Slashdot Mirror
Telcos Want Big Subsidies, Not Line-Sharing
It seems that a recent survey of global broadband practices by Harvard's Berkman Center at the behest of the FCC has stirred the telecommunications hornet's nest. Both AT&T and Verizon are up in arms about some of the conclusions (except the ones that suggest offering large direct public subsidies). "Harvard's Berkman Center study of global broadband practices, produced at the FCC's request, is an 'embarrassingly slanted econometric analysis that violates professional statistical standards and is insufficiently reliable to provide meaningful guidance,' declares AT&T. The study does nothing but promote the lead author's 'own extreme views,' warns a response from Verizon Wireless. Most importantly, it 'should not be relied upon by the FCC in formulating a National Broadband Plan,' concludes the United States Telecom Association. Reviewing the slew of criticisms, Berkman's blog wryly notes that the report seems to have been 'a mini stimulus act for telecommunications lawyers and consultants.'"
In most cases, the "lines" (optical etc) are paid for with tax payer dollars. If the telecos cant play nice, we're just going to have to take our toys and go home.
"Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
The internet industry was already given tax money to implement infrastructure once. That money was distributed to shareholders as profit. And since there was no punishment clause, they never had to implement the infrastructure that they agreed to.
Just require companies taking subsidies to cap wages including top executives at 100K a year and bonuses at 5K a year. They'll squeal like pigs and no one will touch the subsidies. Something similar happened with the bailout money. When there were no strings attached everyone wanted their share. Once they started insisting on wage caps suddenly no one needed the money.
At least here in Finland line-sharing did wonders to consumers. It lowered prices and allowed small companies the possibility to offer broadband with completely different business models. Competition also forced the big ones to improve customer service quality. I can't think of any downsides for the customer.
Yup. Plenty of small companies would be willing to do it though. Hell, if the govt wants to pay for the fiber and install, I'll start a small company to manage it and happily take $105K/year to do so. And I'll run it with an open access policy.
The taxpayer gave you Millions if not Billions back in the 90's for infrastructure upgrades
That's over 200 billion.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
No, he was referring to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, totaling $700 billion in "stimulus," signed into law by President Bush.
Actually, the "telephone industry" was given money, not the "(I)nternet industry".
No, it's actual stimulus cash signed into law by GWB, totalling something like $700B - Obama was not the president, when president GWB signed this stimulus money into law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_Economic_Stabilization_Act_of_2008
He wasn't president at the time, but he was a senator and he did vote in favor of it.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.