Slashdot Mirror
FCC Seeks To Improve US Broadband Access
MojoKid writes "The US Federal Communications Commission
is working on a plan to solve the problem of nationwide access to high-speed Internet service. The three main issues the agency is tackling first are, figuring out how to improve availability, quality and affordability. Acting FCC Chairman Michael J.
Copps held a meeting this week where he asked the public to comment on the national broadband plan, which Congress has demanded be done by February. The public has 60 days to submit comments; the agency and members of the public will be able to reply to comments for an additional 30 days after that."
Try this already? What..with the billions of dollars given to them already...and monopolies given to them..the tax breaks...etc. This is just buying some CEO a new boat.
'Number-memorizing Chinese people.'-Anon
Auction off something cheap, so some companies could get a start.
No big company would EVER use their resources to start a smaller puppet company who's sole intention was to buy a piece of the spectrum and sell service for rates as absurd as text messaging rates..just to keep the competition away.
Never!
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
Resist wireless. It's a short term ploy that isn't even 'broadband'. Modulation schemes today require lots of nearby APs, and that sucks.
Instead, the USA has to buckle down and run fiber, like we did twisted pairs decades and decades ago. Wireless sounds good until you realize just what a rotten long term investment. Remember 802.11a, then, b, then g, and now the might-one-day-be-ratified n? Or how about that great WhyMax stuff? Want some LTE anyone? How about some bonded channels for GSM? Really-- trenched fiber is the best long term way to go. If you invested 20 years ago, you're still using it and haven't found an upper end limit to its capacity for speed.
---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.
Lazziez faire doesn't work in reality.
In a perfect world, companies would want to profit. They would always look ahead to the future to ensure that they only took what the market could bear, for breaking the market would break their company just the same.
This is not a perfect world. Companies want to profit and destroy the competition and lock in their customers. They want to collude to lock out your cell phone's features that you paid several times over retail for, they want to change your contracts after you sign them and still bind you to them, they want to pack in all kinds of hidden fees and charges sixty-three pages deep into their contract, and most of all, they want to please the shareholders.
The shareholders ensure that only the biggest assholes will be in upper management. The shareholders want their profit check and they want it now. Who cares if the company isn't in business in 20 years? The shareholders have enough money to buy stock in other companies, and run them into the ground too.
Job? I don't have time to get a job! Who will sit around and bitch about being broke and unemployed then?
Demand that all service providers act as common carriers, or "dumb pipes", if you will. To insure access for everybody, the basic infrastructure must be managed by a publicly accountable entity, the government, just like the roads. And these "roads" must accept all kinds of traffic. No tiering, no filtering, none of that. The "last mile" can be leased out to those who will accept these conditions. We need consumer protection with real teeth. They won't do it unless they hear from us. So speak up, and speak LOUD. I am formulating my letter at this very moment. To those of you who want to leave it up to the market, I respectfully remind you of the AM stereo debacle, and American cell phone service.
What?
Lazziez faire doesn't work in reality.
Oh, for christ's sake...
Companies want to profit and destroy the competition and lock in their customers.
What do you think these eeevil companies use to attack their competition? Hint: it starts with a "g", and ends with "overnment".
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
IMHO, the telcos and cable companies are why we have some of the worst "broadband" access in our homes. They've been dragging their feet, similar to the way the RIAA has been, fighting tooth and nail to not give the customers what they want.
As much as I'm for better broadband, I'm extremely against giving it to the telcos to implement. We already gave them $2 billion to develop Fiber To The Home by 2000. As of 2009 I know of almost noone who has or even can get this service, it's only in a couple of hot spots where you can get it.
Worse, the telcos seem to see high speed home networks as competition for their business services, so they dramatically limit the outbound rates. 900kbps is a pretty small pipe to push backups of my home systems across, for example.
I personally like the ideas of "homes with tails", the home owners owning the fiber from their houses to a pedestal or "meet me" location, and then the providers can get access in there and users can get different options for that connectivity.
Sean
Eliminate stupid practices like bandwidth caps & metered usage designed to squeeze out competition from online video services while abusing the government-granted monopoly position.
I'm looking at TW in Rochester, San Antonio, and 4 other cities. You know who you are.
Fiber is simply too expensive. Have you ever driven across the continent? Well I have. Several times. There's a whole lot of *nothing* out there and digging up literally millions of miles of dirt to run fiber to farmhouses is going to cost a shitload of money.
I still think DSL is the answer to getting highspeed internet to isolated locations like Wyoming or Idaho or Montana. The copper lines are already present, so all the telephone company needs do is install the DSLAM for any customer that requests an upgrade (as mandated by a new law). Even if the wires are relatively poor condition, they should be able to handle 1000 kbit/s speeds, which is far superior to current dialup maximums of 50. And most importantly: It's a cheap upgrade that minimizes the burden on taxpayers.
BTW my current speed happens to be 700k, not by limitation but by choice. $15 a month is all I'm willing to spend, and it works great. I just finished watching the latest Supernatural episode at cwtv.com - no problems whatsoever. I don't need a 50,000 kbit/s line just as I don't need an 800 horsepower NASCAR to get to work.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
Lazziez faire has been tried before and failed to bring abundance to the people as its supports claim it will,
Freedom promotes prosperity. Historical examples of this simple fact are too numerous to ignore.
Free market capitalism would work great if the private sector didn't manipulate the market to eradicate the very thing that makes capitalism work for the people: competition.
Who acts to limit competition, sparky? Right now, there's a move by interior decorators (seriously) to require state licensing to exclude new competitors from their line of work. When people don't want to compete, they turn to..... That's right, GOVERNMENT to outlaw their competition. So, you want government to have the power to do so? Great plan.
The conglomerates have enough power as it is,
This is true, but what you fail to recognize is that the power they have doesn't come from the market, it comes from greasing politicians.
bribing someone before they start stealing the land from under our houses.
Hey, tell me about how the government protects us from having our land taken away by evil corporations. Oh, wait. It turns out that government doesn't protect us from land-grabs, it actually does the land-grabbing under orders from those who will pay more in taxes than the rightful owners.
So, you're afraid of big businesses? Monopolies? Well, government is the ultimate monopoly, and it's not on your side.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."