Slashdot Mirror
The US Desperately Needs a 'Fiber For All' Plan (eff.org)
The Electronic Frontier Foundation has published a new report calling for a "fiber for all" plan to combat the broadband access crisis in the United States. Government data and independent analysis show we are falling behind the rest of the developed world in this area, and "the U.S. is the only country that believes having no plan will solve this issue," writes Ernesto Falcon from the EFF. "We are the only country to completely abandon federal oversight of an uncompetitive, highly concentrated market that sells critical services to all people, yet we expect widely available, affordable, ultra-fast services. But if you live in a low-income neighborhood or in a rural market today, you know very well this is not working and the status quo is going to cement in your local broadband options to either one choice or no choice." From the report: Very small ISPs and local governments with limited budgets are at the frontline of deploying fiber to the home to fix these problems, but policymakers from the federal, state, and local level need to step up and lead. At least 19 states still have laws that prohibit local governments from deploying community broadband projects. Worst yet, both AT&T and Verizon are actively asking the FCC to make it even harder for small private ISPs to deploy fiber, so that the big incumbents can raise prices and suppress competition, a proposal EFF has urged the FCC to reject.
This is why we need to push our elected officials and regulators for a fiber-for-all-people plan to ensure everyone can obtain the next generation of broadband access. Otherwise, the next generation of applications and services won't be usable in most of the United States. They will be built instead for markets with better, faster, cheaper, and more accessible broadband. This dire outcome was the central thesis to a recently published book by Professor Susan Crawford (appropriately named Fiber) and EFF agrees with its findings. If American policymakers do not remedy the failings in the US market and actively pursue ways to drive fiber deployment with the goal of universal coverage, then a staggering number of Americans will miss out on the latest innovations that will occur on the Internet because it will be inaccessible or too expensive. As a result, we will see a worsening of the digital divide as advances in virtual reality, cloud computing, gaming, education, and things we have not invented yet are going to carry a monopoly price tag for a majority of us -- or just not be accessible here. This does not have to be so, but it requires federal, state, and local governments to get to work on policies that promote fiber infrastructure to all people. Most of the talk lately has been about 5G networks, but the less-spoken truth about these networks is that they need dense fiber networks to make them work. "One estimate on the amount of fiber investment that needs to occur is as much as $150 billion -- including fiber to the home deployments -- in the near future, and we are far below that level of commitment to fiber," the report says.
This is why we need to push our elected officials and regulators for a fiber-for-all-people plan to ensure everyone can obtain the next generation of broadband access. Otherwise, the next generation of applications and services won't be usable in most of the United States. They will be built instead for markets with better, faster, cheaper, and more accessible broadband. This dire outcome was the central thesis to a recently published book by Professor Susan Crawford (appropriately named Fiber) and EFF agrees with its findings. If American policymakers do not remedy the failings in the US market and actively pursue ways to drive fiber deployment with the goal of universal coverage, then a staggering number of Americans will miss out on the latest innovations that will occur on the Internet because it will be inaccessible or too expensive. As a result, we will see a worsening of the digital divide as advances in virtual reality, cloud computing, gaming, education, and things we have not invented yet are going to carry a monopoly price tag for a majority of us -- or just not be accessible here. This does not have to be so, but it requires federal, state, and local governments to get to work on policies that promote fiber infrastructure to all people. Most of the talk lately has been about 5G networks, but the less-spoken truth about these networks is that they need dense fiber networks to make them work. "One estimate on the amount of fiber investment that needs to occur is as much as $150 billion -- including fiber to the home deployments -- in the near future, and we are far below that level of commitment to fiber," the report says.
If they could prevent local cable companies from interfering with cities/towns setting up their own municipal Wi-Fi or networking, that could bootstrap the whole process. Looking at it as a whole-country fiber everywhere project sounds really expensive, with a lot of setup overhead. Plus, don't a lot of people in poorer areas (not sitting at a desk all day) access the internet primarily from their phones anyway?
I don't want to pay for fiber to rural homes. If someone wants to live in the mountains, let them or their local community pay for their infrastructure.
I misunderstood the title. I thought it was a suggestion to start taking Metamucil.
Itâ(TM)s a lot easier to wire South Korea than either of the Dakotas. Itâ(TM)s a big place, and half the population lives in a half dozen cities. Not worth spending huge coin to bring gigabit likes to fifty people in BFE.
Sound stupid. Go for complete 5G coverage instead.
Oddly enough, the US Dietetic Association agrees.
Central Services: We do the work, you do the pleasure.
Fuck off EFF. Everybody _doesn't_ need fiber. Last thing we need is another billion/year going to rent seekers. Like all the rural electrification money we're still bleeding, 50 years later.
Market is working, let it. Unless the bigs get their shit together, all those tiny ISPs will own them. Wireless network's fiber backhauls are in fine shape, again market is working.
If you live out in BFE, you already know how to live with satellite or at best a cell data plan. No, _we're_ not paying to run a fiber 100km to your doomsday compound. Anybody who tells you they want/plan to is lying.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
There's no desperate need. A big giant want, many individual or organizations that have needs. But no giant public desperate need. Especially when such "desperation" usually means someone wants to use someone else's money to do something about it.
Hey I know we can pay verizon, google, at&t, windstream to build this thing out. They will not rip us off again at all Lets give them billions this time. I am sure they can get it right this time.
WISPS are doing just fine.. If you want a realistic boost, give them the same access rights to the poles that the big carriers have.
This sounds to me like more money and more subsidies to the same fucking telcos that have been screwing us over all along.
Capitalism always finds a way.. Crony-capitalism not so much...
$300 billion.. That's the amount of subsidies and tax breaks AT&T has been given to deliver on their promise of "45 megabits for everyone". They delivered NONE of it in the time frame they were given.. Not a single fucking residential household. We supposed to give them more? Or are we supposed to put governments in charge of internet? Yeah, all those fiscally responsible local/county/state governments we have? Fuck that too.
Make life easier on the WISPs (more frequency, less regulation, less paperwork, less red-tape in general, and you'll have your coverage.. I'm not suggesting there should be ZERO oversight, but the amount of red-tape we already have to deal with is ridiculous.
No subsidies for ANYONE. Just less paperwork and easier access to telephone poles and possibly federal/state lands for transmitters... That's all we need..
The 'crisis' is caused by telecom companies who won't invest unless there's profit to be made, and meanwhile they price-gouge everyone else.
Eventually if our civilization is to advance some things are going to have to be not-for-profit instead of squeezing people for every penny they can make, by hook or by crook. We see this mainly with healthcare; but since internet is still seen as 'optional' instead of 'a necessity' it doesn't loom as large in people's minds.
The healthcare industry was at one point in time not-for-profit, and that changed, leading us to the expensive mess we have today. If Internet is going to be considered 'essential' then perhaps it needs to be 'not for profit' as well -- and ubiquitos, instead of only where telecoms feel like installing it. Also municipalities should not ever be prohibited from providing access themselves.
Nope Mueller report exonerates all the Trumps.
Democrats been Trumped again. Liars who tried to overthrow the government will get their liberal asses handed to them again in 2020. Then the real end to all leftists begins. We'll start by calling them relocation centers...
I've been stuck with shotgunned 128K ISDN for 15 years now. And I'm lucky to at least have that.
Somalia has better internet than Seattle.
"But if you live in a low-income neighborhood or in a rural market today, you know very well this is not working and the status quo is going to cement in your local broadband options to either one choice or no choice."
Low income markets in this country have bigger problems like drug and alcohol abuse, lack of jobs, and decent education; the money to build fiber optic networks to these places could be better spent on other areas to improve these people's lives.
Understand that fiber has increased in times ten over the past year. Everybody East Coast has a 300 Mbps CAT D10. People are demanding things in the server isle that the server farms cannot get to people fast enough. To the best of my understanding, the cloud had to be filtered because of the demand of people fraudulently using the cloud at 300 Mbps. The people that do have it, such as Ivy League schools, are hogging the bandpipe and wrongly servering up things that are clearly illegal. Stealing with fast lines has become an industry-wide thing to do, such as privately servering and DRM ripping the Shonen Jump.
I eat fiber and douche out my asshole to help keep it squeaky clean. You never know when you're going to meet a nice guy that wants to toss your salad or top your bottom :)
The US is really lagging. They need to teach basic hygiene like this in middle school.
because thanks to our Senate and Electoral College those mountain folk have over 40 times more voting power than you do.
It is in your best interests that they have as much access to information as possible. Otherwise somebody will be happy to tell them exactly how to think and how to vote, and not necessarily to your liking...
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Yeah, that must be why Mueller delivered his report on a Friday after 5 PM local time.
Hint: that's when things get release that you want buried.
Awwwww, NO COLLUSION FOR YOU, POOOOOR WIDDLE TDS-ADDLED BABY!!!!
that's why we're discussing this. It's too expensive to get internet out to the boonies. Just like it was too expensive to get electricity and phones there. We did it anyway because it was good for the country. A connected, modern and well educated rural population was much less likely to do boneheaded things at the polls.
And I mentioned this elsewhere but if you live in the city the average rural voter has 40 times the voting power you do thanks to how the Senate and Electoral college works, and that's before we factor in Gerrymandering.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The majority of content on the web worth anything is actually compact. Five megabytes can provide much more utility than gigabytes. A book can easily be under 5 megabytes, take hours to devour, and be contained in much smaller space than a 4k video, and easily writing can be far more valuable than video. Pro-tip: at 4k the images are fake, run through a "digital makeup" box, making them automated photochopped.
There is no need for webpages to be as bandwidth heavy as they are now except for laziness and sloppiness. Years ago, a 30k webpage could easily hold more content than today's 3 megabyte javash*t laden bloated mess of "telephone game" error ridden journalism.
Dumbocracy, we are living in it.
RUFKM?
Who's gonna enforce this? The Poop Police?
Now the government is into how much FIBER people need?
What that hell?
Poop Police: You're not getting enough fiber!
Me: If I wanted more fiber, I'd eat a fucking towel!
Critical services? Right. People can't go a day without cat pictures and netflix. Everyone before 1995 was just wallowing around in the mud like lepers.
I was thinking colon cancer.
Now people feel forced to move away from cities, where good internet is cheap, to rural areas that may lack it, in part because housing in cities often is restricted to single family dwellings and apartments are much harder or impossible to develop, making city living extremely expensive. Zoning is in effect a subsidy on those who enjoy it, and is an effective way of discriminating against the poor. It should be easier for people to enjoy the benefits of city living, without being a millionaire. A rural internet subsidy is unnecessary and unjust.
While it's clear that some com companies are using dirty tricks to keep small players out of the game, smoothing this out isn't gonna magically grow fiber to the whole US. The US is a fairly large landmass. My understanding is that most countries with really good internet connection everywhere are pretty small in comparison. As in "equivalent to one or two US states" kind of small.
Someone prove me wrong? I'd love to see better net access here but we have LOTS of rural farmland.
What was this website about again?
I lived on afarm in the 60's, that was when we got a party line with 6 other houses. One phone line with 7 extensions, one in each house. We were a 5-bell ring. It came to area when MA Bell pulled a 100 bundle through the county. We had there tractors on our land for about a week. This was 60 miles north of San Francisco and 15 miles outside of San Rosa.
Things have not changed, the big telcos / cable / what name they want to be called - have centeralized control, blocked locals groups/cities/counties from forming a competitive system. Government not longer has control, like in the day of Ma Bell... They were the same :). Remember the microwave inner connect towers.
I am personal, not sure if "fibre for all" is the right answer... AT&T (step Ma Bell) was trying to sell me fibre, at my front door. "1GB fibre is available in the neighbourhood. Dedicated fibre to your house. Better than Spectrum, no slow downs." I know the fibre goes to the old Universe hub to 2 blocks away. I asked what is bandwidth to the sub-station... His eye went blank and turned and walked away. Ops - I asked the wrong thing?
I tend to lend toward radio based vs fibre. Less infrastructure - pole, trenecis
1) low earth orbit stations... The issue there is bandwidth too
2) 5G - then fibre for all makes sense since last mile is wireless. Stronger built to boot.
I understand if you're on dialup or something, but that isn't very many people.
I live in the boonies and I have a 50 Mbits/s plan, and frankly that is massive overkill. I can stream 1080p using only a fraction of my downstream, and once you can do that, what else do you need? I can transfer huge game patches without waiting days. It seems fine, so I don't know why I'd need "fiber" and 1 GBit/s speeds. What in the world difference would it make? Instead of streaming 5 simultaneous HD feeds I could stream a hundred?
I think what we need more than this, is fast upstreams and the right to run servers on home plans, without paying out the ass for commercial service. That would help break the monopoly of a few of the big online data companies, if anyone could run their own federated server at home.
It'd be nice to have fiber everywhere. It'd be nice to have jetski for each foot, and a dolphin with mechanical spider legs to walk around town as a chariot.
It's not a right to have any of these things. If my state or local municipality wants to provide for these things at my tax payer expense, well, as a tenth amendment adherent, fine. but not a federal program. I'd prefer government not being involved at all, at any level. Let an investor take the gamble to spread fiber to areas they think they can turn a profit. If their analysis thinks it's not worth it, well, that sucks, but no one should be forced to subsidize.
My old man lives in the boonies and cable internet stops a block from him. It sucks, but that's the breaks, there aren't enough residences to justify the cost of expanding the network further, and I certainly dont want to give government subsidies to an already shitty cable company.
Myself, I choose to live in a fiber neighborhood. I made the conscious choice to do so, and my cost of living is higher and I suck down gigabit internet. All my choice in where I want to be. My old man prefers his privacy of shooting guns on his property and walking outside buck nekkid and not giving a damn what his neighbors think. his choice to live there, i couldnt do it.
But i'm certainly not going to pay for ppl that have no connection to me, not even in my county or state, to have access. that's their responsibility.
I blow thru my data caps fast enough on cable.. horrible Comcast
The entire article is wrong: ""the U.S. is the only country that believes having no plan will solve this issue," - The US does have a plan! It's called Capitalism - and GOP continually scream that capitalism and competition will fix all problems...
Unfortunately, in practice, capitalists have become so wealthy and powerful, capitalism has become the problem. Elected Representatives need money to get elected. As the wealth concentrates, capitalists have more and more power to influence laws and regulations by buying our (actually their) representatives.
The only way to fix the problem is campaign finance reform and return Government to The People.
Even if special counsel Robert Mueller finishes his work without filing new charges, President Donald Trump and his associates won’t be in the clear.
In recent weeks, several prominent figures close to Trump have insisted that they’ll survive Mueller’s probe unscathed. Trump himself maintains that Justice Department officials have told his lawyers he is not a target of the special counsel’s investigation. And his family members have sent similar signs. Trump’s oldest daughter, Ivanka, recently told ABC News that she has “zero concern” about the investigation. Her brother, Donald Trump Jr., told Fox News on Monday that he wasn’t worried because “we know there’s nothing there.”
But Mueller is far from the only threat to the president, his family and aides.
Federal prosecutors in New York are examining Trump’s 2016 campaign, inauguration and businesses. Congress has given the Justice Department dozens of hearing transcripts that could contain lies told under oath. State and local prosecutors have reportedly prepped new charges that can’t be erased with a presidential pardon. And a slate of sealed indictments sit in the Washington, D.C., federal courthouse, raising the prospect that some in Trump’s circle may have already been indicted and just don’t know it.
“If anyone in Trump world is breathing easy right now, I’d say they are very foolish,” said Shanlon Wu, a defense lawyer who previously represented Trump’s former deputy campaign chairman, Rick Gates. “Even if Mueller’s report were to appear and didn’t implicate the president, all these other criminal investigations will continue. That’s not going to be the magic bullet that solves everything. I’d be very concerned if I was a lawyer or a potential target in that world right now.”
I don't work but I deserve 4k streaming.
Oh the FUD. Saying that 5G needs a dense fiber deployment, therefore every home needs fiber is nonsensical. Towers need fiber and service providers lease space on the towers. There's already fiber in the ground and getting laterals for new towers isn't usually a big deal unless you are talking about exurb or rural areas and you want a higher density of towers. And even that has little to nothing to do with a residential fiber deployment.
Yes something needs to be done about opening up last mile access as the ILECs and MSOs have a stranglehold on the market and operate with arrogance because they know consumers have no effective choice... but that doesn't mean every home in the country needs fiber.
See you in prison either way, lol. You're going to redefine "cute traitor ass" with your screaming, Junior. SDNY is going to make you their bitch, no pardons possible. That's why Mueller didn't bury you today - he wants it airtight.
There's no escape lol traitors. Clutching at LAWS, lol. Junior and Ivanka are going to be clutching their RAW ANUSES for LIFE, a Drumpftard traitor's due. You treasonous faggots do it to yourselves, every time.
Better call Douchebank! See you in Hell, traitors... we'll keep your cell red hot for you. Just like a traitor deserves.
No need to follow the other countries, they don't follow us when it comes many things.
We don't need another 100,000 plus government workers, contractors and bureaucrats in a federal agency for this. That millstone the country does not need to bear.
Please explain the GDP impact of building out such infrastructure as well as specifics on how much it will raise the standard of living for rural and urban dwellers in the USA.
An 'other countries have it and we have to have it too' argument holds no water otherwise, some political advocacy group would proclaim a crisis that Boston does not have a 'Running of the Bulls' event like in Spain and and not having that event makes the USA less advanced.
Frankly, the EFF and many others would welcome such a federal mandated rollout and tax as it provides thousands of oppourtunities for the EFF to get on TV, testify before Congress, write op-ed pieces, blog, and of course get paid consulting jobs.
pay your taxes, America! Donâ(TM)t ask any questions in the name of your freedom! You have a statue that proves that, right?!
The fibre connection should be infrastructure.
The company that puts it in shouldn't be allowed to sell directly to businesses or consumers. Instead, that infrastructure would be sold at wholesale to other companies - at least 10 should be available for any address - which can compete on features, price, and customer service.
This sounds like a way to add more overhead, but it isn't. My state did this with natural gas delivery and it is trivial to change companies whenever you like or sign a 3, 6, 12, 24 month contract for a specific rate, and if customer service sucks, you leave. Assuming you need it at all. I can pick from about 50 different natural gas providers. Competition works really well.
Plus, since consumer fibre companies are some of the most hated companies in the USA, end-customers wouldn't need to deal with those nasty companies again.
A law that makes poorer neighborhoods get the fibre first, before wealthier neighborhoods in the same region of the state would ensure everyone gets the access. A little reverse discrimination is good, right?
My small town in Idaho just started getting residential fiber. My house happened to be in the first rollout zone!
Got it all hooked up this week... and now I have a sweet 1Gbps down and up connection for $80 a month.
They're doing it here through the power company. The fiber line itself was run by the power company and you pay them a fee to have the line ($30 a month) then you have a number of ISPs to choose from with different plans (mine is $50 a month).
All-in-all installation went really smooth and I couldn't e happier. It's $40 a month cheaper than I was paying for cable internet that was 250Mbps down and 10Mbps up... can't beat that!
Half the US population
It's interesting that you say "half", as Finland has high-speed Internet with roughly half the population density of the USA.
Finland: 17 people per km^2
USA: 35 people per km^2
If you live out in BFE, you already know how to live with satellite or at best a cell data plan.
And they currently make do with sneakernet over motor vehicles. whose exhaust pollutes the air. From an interview:
Why do you hate the air? :p
There has been lots of hype of the economic benefits of super high speed internet connections since the 90s. The only killer app which has emerged is streaming tv shows and movies.... quite similar to cable TV.
10 years ago, I was on a budget 768/128 kbps internet connection. I'd have to use 240p on Youtube, and give the video time to download, but the normal websites came up fast enough. So, from an economic standpoint, mediocre DSL is good enough for most people.
Look, fiber out 10 miles in rural area? Nope. Does not make sense.
Instead, we have 1-web, starlink, etc for the rural areas.
What is needed is for the cities and towns. In those, we need to allow local gov to run this as utilities OR just own the fiber, but outsource the various services including internet( great for small towns up to small cities), OR for multiple private companies (works best in cities).
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Slashdot is now posting direct political action calls from activist groups? Nice. Hope you registered.
Or just enforce the existing monopoly laws and capitalism or local communities will take care right quick. The article is complete horseshit.
Separation the physical infrastructure of wires/cables from the service (Internet, television, whatever) would be a lot more effective.
Basically, we're in this situation because media production companies own the means of distribution. They really don't want third parties selling you stuff. Making it so one company owns the physical hardware while other companies lease access (ISPs, TV) would make this whole thing a lot easier.
Cable companies developed back when you needed separate wires for telephone and television. Telephone was regulated as utility (since everyone would have it) while cable television wasn't.
But then digital communication and packet-switched networking became the standard, meaning cable was now capable of two way communication, also making it a telecom.
A somewhat easier, but acceptable alternative would be to copy the MVNO cell phone system where third parties lease access to existing carriers. Third parties could simply jack into Comcast's network (which has a fiber backbone, so should be plenty fast). That's how Comcast is using Verizon's network to offer cell service.
I only drop a big'n 'bout once a week.
It's too expensive with too little return on investment to place fiber in all but the highest density areas where the population density and / or more affluent can afford the monthly costs. ( Both Google and Verizon tried it. Both failed. Miserably. )
In all likelihood, what will happen is they will simply bide their time until 5G is rolled out because wireless is MUCH cheaper to deploy than fiber.
In addition, since it IS wireless, they get to charge you insane amounts of money for those wireless data plans vs a traditional ISP data plan.
So, in their eyes, it's a Win - Win.
Cheaper rollout and can charge you much more for the privilege of using it just because.
This is assuming it works well, which I have doubts about.
( Considering the frequency range it operates at, I suspect rain, fog, snow, etc. will be quite the experience for the end user. It will make Xfinity look amazing by comparison during inclement weather. My theory only though, will wait to see what reality has to say about it. )
The US government won't enact single-payer healthcare: Only an idiot would think telecommunications will receive better policies.
1. Ask the monopoly ISP to upgrade their network in your community to 1000/1000 ready services.
Wait for the offical "no".
2. Take the offical "no" to your gov and ask them to allow in a new ISP that can build a 1000/1000 ready service.
Wait for the monopoly ISP to block the new ISP attempt.
3. Ask for community broadband as the monopoly granted to the ISP is not keeping up with advancements in network tech.
The monopoly ISP is also using its monopoly position to block competition in your community.
4. Allow the monopoly ISP to state when it would have a 1000/1000 ready network.
5. Did the monopoly network get a 1000/1000 network ready when asked?
6. Show the monopoly network did not have a 1000/1000 network and that it also used its monopoly position to block any new ISP that could offer a 1000/1000 network.
The granted ISP monopoly is no longer worth keeping as the ISP has not delivered what is needed to stay as a protected monopoly.
7. Go with community broadband and bring an open 1000/1000 network to your community. Time for some new trenches and fibre optic cables.
8. The community has a 1000/1000 network ready to connect to private land. Connect when a connection is requested to private land.
Land owners can help if they want. Connect when they want.
9. Invite different ISP from all over the USA onto your network. Enjoy some selection in ISP services.
10. People can enjoy fast internet connections like in a US city.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Why do you lie constantly WindBourne?
Why do you lie constantly WindBourne?
Free fiber for all, free college, free this, free that, Green New Deal... all are nice, but the US is way the hell in debt to the point where it is only a matter of time before China gives the middle finger and plunges the US into a permanent depression (think Haiti or Venezuela.)
Now, lets look at the average tax the American taxpayer has to pay. When you add health insurance premiums which can be $1000/month for an individual regardless of income, the US taxpayer is the most taxed person in the world. Bar none.
Lets be real. Ayn Rand is spot on about this stuff. Stop giving out freebies, fix the government, and if people want fiber, companies will give people fiber. End of story.
Why do you lie constantly WindBourne?
You really stepped it up this time WindBourne. Now instead of not reading your links, you don't even read your own posts...
What is needed is for the cities and towns. In those, we need to allow local gov to run this as utilities OR just own the fiber, but outsource the various services including internet( great for small towns up to small cities),
The government can't solve it, but the government is the best solution. Laughable.
The private scenario: now that the cost of access to space is plummeting, send up constellations of mid-altitude satellites to relay Internet service.
The public scenario: deploy an ultra high capacity fiber backbone along Interstate Highways, with taps at strategic exits. Access would be leased to local cable providers with the stipulation that each ‘data intrrchange’ be served by at least two competing providers and that one tap at each interchange be reserved for local volunteer organizations or municipalities. If this system pays for itself in large urban areas, service would be extended to an increasing number of rural tap points.
Why do you lie so much WindBourne?
Here, here and herefor example.
You also constantly claim links say what you want them to when they clearly do not.
Why falsely accuse other people of lying, when it's clearly you who is the liar?
Show some honour for once.
Why do you lie so much WindBourne?
Here, here and herefor example.
You also constantly claim links say what you want them to when they clearly do not.
Why falsely accuse other people of lying, when it's clearly you who is the liar?
Show some honour for once.
I would rather prefer a stable and reliable ISDN connection, and a text based interaction with relevant websites. Broadband is just for annoying advertisements, and distraction from the purposes you spawned the browser for.
Break up the cable monopolies. Allow competition in telecommunications services. Split up the distribution (providing and maintaining the physical conduit, wireless towers, etc.) from the services provided (internet, phone, etc.) from the content provided (movies, TV shows, music, etc.)
This will never happen in America because that would be too much free market competition.
Captured today.
On 4g cell phone.
1 hour south saigon.
As you can clearly see, the terrorists won.
https://imgur.com/a/sBRWWF7
This must be a joke. This is America and not Europe. Try laying fiber throughout Montana or Wyoming see how much $$$ is wasted for less then .01% of the population. YOU would have to pay for these enormous costs of installation AND maintenance.
And since you want everyone don't forget Alaska. MY igloo could use fiber but not that kind of fiber.
Human trafficking? Civil rights violations? School shootings? Mass murder? Clearly none of these are as important as making sure rural Americans can download their porn faster.
Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
It is why cable and telcos spent billions figuring out how to squeeze every last drop out of existing cable/twisted pair existing wires. Frankly I am amazed you can squeeze 50Mb/sec down twisted pair and cable has managed to get one friend up to 1Gb.sec on cable.
Sounds easy, but cutting a trench into all kinds of soil/rock with existing pipes/wires in said soil/rock is non-trivial. I know when they replaced my fence they had existing stuff marked, and then proceeded with a jack-hammer to punch thru the limestone. Took days. For one yard. And even with that, there was a WTF when they hit a pipe that was not marked. Stopped everything for a day while they figured out it was just a pipe going nowhere. Techies (me included) live in the dream world where you never get your hands in real dirt. How about retitle the article, most people are unwilling to plunk down a couple grand to pay for the infrastructure to drop fiber to their house. Oh and for it to work, you have to get everyone from your house to the "central box" to also pay up since it is all in the same trench. No we just want some telco/cable company to do it out of the goodness of their hearts at 50/mo.
Who's going to pay for it? We are broke. Our infrastructure is shit. And you're worried about fiber internet.
.....with 1G up/down while a bunch of liberals moan and bitch about internet in their progressive paradise!!
The specification of fiber-everywhere should be replaced with a goal of broadband-everywhere (defined as > X Gbps, where X is defined by some balance of cost-performance based on current technologies and X increases over time.)
A lot of us on /. are technical and in engineering-like professions and hobbies. So, why would we demand a specific technology instead of looking at how we can deliver faster broadband to more places in the most economically-efficient way.
Without a doubt, the most economically efficient way to provide broadband to rural areas is via wireless, whether it is via terrestrial antennas/repeaters (LTE, 5G, VHF/UHF/ microwave) or satellite (currently geosynchronous high-latency, but soon with much lower-latency via a LEO constellation).
The US governmental agencies can be involved by lowering the regulatory hurdles for building more cell/radio towers, opening up more RF spectrum, and allowing LEO satellite constellations to be built-out. To do so, would even add competitive pressure to the areas where cable and telephone companies have local monopolies and force them to improve their service to their users, too.
any of the infrastructure that delivers power, food, water, construction materials, etc to the big cities. I also do not want to pay for the infrastructure to let them export their trash and sewage; they should keep that all right where they live, like pigs in a pig sty. And while we're on the subject, I also do not want to pay for their mass transit garbage which only serves people in big cities and only works with huge tax subsidies, nor do I want to pay for their libraries, museums and sports stadiums which provide no benefit to rural people.
People in big cities, who think potable water comes from faucets, electricity comes from wall outlets, and food comes from grocery stores, should think very long and hard about how rapidly they would all die without the rural people they always look down upon. Any major city deprived of access to rural resources for one month would become a nightmare of murder and starvation. Any rural area deprived of access to big city resources for a month would probably be a happier and healthier place.
Oil does not come from big cities - it's a rural thing in the US. Fertilizer also is a rural product. Also, there are lots of farms that do not use pesticides,
American farmers have along history of making equipment that they needed to do their work and that's all far easier now days. The fact that big industrial firms came along and mass produced big shiny (and very expensive) industrial farm equipment does not mean that farmer folks need this stuff. American farmers were feeding the world long before the big new tractors with air conditioned cabs came along.
You've got one hell of a delusional view of rural America if you think that the people in "fly over country" would need ANYTHING from the big cities to be very successful in producing all the food, water, and power they need without the big cities and that they would need to resort to horse-drawn plows. When a single family farm can produce enough food for thousands of people, you ought to know they are not in danger of "subsistence farming". People in huge cities on the other hand have no option to provide for themselves - they MUST buy and import from somewhere else (and ALWAYS somebody rural) the most basic things they need to survive, and if that option dissappears, they DIE. You might think of your big city as a comfortable "safe space", but it's actually a huge trap that is balanced on a knife edge and can easily and rapidly become an immense mass grave. You are incredibly vulnerable but the vulnerability is disguised and you fool yourself into thinking you are secure not because you actually are but rather because you've been lucky for a long time.
It's extremely unwise for people who are 100% dependent upon rural America for their food, water, and power, to continually dismiss and insult rural America and constantly talk of depriving them of what little political power they have (talk of eliminating the electoral college) attacking their ability to live and produce what you need (talk of carbon limits, higher gas taxes, etc) and so on. Remember: those rural people, in addition to providing you all you need to live, also are far more likely than you to be well armed, know how to use those arms, and know how to make more arms and ammunition (gun control in rural America is not actually even possible).
Lie.
Mueller said only that HE is not issuing new indictments
It says nothing at all about innocence.