Linked by Howard Fosdick on Fri 27th Jul 2012 02:57 UTC
Internet & Networking A free, new report from the New America Foundation compares cost, speed, and availabilty of internet connectivity in 22 cities around the world. The report concludes that U.S. consumers face comparatively high, rising connectivity costs, even while the majority have very limited choices -- often only one or two providers. The report argues that U.S. broadband policies need to change, otherwise consumer choice will continue to deteriorate.
Permalink for comment 528782
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Two words describe the "why"
by deathshadow on Sun 29th Jul 2012 07:13 UTC
Member since:

Population Density -- look at the place that has dirt cheap gigabit: Hong Kong. Population Density? ~42,500 per square mile...

Coos County NH where 33.6 dialup is a good day? 19 per square mile.

I get a laugh out of the people who seem to think broadband can magically appear everywhere or that people everywhere are just "entitled" to what is for all intents and purposes a LUXURY. If you don't think it is a luxury, they you need to take a SERIOUS look at your priorities.

From a business standpoint, the cost of running broadband into a lot of areas -- like northern NH, western ME, most of the states in the northern Rockies couldn't be recouped for decades... and no business in the middle of a recession is going to be looking for something that puts them in the red for that long. You run fiber into a city you can divide it up with short runs -- you're not going to blow a quarter of a million dollars to run 100 miles of copper just to pick up 100 customers... much less the million it would cost for optical.

In a lot of ways the rhetoric being thrown about, and talk about changing policies reeks of the same type of stupidity as congress shoving HDTV and digital broadcast down our throats -- when people can barely afford what they already have, and the government is centuries in debt, forcing people to buy new stuff they actually don't need when what they have works, or WORSE subsidizing it with federal money that doesn't even exist is just asking to further contribute to the tanking economy...

But what can one expect in a credit based society -- pay more later for something you can't afford now. Kissinger was right, we've gone from a nation of savers to a nation of debters... There's this noodle-doodle idea right now that getting people to spend money they don't even have on things they don't need will actually help the economy - when what needs to be done is outlaw credit, loans, and to be frank, toss insurance on that heap as well.

This **** costs money, and right now, we should be worrying about the stuff that really matters -- like the 15.8 trillion dollar debt... in other words, over 50K per citizen.

Edited 2012-07-29 07:15 UTC

Reply Score: 1