Clothes and shoe shopping used to be pain, involving day long trips, to hit the other towns. Definitely not 100 hours a month, but a few thousand miles a year.
What are we going to do tonight Brain?
From the report:
The error is in the Computerworld article which misstates:
Top jobs created by broadband adoption:
1) Comcast traffic filterer
2) MPAA P2P network monitor
3) DMCA takedown notices writer
4) RIAA fake torrent uploader
5) Botnet senior manager
6) Senior wiretap installer
For all the trillions of dollars pouring into alternative fuels, hybrid cars, & transportation taxes, all it would take to solve most of this problem is willingness to let workers telecommute.
It's like living in a parallel universe where we sit in traffic 10 hours a week & spend half our income getting to work with all these unused internet cables sitting just a few feet away.
Broadband adoption in the US will really take off only when Hollywood celebrities begin adopting a lot of broadband from Africa. Then it will be all the rage.
ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
A couple of months later the ISP gets wind of it and comes up with some rule about "amount of computers allowed to connect to the line" or some BS,it was obvious they had made it up just to get rid of him.Basically it would have made the price about 500% higher while limiting them horribly.He asks around trying to find another service provider,and wouldn't you know it,the only two that would service that area had the exact same rule! What are the odds,huh? So they give up the T1,they went out of business less than a year later,and do you think that anyone brought broadband to those folks willing to pay $50-100 a month? Nope.The line sits rotting away last time I went out that way and they are all still stuck on 14k on a good day.
The moral of the story? It isn't just about greed,it is about power. They consider it their sandbox to do with as they see fit,and they "compete" with their golfing buddies over a few choice spots.The rest can go rot for all they care.If we had let big business and "the market" handle it when it came to water and power I bet folks in the hills would still be using candles and crapping in a outhouse.Like a national highway system this is something we as a nation are going to need to compete in this century,period.But with the current "F*ck everything but the stock price!" attitude most aren't going to invest in the long term because the day traders only care about the quarter.We have to invest in our infrastructure,power,water,roads,and communications.If we don't we are simply going to be left a backwater while everyone else advances.As always my 02c on the subject,YMMV.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.