Slashdot Mirror


UK Government To Back Broadband-For-All

Barence writes to mention that the UK government is throwing their weight behind a broadband-for-all initiative with an initial round of £250 million in funding. Using money left over from the digital television switch, the initiative aims to have a 2Mbit/sec broadband connection or better in every home by 2012. "Analysts welcomed the proposals, but say there are still many details to be hammered out: 'The Chancellor... needs to consider how to remove the barriers that prevent the people who cannot afford broadband to get connected. They need to ensure that competition in the market remains fair and consumers are given choice rather than one or two providers.'"

3 of 192 comments (clear)

  1. Re:2mbits? woo-hoo! by Shakrai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    this is actually a decent number for an initiative such as this.

    No it's not, because by the time they are done spending money at the rate the Government typically spends it they could have bought a fiber to the doorstep system for every man, woman and child in the UK. Why would you spend a pile of money to build a system that's obsolete as soon as you turn it up?

    --
    I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
    We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
  2. Re:How about better jobs instead of lower costs? by owlstead · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, somebody is going to have to dig the trenches and put down the cables and all. I presume that this is exactly what they are doing. This way people earn money and you get something in return. This is typical behavior for governments during this particular economic crisis.

    Besides, for many remote places the cost will be prohibitive (of putting cables down) for an individual or group of individuals. So the government will have to put the infrastructure there for them. Otherwise they may face even more people moving from the countryside into the already crowded cities.

  3. Re:Utility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If people can't live without the internet, how did humans exist throughout most of history?

    Times change. By "live", we of course mean "live by acceptable standards in a modern civilized world", not "continue functions construed by science to indicate a creature is alive". Most people with some inkling of knowing how to communicate with humans would have understood the implication by social convention, experience in which you appear to lack.

    How are people alive in socialist utopias, such as Cuba or North Korea, where access to the internet for all but the ruling elite is a crime?

    Poorly and in an uneducated state.

    How do so many people, who voluntarily choose to eschew the internet and computers, survive?

    In their own little isolated worlds where nobody really cares about them.

    Just because someone can't imagine their lives without a product or service does not mean that they literally require it to survive, or even if, peculiarly, that they will literally die without the internet, anyone else would be so affected be such a common and non-threatening condition.

    You're just not catching on that you're not nearly as funny as you think you are, right?