ITU Aims At 20Mbps Broadband For All By 2020

Mark.JUK writes "Dr Hamadoun Touré, Secretary-General of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), has proposed to 'dream big' by setting a new broadband access target for the world. In short, Touré would like to see the United Nations (UN) update its global digital development targets to include a commitment that would require countries around the world to ensure that everybody can access broadband internet speeds of 20Mbps from just $20 by 2020. Easier said than done, especially in poorer countries."

Comments

Poorer countries

[hpa]

20 Mbps for $20? Easier said than done in the United States of Monopolies.

Re:Poorer countries

[BrokenHalo]

And never mind the "poorer" countries. Their biggest challenge will be Australia. Not because they cannot deliver a quality service, but because they will not.

Re:Poorer countries

[sidevans]

Odd you say that, as Telstra (our local telco) has an obligation to provide a "phone" to everyone in Australia, even if it requires them installing a satellite dish or PTSN compatible 3G modem in the house at a total loss to the company.

I worked with them and have personally spend 2-3 days trying to troubleshoot a single customers line problem, it wasn't until we pulled up maps we noticed the 3G modem we were using was 42km from the nearest mobile tower and the issue was weather. The tech who installed the node had modified a Yagi and pointed it a the mobile tower on a nice sunny day, and, defying everything thought possible by the hardware manufacturers, managed to get a stable connection and the longest distance most people had ever seen.

Step outside the CBD and major cities in Australia then say Telstra doesn't provide a quality service, when they are the ONLY provider there... I used to be a Telstra hater until I worked for them in rural areas for a short time, the tech's who get out in the bush and provide communications for people are an amazingly talented group of people who will drive a 4x4 in the outback for 12 hours a day, just to fix someone's phone connection.

I regret moving to vodafone that's for sure.

Re:Poorer countries

[A NonyMouse CowHerd]

Yeah - I live in Northern Indiana, and my choices are Verizon Wi-FI with a 4 GB cap at $49.00 a month or dial-up. My dial-up costs $99.00 a year and is unlimited, with a maximum connect time of 8 hours. But no issues if I redial/reconnect immediately.

Re:Poorer countries

[girlintraining]

20 Mbps for $20? Easier said than done in the United States of Monopolies.

How dare you say that, you unamerican, unpatriotic slime ball! You're just feeding into communist propaganda! Capitalism works because capitalism works, dammit. The only monopolies are the ones created by the government, blame them, not the capitalists who are the makers, not the takers. (pukes up on floor) The reason we don't have cheap broadband is because there's no demand! (pukes some more) Supply and demand mean that if enough people wanted it, someone would get up and do it, and it would be priced competitively. (dies of laughter)

Re:Poorer countries

[black6host]

And never mind the "poorer" countries. Their biggest challenge will be Australia. Not because they cannot deliver a quality service, but because they will not.

Look fuckers. I don't care where you live, or what the UN wants. If I can get away with charging $99.00 a month for 5Mbps I'm going to do it. I don't care where you live, what you do, or why you need it. The only thing I care about is how to get you to part with as much cash as possible and give it to me. BTW, way back when, when we first rolled out cable and you all thought it was worth it in order to watch TV without advertising? Priceless! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha! See you suckers on the way to the bank!

Re:Poorer countries

[GumphMaster]

I, too, would prefer FTTH simply because if they only take fibre to the existing exchanges, or even to new sub-exchanges/street boxes, then I will still have the same 40+ year old copper that can only support 4.5Mbps when it's dry, and routinely drops out in the wet. (It has been wet a lot lately)

I, like most Australians live in an Internet privileged urban setting. My childhood home town of 250 (only 40 km off Highway 1, 3 hours from Brisbane) has just passed the hurdles to get NBN fixed wireless at "up to" 12 Mbps... under the other plan they may get the same but I expect they will get exactly what they have now: ADSL over aging copper with IP-over-avian-carrier backhaul because that will satisfy the "free" market. Makes the ITU 20Mbps look far fetched, the $20 laughable, and this is a first world country without a recession.

Re:Poorer countries

[gargleblast]

Please read the opposition policy on national broadband access and get back to us. That's likely what we will get come the September election.

Here it is.

But it's junk. The Lib/Nat coalition are talking about improving the copper system, maybe going from ADSL2+ to VDSL, so from 20Mbps to 40Mbps.

The Lib/Nat coalition are idiots sometimes. Tony Abbott refused to believe NBNCo when they changed their maximum available data rate from 100Mbps to 1Gbps. But even that is nothing. 100Gbps optical Ethernet is commercially available, and researchers have managed 26 terabits per second with a single laser, and 100 terabits per second with multiple lasers. And that research limit is not in the fibre itself, but in the endpoints. So they are talking about spending $6B over six years on a twofold data rate increase. And pooh-poohing a $40B plan to increase the data rate by 5,000,000. Oh and how often does the national data rate double? About every two years! So they get two years of data growth out of a $6B investment over six years, instead of about 45 years of data growth from a $40B investment.

Read Nick Ross's take.

Re:Poorer countries

[AK Marc]

My favorite was the Rural Broadband Initiative. There were 2 bids, one for fibre to all the schools and hospitals, and 5 Mbps minimum to convenient places, missing 15% of rural places, 5+ years install. The other bid was for 5 Mbps to every address, install time within 1 year of contract (and fibre to every school, don't remember about hospitals). Of course, they went with the one that would miss hundreds of thousands of rural locations, bid by Vodafone and Chorus (when Chorus was still Telecom).

Re:Poorer countries

[roman_mir]

Capitalism works, and within free market settings where there is actual competition it works to increase everybody's wealth by providing choices.

In absence of free market (as is the case with the United States of Monopolies, as you said), then capitalism is reduced to only a few capital holders that are working closely with the government. The government prints the money, 'insures' deposits and provides other forms of moral hazard. In USA at this point only the largest companies are still in business, they have the power to lobby against the rules, taxes and regulations, they have the power to get government sponsored credit.

You are attacking capitalism implying that capitalism and free market are synonymous, they are not. Capitalism is private ownership and operation of means of production, ability to own and operate private property. Free market ensures that everybody is on an equal ground when it comes to relationship with the government, nobody is the preferred capitalist to anybody else.

What you have today is a government system that picks winners and losers, that sponsors some at the expense of others, that transfers private property in any way it wants from some to others. Under this system capitalism is very limited and skewed. Blaming capitalism, which is a system of wealth generation for the failure of the people to ensure that they provide the same rules for all to work with is disingenuous.

Re:Poorer countries

[Electricity Likes Me]

It's all in the wording as you note: the Coalitions policy is "upto 12mbps". The Labor policy is a minimum of 12mbps.

And that's to say nothing of upload speeds, which are far more important these days and have been historically neglected: my girlfriend can get 8mbps on her ADSL2, but 162 kbps upstream speed (about 1/5th of what it should be). Which makes using VOIP/Skype etc. on her connection nearly impossible.

That's of course when it's working at all: the copper in her walls or too her building seems to be degrading since we've found corrosion forming on the sockets themselves at times, so they're immersed in water somewhere else. Of course since she can get "upto 12mbps" nothing needs to change apparently!

Re:Poorer countries

[chrish]

See also: Canada.

Pretty sure our telecoms oligarchy (Rogers, Bell, Shaw, Telus, Videotron; generally "pick two" depending on where you live) spends more money convincing the CRTC they provide excellent service at a great price than they do on network upgrades and maintenance.

AHAHAHAhahaha

[tokencode]

And I want to stop world hunger and end all wars. We can even feed everyone on this planet and their goal is 20Mbps? I love the Internet and all, but considering the fact that many people still die of hunger and disease, isn't this goal a little lofty?

Metal theft is problem

[DigiShaman]

Yes, networks span over fiber optic. But to power the junction points that light up the fiber and distribute over coax and twisted pair is a big problem in many 3rd world nations. Reason being copper theft. It's big deal. It's a big deal here in the US too. But don't expect to sink a large investment into a nation if said investment can't be reasonably protected. South Africa comes to mind.

Re:Metal theft is problem

[TubeSteak]

I recall reading that telcos in Africa hired guards to protect the cell towers (and their fuel) from getting ripped off.
When this didn't stop the problems, they created a program where the guards could sell minutes as a side business,
which gave them an incentive to keep the service up so they could keep making money.

Re:Beware the U.N.

[runeghost]

Yeah, be afraid of the terrifying organization with an annual budget under $5 billion. And meanwhile, completely ignore the mega-corporations that would like to enslave everyone on the planet who's not a shareholder, that send that much lobbying U.S. government every year.

Cheap access is key, not bandwidth

[jma05]

> Reason being copper theft. It's big deal.

Well. Here in India, Internet and cable TV use wires hanging between buildings, and have done so for decades. Theft is not really a problem.

The cheapest wireless internet we have is 256 kbps at $5 a month. That's quite adequate for everything but video. $10 for 1 mbps wired.

The important thing is for everyone to with the most basic literacy to be able to afford unmetered Internet *access*. Higher bandwidth is much less important. Upper tiers just get used for entertainment and are not critical.

I feel that making basic Internet access at limited bandwidth (256 kbps is fine, 1mbps is better if we are to target online education), available as free as radio waves or water, is a better goal than 20 for 20 by 20.

Mobile phones are already very cheap here. Incoming calls are free. Outgoing call balance can be recharged with cards as low as 50 cents. So a poor family living in a hut with a leaky roof can still afford phones for each of its members for essential use. Internet should be as affordable as that and it will surely get there here without any ITU directives.

Re:Beware the U.N.

[Xest]

I hear they're run by lizard men and are responsible for 9/11 too!

Define "everybody"

[kenh]

Touré would like to see the United Nations (UN) update its global digital development targets to include a commitment that would require countries around the world to ensure that everybody can access broadband internet speeds of 20Mbps from just $20 by 2020.

Please define everybody.

Does this include folks in third-world countries? Does this include all regions of India, Africa, and China (as a few examples)? There are may regions without access to, for example, safe, clean, potable water - is high-speed access to Amazon really a priority in those locations?

Here's the standard I want by 2020:

[MtViewGuy]

15 mbps for DSL lines, 30 mbps for cable TV lines, and 60 mbps for optical fiber lines. And that's the minimum. For cellular wireless, it should be 15 mbps for HSDPA+ 3G and 40 mbps for 3GPP LTE minimum.