Slashdot Mirror


US Broadband Policy Called "Magical Thinking"

eWeekPete writes "Is the pipe half full or half empty? Not surprisingly, the talk at the second annual Tech Policy Summit was decidedly mixed. 'The US is still the most dynamic broadband economy in the world,' said Ambassador Richard Russell, the associate director of the White House's Office on Science and Technology Policy. 'As opposed to being miles ahead, though, we're only a little ahead.' But Yale Law School's Susan Crawford called Russell's position 'magical thinking. We're not doing well at all.' She proceeded to call the White House's effort 'completely inadequate on broadband competition.'"

29 of 287 comments (clear)

  1. "only a little" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When our policy-makers (who never admit to anything bad lately) say that we're "only a little ahead," you know that we're seriously lagging.

    1. Re:"only a little" by FireXtol · · Score: 5, Insightful
      America is a very large country. To roll-out fiber optics (to the curb!) would be very expensive for a nation that still has a very large number of solely dial-up users. Especially compared to the arm-and-a-leg you're being charged for poor service.
      Plus it would enable hugely cheap WiFi networks. An entire neighborhood could be connected through one fiber line, and all be enjoying [several] Gigabit WAN. Enabling the ability to host your own fairly large web server.

      Unfortunately, these are all very bad for big business!

      Businesses model their offerings based not on what they can do... but what they think they can get away with. Establish unreliability as 'standard', establish that 'hosting your own' is cost-prohibitive (or contrary to a service agreement), and that this thing called bandwidth should be ridiculously expensive.

      It is basically a criminal mentality.

      --
      Enlightenment is the elimination of that which is unnecessary.
    2. Re:"only a little" by Hyppy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Tax money shouldn't be pumped to the telcos to yet again waste instead of rebuilding critical infrastructure. Instead, the U.S. government should build its own national, public infrastructure to replace the crap that the telcos are trying to pass off as acceptable.

    3. Re:"only a little" by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What? Socialized infrastructure? Maybe even offering everyone the same goods for the same price, leveling the playing field instead of offering discounts for large corporations to give them an edge over the smaller companies?

      Careful there, it may lead to a free market system, and I doubt that's in the best interest of the corporations and their politicians. In other words, don't expect to see that anytime soon.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:"only a little" by Hyppy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You're right, I was completely out of line. We need the best government money can buy. In order to purchase that government, we need powerful corporations which have the people's best interests at heart to provide that money. Democracy at its best!

      Wait... I think I heard of a quote about corporations and government before... Ahh, yes, it was Benito Mussolini. "Fascism should more properly be called corporatism, since it is the marriage of government and corporate power." So much for democracy.

      Is there an equivalent to Godwin's Law for fascism?

    5. Re:"only a little" by CodeBuster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you consider self interest to be criminal then you may be right. However, t is my own considered opinion that the extensive power of the government to regulate has created the opportunity for rent seeking and anti-competitive behavior to occur in the first place. If there were less power to be gained by corrupting politicians because the government was smaller then you would have more broadband at cheaper prices right now. The competitive market does not allow people "to get away with it" because inefficient competitors are ruthlessly driven out of business by their more able competition. The problem in the real world is that busy-body governments, even though their intentions may be good, cannot resist interfering and we all know a certain road that is paved with good intentions.

    6. Re:"only a little" by bzipitidoo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      the extensive power of the government to regulate has created the opportunity for rent seeking and anti-competitive behavior to occur in the first place.

      And of course your solution to this problem is... less government! But back up a second. That's quite a leap saying that more powerful government gives more opportunity for rent seeking. If that is true, why did the EPA try to claim it didn't have authority to regulate CO2 emissions? Why have fewer species than ever been added to the endangered species list? Maybe the FCC shouldn't have any authority over the electromagnetic spectrum, parts of which were recently reclaimed, repackaged, and auctioned off? Why did the Department of Homeland Security bungle Katrina so badly? Why does DHS insist on spending big $ for radiation detectors that won't reliably detect smuggling and which are subject to false alarms, while barely pursuing other, more promising methods? Maybe they don't have enough people? It couldn't be because consolidating several agencies into one overall smaller agency was a bad idea, could it?

      The problem is not the size of the government, it's the size of the corruption, incompetence, and stupidity in government and in corporations. It's the extent to which these organizations and systems allow problems to be hidden and covered up. In some cases, government authority has been used for rent seeking, but in many other cases, lack of government authority has been used to put together monopolies and to get away with short changing the people. Just look at the subprime mess, and the way the telcos have not provided services, even going so far as to sue government entities set up to provide services where the telcos would not. If Bush and Cheney had less government to work with, they'd have fewer secrets to keep! Yeah. Transparency, not size, is the key.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    7. Re:"only a little" by TheLink · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What are _you_ smoking? And no I don't want any of it.

      How has having the network being owned by a Corporation stopped comms being illegally spied on by the US Gov?

      If you have a crap Gov, it'll spy on citizens whether it owns the network or a Corporation owns the network. Heck it'll MAKE IT LEGAL TO DO SO IF IT WANTS. The fact that the present Gov doesn't even give a damn and tries to make it retroactively legal shows the amount of CONTEMPT it has for the citizens, their intelligence, and the laws of the country.

      The last I checked US citizens had this thing called a vote. If they don't care very much about your mentioned concerns, the Gov will continue doing it. If they do care enough then the Gov might stop doing it.

      But it appears most are clueless. The Sheep are busy deciding which Wolf should eat them for the next term, and it sure seems that some would rather have the Wolves' good friend the Fox to own the networks, because they are afraid of the Wolves owning the networks.

      Brilliant. No wonder Bush won two terms.

      I live in a different country and wouldn't care so much but for the fact that the USA is the most powerful country in the world ( military spending is almost as much as the rest of the world combined), and has no qualms on starting wars unilaterally, doesn't care about the UN, what the rest of the world thinks, or what the US Constitution says. Add Diebolded elections, lots of really stupid voters, and it sure doesn't look good.

      --
  2. "Magical Thinking" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Anything coming out of the White House at the moment is "Magical Thinking" alright.

  3. magical thinking by 45mm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It's certainly magical ... like LSD-induced magical. What is this administration smoking? Can I have some?

    1. Re:magical thinking by Kozar_The_Malignant · · Score: 4, Funny

      But more importantly, did this administration INHALE?

      Snorted.

      --
      Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
    2. Re:magical thinking by sm62704 · · Score: 5, Funny

      What is this administration smoking?

      Corporate poles, of course.

      --
      mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
  4. Better connectivity in China by querist · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I don't know about Washington, DC, (which I suspect has great broadband) but where I live in South Carolina all I can get is dial-up. I get better connectivity when I'm in China.

    1. Re:Better connectivity in China by yiffyfox · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I live, 35.4 mi - about 1 hour, from Google's headquarters in Mountain View. The best I can get is ISDN. No Cable/DSL is available. Nor will the phone company install a T1 to our house. I feel your pain. If you live in the thick of it, you can get broadband, step away form the city and it's back to dial-up.

    2. Re:Better connectivity in China by sumdumass · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Find your local public utilities commision and write a complaint to them. It worked for me in ohio. I'm only 200 yards from a main timewarner line and found that I couldn't get service from them when both the neighbor across the street and next door can. I'm stuck with Verizon DSL or a satellite hookup that the other neighbors tree knock out every so often.

      Time Warner told me that it wasn't econimically feasable to service my house so I complained to the PUCO. It took about 8 months to a year and time warner sent letter to everyone on my road (I am rural) saying they where going to run all the way down the right of way and we needed to attend a meeting to object to it. Verizon already put in a RDSLAM to increase my service and extend DSL to others down the road.

      Your local authorities and government structure isn't as concerned with externalities like the state would be. Seriously, complain to them, get your neighbors to complain, and it might take a while, but something will/should happen. The purpose of giving them monopoly access to certain areas is to make sure the unprofitable areas get served. If your state is anything like mine, the fines for non-compliance will end up being more then the costs of running the lines and making the necessary changes. Also, if it is a local "right of way" issue, the state can step in and settle the issue a lot easier then a company can.

      Don't hesitate to use the PUCO or equivalents authority to complain about being left out. BTW, if you call, record everything and write down what you said then mail it to them. A call gets logged but doesn't always have the same status. Written correspondence and email seems to be much more effective because they can forward it to someone specific easier then a call taken by a secretary.

  5. Not so good by scubamage · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My boss's mother in Korea has 1Gbps coming into her house via ethernet. It costs less than 30$ a month. Considering that a t3 functions at 45Mbps and costs a few thousand dollars a month, I'd say we're lagging behind. Badly. Most of our national infrastructure is still using lines which were installed in the 50s and 60s that have been retrofitted with newer equipment.

    1. Re:Not so good by scubamage · · Score: 5, Informative

      ILEC = Incumbant Local Exchange Carrier.. basically your local telco who controls the last mile or so. FTTP = fibre to the premesis... replacing the analog loop from the telco switch to your home. All POTS lines and other telecommunications equipment use analog lines for the home run loop from the switch to the home... replacing it with digital can dignificantly increase line speeds in the US. FTTN = fibre to the neighborhood... basially the same thing but it connects small switching stations which service neighborhoods via fibre. One of the biggest issues is that the home runs between your handset and the telco or local switch are analog lines, which means that a) processing must be done on the signal to modulate it, and b) its going to be slower and more error prone because of the nature of an analog signal.

    2. Re:Not so good by JohnSearle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I get 2Gbps up/down in my apartment in Finland, and it's included as a part of my rent; which is next to nothing, since it's a student apartment. On top of that, free post-secondary education for all! On the downside, higher taxes... on the upside, a well educated populous, and debt free students.

      I'm a Canadian married to a Finnish citizen, which is the reason why I'm here, and I can say this connection is the nicest I have ever been on. I've also been on other publicly available Finnish connections, and it is still leaps beyond what Canada has to offer... especially in terms of fairness towards the customers, since rates are low and forced contracts are rare.

      - John

  6. Just Redefine "Success" by hardburn · · Score: 4, Informative

    In this case, "success" means that local monopolies are continuing to make money on existing infrastructure without having to reinvest any of it into new infrastructure.

    I signed up for a business-class cable modem a few years back (being willing to pay the premium so I could host my own email and not have to worry about bandwidth caps), and my contract is about to expire (defaulting to month-to-month after the expiration). In that time, the cable company hasn't increased the speed for business users at all. Normally, I'd look for a competitor, but none of the local companies have DSL coverage near my house. There's one company offering WiMax service, but I find WiMax questionable.

    So apparently, in the few years that I've had my cable modem, almost nobody has invested a single penny in infrastructure upgrades. Meanwhile, the Koreans had 10 megabit fiber connections years ago. I can only conclude that "a little ahead" is a measure of profit margins, not usefulness.

    --
    Not a typewriter
  7. Crawford right -- net should be publically owned by Jerry · · Score: 5, Interesting
    Crawford added that what America needs is "access to a general communication structure that is open with universal access," a notion characterized by Russell as a "tragic mistake" and invoked an image of a single, regulated monopoly.

    "More pipes into the home is the key," Russell said.


    We already have "more pipes" and their bandwidths are too narrow and too expensive. We pay $70 for 10MB and many European and Asian countries pay $15 for 40MB to 100MB.

    We should have had a PUBLICLY OWNED 100GB optical fiber pipe across the nation FIFTEEN YEARS AGO but the cable and telcos reniged on their promise to build it after Congress gave them to money to do so in order to prevent local governments from building their own. Much of that pipe my city government installed is still buried and is still good. One line goes under my yard. We should demand that the cable and telcos FULFILL their promise and finish the job they were paid to do, and finish it without being paid a single penny more or raising their rates. That's right... take it out of the profits and stockholder dividends. The stockholder's didn't mind receiving windfall dividends while the cable and telcos management was taking the money and paying themselves huge salaries and bonuses and giving those dividends. It's time to pay up, with interest... just like they'd charge.

    --

    Running with Linux for over 20 years!

  8. Translation by arth1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    "A little ahead" in this context means "behind Denmark, Netherlands, Iceland, Korea, Switzerland, Finland, Norway, Sweden, Canada, United Kingdom and Belgium" in broadband penetration.
    And that's with a very liberal view of what broadband really is (256 kbps or above). If only looking at true broadband capable of video streaming both ways, the US is WAY down the list behind almost every other non-third-world country.

    Geographically, it becomes even worse, with broadband being largely unavailable outside cities and suburbs, while other countries have ensured that penetration also reaches areas with a low population density.

    The US is much like the Holy Roman Empire in that it refuses to acknowledge that its days are numbered and that to survive, it needs to accept that it's not #1, and that it must accept help from the outside.

    Or, to use a vehicle analogy (this is slashdot, isn't it?): The train has left, and the US was not on it. Even though the many of the engineers are Americans, the passengers and their agents were too busy haggling over the ticket price, so they missed its leaving the station.

  9. Re:Wrong by hyades1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think you miss the point. When the statement of a government official (we all know government officials always tell the truth, don't we) is clearly contradicted by documented date and objective analysis of that data, then it's time to cry bullshit.

    For far too long bureaucrats, politicians and corporate leaders have cynically played on the sometimes-misplaced national pride of Americans to short-circuit justified criticism and move attention away from real problems. Whenever I want to refocus a debate in a way that favours my view, I simply say this: "Well, the American people have the best (fill in whatever you want) in the world." The Americans in the room will all nod gravely and accept whatever claim I've just made, no matter how outrageous. I've just convinced them that everything is mostly OK, and all that needs doing is a little fine-tuning. I now own the debate, because I've defined most of the situation to suit myself. Whatever useless little make-work project I then suggest to make things "even better" will be enough to make "the American people" believe the problem is as good as solved.

    If you don't believe me, try this some time and watch it work. Don't worry about the occasional person smart enough to catch you. They'll be perceived as one of those left-wing nay-sayers who never has anything good to say about The Greatest Country In The World, Ever. In today's climate, they might even wind up on an FBI Watch List.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  10. Re:What? by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If Ron Paul were in charge of this we'd still be just as far behind, but at least we'd individually have more money due to not paying taxes to the telecom companies to roll out fiber they never actually did.

    --
    Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
  11. Re:USA Broadband is fine by ivan256 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have cows in my back yard.

    On Main Street in the center of my town, people keep horses and sheep. I don't think you could categorize my town as anything buy "rural".

    However, Boston is 30 miles to the east of me. I've got Fiber to my house. Nobody in Boston does.

    Why do I mention this? It's because the problem is much more complicated than you imply. We've got a city with a high population density with no access, and rural farming communities with the option for 50Mbit symmetric connections, because while it's typically easier to serve a higher density population, the problem reverses when you start talking about a place where everything is hundreds of years old. It's hard to lay cable in a city that has gone through hundreds of years of layered construction projects, so those of us in the sticks end up with service first.

    We need to come up with our own solutions. The only way we can be compared to European and Asian countries is in these statistical analyses. We can't always adopt their solutions. If you look at the European cities that have high penetration, they're generally fairly modern cities (even if they're "old", because many of them have had non-voluntary infrastructure resets (read: wars) over the years) compared to some US cities. We need solutions custom tailored to each of our regions. There isn't one magic solution.

  12. Re:USA Broadband is fine by cowscows · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I don't think there are that many people arguing that some hermit living in the middle of the woods in Montana should have telco's lining up to run a fiber line to his house, but there's a strong case to be made that even in dense urban areas and brand new high end suburbs, the state of the telecommunications infrastructure in the USA is generally behind the times. I've got family living in wealthy areas of the east coast, and their internet options are limited to the same dsl/cable choices that I get where I live. In the south in a city that was half destroyed by a hurricane a couple years ago.

    What I think this means is that the government should force the telcos to get off their asses and actually upgrade some of this stuff, and do it without passing huge new bills onto consumers. Yes it's regulation, no it's not free market economics, and no it's not necessarily fair to the telcos and their shareholders. But the idea that those telco companies and their successes are the result of a free market is just a myth. They were handed their marketshare by the government decades ago. That wasn't a gift, it was a trade, and the telcos need to be held responsible for their side of the bargin.

    --

    One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  13. Re:Wrong by bhima · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "When fascism came to America, it was wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross."

    There, fixed that for you!

    --
    Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  14. Canada is even bigger by FreeUser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Canada is even bigger, with a much lower population density. Rural Canadians typically pay $20/month for ADSL bandwidth I couldn't buy in downtown Chicago at any price. I could get equivalent bandwidth, but not ADSL, and prices were in the multi-$100s/month for leased lines. The US was woefully behind its northern neighbour, and the rest of the developed world, three years ago.

    Now that I live in Europe, I'm able to get 24Mbit/2Mbit ADSL for a fraction of what I paid for 1/12th the bandwidth in Chicago (and having spoken to a friend of mine who lives there now, it seems things haven't improved much in the last 18 months). Seeing as 100Mbit is coming in the next few months, I'd say the US is not only not ahead, it is falling behind at a geometric rate.

    --
    The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  15. Speed is relative... by rickb928 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Back in the day I worked for an ISP/consultancy. I was at a client site which was also our POP, and had dual T-1s, and I shared that with our users. It was blazing fast for the day. Then I got RoadRunner (one of the early users in our city) and damn, that was fast. I would mirror vendor FTP sites overnight, swapping 1GB/hr one night. Woot!

    Today, my cable service is the equal of what I had back then, but the download speeds suck. Why?

    Demand, and of course backbone capacity.

    So, does that nice Korean grandmother with the GB Ethernet connection get GB BitTorrent downloads? It's not up to the last mile how fast your connection is. It's the source(s) and the backbone. And your ISP's gateways, of course.

    Our broadband problem in the U.S. doesn't seem to be, IMHO, the last mile. It's the ISP's gateways, just inside the gateways, and the backbones.

    How do they fix this? Well, for most ISPs, they ignore the capacity issue as long as possible, either waiting for the next generation of switching equipment or a capital infusion to spend some money on the NOC. This takes years either way.

    I just saw a story on Nokia apparently offering changes to GPRS, doubling and then increasing again data speeds. this might be a software change, which while not free would be cheaper than new boxes. Sounds like they wanna keep GPRS alive and competitive with EV-DO, HSPDA, et al. This sort of competition is not working in the landline/wired ISP business.

    For a while, a DSL provider in Southern Maine was advertising that they offered faster connections than the cable company did. Oh, man, the cable co threatened to sue for false advertising. And the DSL provider basically said 'bring it on'. They could back their claims. In none of this did the telco, Verizon, ever speak up about *their* speeds, Cause their speeds sucked. That little spark of competition is not happening over much of the nation. The incumbents are so entrenched there is no getting past them.

    Perhaps wireless gives us a hope to get past the incumbents, but with the C Block auction going to the highest bidders^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H incumbents, we're probably not going to get any more there. The 'open network' spec is a joke. Any device will operate on the 700MHz band, it will just operate at the pokey, laggy speed every other device works at. Nice. I have no hope that the bidders will build out their networks to accomodate the potential demand of true broadband - BitTorrent, 1080p, large file transfers for online storage/backup are the drivers for this.

    We need to change things at the FCC, open up the marketplace, and let someone/something come on and deliver what is wanted.

    Fat chance.

    --
    deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
  16. Dudes... by spazdor · · Score: 4, Funny

    Small fuckin' world, you guys. ...*snif*..

    --
    DRM: Terminator crops for your mind!