Slashdot Mirror
US Broadband Won't Catch Up With Japan's For 101 Years
An anonymous reader writes "Internet speeds of users nationwide shows that the United States has not made significant improvements in deploying high-speed broadband networks in the past year, and if the average US Internet speed continues to improve only at the same rate it did from 2007 to 2008, the country won't catch up with Japan's current download speed for another 100 years, according to findings released by the Communications Workers of America's (CWA's) Speed Matters campaign." With enough statistical mangling, nearly anything can be presented as plausible, but that's not enough to cover up my envy of Asian broadband speeds.
Yes, because we all know upgrade paths are all completely linear...
US Broadband Won't Catch Up With Japan's for 101 Years
Uh, could you somehow spin (regardless of truth) this as related to war and/or military prowess so our administration will mindlessly throw money at it instead of mindlessly ignoring it?
Like:
US Cyber Attacking Infrastructure Embarrassingly Lags Japan's
Japanese Identify US Broadband as "Ripe for the Pickin'"
Cyber Pearl Harbor Imminent
US President's Netflix Downloads 1/10 as Fast as Japanese President's
US Administration Idles as US-Japanese Broadband Gap Widens
Come on, these things basically write themselves! Turn it into a dick measuring contest or it's meaningless.
My work here is dung.
The Japanese are also at least a hundred years ahead of us in cartoon porn, particularly tentacle rape porn. This "tentacle gap", as I call it, cannot be allowed to continue.
After reading this summary and feeling a sense of outrage rising in my stomach, I felt obliged to call the Japanese Internet Minister and set the story straight once and for all. After many hours of argument regarding relative price structures, exchange rates, and international broadband infrastructure, he assured me that I had a very large penis. He used such words to describe it such as 'gargantuan', 'mammoth', and 'really freakin huge', and that in comparison, his penis was microscopic. I for one applaud the Minister for his honesty. That is all.
Wow, simply to plan on living in a hundred years is a fairly ambitious goal.
Not the old "but America is rural!" chestnut again. Scandinavian countries have lower population densities than we do yet have much better access. And the "rural" argument might make sense for why you can't get good access on a farm in Kansas, but then why don't we have 100 Mbps consumer connections in San Francisco or Manhattan?
Even then when you compare with Finland or Sweden, which have a similar population density, the US compares badly. Saying that the US is larger isn't a worthwhile response, the $/potential customer is the same regardless of the scale of the operation. It's just that clearly one single company for the US is far worse than the dozens across Europe, and there isn't real competition or universal service requirements.
Then again the UK is pretty dire in my opinion, following the US model of cheap crappy DSL and lacking upstream bandwidth, rather than the Swedish model of fast fibre to the home. Virgin Media like to claim they're fibre to the cabinet, but it's still arse-slow on DSL if you're unfortunate to be stuck with them.
Whether or not the prediciton is statistically shaky, the fact remains that there is a huge gap between the US and many other, quite dissimilar countries. The big question is "Why?" Japan and Korea aren't the only ones that far outclass American broadband speed, though they do have quite a speed lead.
Chart of Broadband Speeds by Country
And sure, in the US you can get FiOS at 30Mbps, but it will cost you $200/month and you have to live in a very limited area. You can get 50Mbps from Comcast only if you live in the Twin Cities (right now), but it's still $150/month.
I could point to the geography of the US, saying how its a much bigger area than the smaller countries at the top of those charts. Sure, Japan and Korea have an incredible population density. But not Finland, Sweden, France, etc. They have population densities several orders of magnitude smaller than even cities like Houston, Miami, Phoenix, or Chicago. Why aren't these cities more like those countries?
I could also try it from the angle of regulation/free market/competition. But I'm pretty sure those countries at the top aren't all the same in that regard.
Is it because our companies tend to each have local monopolies over large areas? That seems less likely considering how just about everyone in a metro area can get cable. So they have two companies, phone and cable, to compete with each other.
Is there something unique about our infrastructure? Did we make some horrible mistake that seemed like a good idea at the time but is now haunting us?
Is the US just in a perfect storm of craptitude where all these factors come into play?
I lived in Japan for three years, and when I got there in 2002, the *basic* package offered by Yahoo! Japan was 12Mbps DSL for an intro rate of ¥2000 a month (about US $20), bumping up to ¥3500 a month later on. By the time I left in 2005, the *basic* package cost the same, but the *lowest* speed available was 18Mbps -- something that still doesn't even *exist* at the consumer level anywhere in the US (that I'm aware of) in 2008.
The US broadband market is suffocating under the rank hypocrisy and greed of the telcos, and the bald corruption and bribeability of the congress. Somehow the Japanese broadband market has a heck of a lot more internal competition, yet the companies there can still make a profit offering much higher speeds for relatively lower rates.
Frustratedly,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Manhattan is a relatively small island with an extremely dense population. Logically, it should be even better than Japan for broadband (since Japan has to run cable to comparatively lightly populated areas like Hokkaido). The fastest affordable broadband here is:
FiOS is apparently available in a small amount of downtown, but not in most of the island, and even that was only introduced within the past year.
According to the article, average broadband speed in Japan is 63 Mbps down. So in 5-10 years when Verizon finishes wiring Manhattan, we'll be up to consumer speeds *almost* one third that of Japan's *now*.
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
the US system encourages people to work hard, whereas laziness is often seen to be rewarded in the UK.
I am so totally moving to the UK.
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
I live in Canada, and from talking to a couple Americans, my taxes seem to be right on pay with what they are paying, possibly a little higher. Once I count in all the benefits my government provides me, like free health care, I would probably say I pay less taxes than many Americans. Americans think they have less taxes, but if you really look into it, you'll find that logic flawed. They pay a little less, but get a lot less out of their government.
Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
I live in Boston and can't get anything more than 8 down 768 up from Comcast or 3.0 down (something slow up) DSL. No other options. (No Fios in Boston proper).
Even if Fios were available I don't think there are any options that will give 63mbps download speeds. And that's the apparently the Japanese average...
What's the excuse here?
You're blaming government-granted monopolies on the free market?
-- The act of censorship is always worse than whatever is being censored. Always.