Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: When and How Did Europe Leapfrog the US For Internet Access?

New submitter rsanford, apropos of today's FCC announcement about what is officially consided "broadband" speed by that agency, asks In the early and middle 90's I recall spending countless hours on IRC 'Trout-slapping' people in #hottub and engaging in channel wars. The people from Europe were always complaining about how slow their internet was and there was no choice. This was odd to me, who at the time had 3 local ISPs to choose from, all offering the fastest modem connections at the time, while living in rural America 60 miles away from the nearest city with 1,000 or more people. Was that the reality back then? If so, what changed, and when?

17 of 495 comments (clear)

  1. Government Intervention by jaseuk · · Score: 5, Informative

    EU wide publically funded projects to bring high speed broadband across Europe?

    We had plenty of choices for dial-up too, what we lacked particularly in the UK was free local calls, that made modem calls expensive compared to the US. Since then everything has been going our way.

    Jason.

    1. Re:Government Intervention by Qzukk · · Score: 5, Informative

      publically funded projects to bring high speed broadband

      In the US we gave our telcos massive tax cuts in the 90s in exchange for fiber rollout. The telcos took the money and ran.

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    2. Re:Government Intervention by sonicmerlin · · Score: 4, Informative

      The US government has given the telcos hundreds of billions of dollars in USF fees over the last 15+ years. No one in the world has subsidized broadband as much as we have.

    3. Re:Government Intervention by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 4, Informative

      Also: the free market, which the government actually helped bring about: some telco's had to be dragged kicking and screaming into that. In the Netherlands, the incumbent telco PTT (now KPN) was first forced to co-locate equipment from other ISPs (they actually sabotaged that equipment from time to time), then forced to share the local loop for a reasonable fee. And in this country almost all homes have cable, which meant another option for obtaining Internet. As a result we've always had a good many choices of ISPs and decent fees. I now have fiber to the home, and a choice of 3 ISPs on that fiber. Then there's ADSL and cable if I want another option (but who'd want to with 500 Mb up/down?)

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    4. Re:Government Intervention by Pentium100 · · Score: 5, Informative

      There is another reason (at least in my country).

      Instead of giving money to ISPs and asking them politely to connect rural areas to a fiber network (like I understand happened in the US resulting in the ISPs taking the money and doing nothing) the government in my country is laying the fiber cables itself and then leases it to anyone who wants to use it at a set price. Which means that if ISP A does not want it, ISP B will get it.

    5. Re:Government Intervention by theVarangian · · Score: 5, Informative

      EU wide publically funded projects to bring high speed broadband across Europe?

      We had plenty of choices for dial-up too, what we lacked particularly in the UK was free local calls, that made modem calls expensive compared to the US. Since then everything has been going our way.

      Jason.

      Yeah, who would have thought that European 'socialism' would be more effective at bringing the internet to the masses than American private enterprise? But sarcasm aside, here are the world's 16 most connected countries according to a study done by Harvard University for the FCC:

      1 Sweden
      2 Denmark
      3 Japan
      4 South Korea
      5 Switzerland
      6 Netherlands
      7 Finland
      8 France
      9 Belgium
      10 Norway
      11 United Kingdom
      12 Germany
      13 Iceland
      14 Italy
      15 Portugal
      16 United States

    6. Re:Government Intervention by bhcompy · · Score: 2, Informative

      That's part of it. The other part of it is just plain population density. Most of Southern California has access to more or less inexpensive high speed fiber service through FIOS or UVerse. Head out into the desert and you're lucky if you're on ADSL, though. But that's part of the problem with having one of the least dense countries in the world. You'll note that Canada is near the end of that list and they suffer worse than we do with Shaw and Rogers.

    7. Re:Government Intervention by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Informative

      The so called density problem in the US is bollocks. Sweden has less population density than the US and their Internet access speeds are among the fastest in the world.

    8. Re:Government Intervention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sweedish population and population density: 9.7 million and 21/km^2

      Wait... that doesn't make sense... why are they on the TOP of the list of countries in terms of internet connectivity?

    9. Re:Government Intervention by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      As near as I can tell, municipalities are practically begging Google to come in. The incumbent telecoms have had some success in getting states to forbid actual municipal ISPs, mostly on the grounds of communism, but the desire for an alternative - any alternative - to the ISPs we have all come to know and despise is really exceptional.

      Seriously - have any of the cities Google's considered ever said, "no, thanks: we're good." ?

    10. Re: Government Intervention by Computershack · · Score: 4, Informative

      I have 75/75 for $60 in metro LA. I don't find that unreasonable.

      I have 76/20 truly unlimited for $34 a month in my small 11,000 popultation town in rural East Yorkshire, England. I find that more reasonable.

      --
      I only please one person per day. Today is not your day. Tomorrow isn't looking good either. - Scott Adams
  2. March 11, 2000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    After that, things started tanking and telcos took their government hand-outs from the 90s and paid their CEOs' bonuses - and a few of them walked away with billions personally.

    In some cases there was outright fraud.

    It's kind of like living in a Third World country where the billionaire class rigs the system for their benefit, bitches about government interference (all the while lobbying for it to boost their profits) and John .Q. Public falling for the BS and thinking that one day, if he works hard enough, he'll be one of those billionaires with a private jet.

    Or let's put it this way: we have a corrupt economic system in the States and no one wants to change because they have been brainwashed into thinking we have free market capitalism and anything other than our crony capitalistic system is Communism.

    Yes, most Americans are that stupid.

  3. Lack of corruption by DMJC · · Score: 4, Informative

    Basically it's because of the lack of corruption in Europe and the Asian nations that achieved high speed broadband rollouts. The USA is a pretty corrupt place, and it's embedded in the culture from the very bottom of the food chain: Tipping for basic goods and services (where a decent minimum wage should be paid by employers rather than just ripping off customers with tips and surcharges which are still a form of corruption), to the top of the foodchain: Golden parachutes, kick backs, earmarks etc. In an environment that allows corruption to flourish, and where people expect to get something extra for just doing the job they are paid to do. Of course there is going to be gross program mismanagement and failures. The US has up until now not been completely destroyed by the internal corruption because it's been focused elsewhere, fighting WW1/2, rebuilding the world, fighting communism, stealing other countries resources etc. Now that the wars against communism in South America (1980s) have ended. The corruption has settled on he closest target: The American People. Until the USA deals with the gross corruption within it's own borders (yes that includes the two-party system, minimum wage, drug wars, war on terror (military handouts) golden handshakes etc) They will continue to decline as a nation. At the same time that America has been declining there has been a serious move in most of the world to stamp out corruption. Sure it hasn't been 100% effective, but it's more than the USA has done and it's why we're seeing other countries pull ahead. Basically when your politics aren't being bogged down with bullshit issues from corrupt people. You get things done. This is why Germany is doing so well, they have strong laws against corruption and they are the manufacturing heart of Europe. Sure countries like Greece and Italy have stuffed up (mainly due to high levels of corruption) But the Nordic/Germanic countries are pulling the whole of Europe with them.

  4. Re:My view by compro01 · · Score: 4, Informative

    I don't recall quite what happened, but that arrangement didn't last very long, I don't think a year had transpired before ELN and AOL were booted back off the pipes.

    National Cable & Telecommunications Association v. Brand X Internet Services happened.

    --
    upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
  5. Lawrence Lessig on this by jcupitt65 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Pre-2000, the US had "open access", meaning that cable owners had to sell use of their infrastructure. This made it relatively easy for startup ISPs to enter the market: every time you sign up a customer, you just need to buy time on the extra bit of cable you need to serve that person. Almost every country in the world uses this regulatory model.

    Under intense pressure from lobbyists the US changed to a closed model in 2000. Now cable owners are also ISPs and have exclusive rights to the bits of wire they own. There are only a few ISPs, it's very, very expensive for anyone else to enter the market, and they can charge what they like, not only to customers, but upstream as well, as we're now seeing.

    tl;dr: this is a failure of regulation.

    Lessig talking about this:

    http://blip.tv/lessig/america-s-broadband-policy-3505079

  6. restricted, did not eliminate franchises. Most ppl by raymorris · · Score: 4, Informative

    The 2007 action put some limits on local (but not state) franchising practices. It did NOT eliminate them. In fact, most of the US population still lives in areas with restricted franchises. The FCC said that local franchising authorities could not be "unreasonable" in their demands. More info:

    https://www.wilmerhale.com/pag...

  7. Germany internet speeds terrible and expensive. by jlgreer1 · · Score: 1, Informative

    I just left Germany. The internet speeds there were terrible and very expensive compared to cable in the US.