Broadband for Everyone?

Here in the US, the FCC will present it's National Broadband Plan to Congress on Mar 17, however from looking at the different articles from a variety of sources, there seems to be quite a variety of opinion on what this proposal means to the taxpayer..

In this article, the FCC is presented as looking to provide FREE or low cost broadband to 90% of the country... by 2020:

www.totaltele.com

U.S. watchdog's National Broadband Plan aims to make Internet services more affordable.
The U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) on Tuesday said it will consider proposing the use of wireless spectrum to launch a "free or very low cost" nationwide broadband service.

The initiative was brought up during the regulator's Digital Inclusion Summit in Washington, which focused on the goal of extending home broadband access to 90% of Americans by 2020, compared to 65% today.

"In order to ensure long-term American competitiveness and prosperity, we must not leave one third of the nation behind," said FCC chairman Julius Genachowski, in a statement.

But, in this next piece, the situation looks all to familiar for the politics of Washington DC:

www.dslreports.com

Dave Burstein has been writing about broadband for more than a decade, and there's probably nobody in the sector whose head is more stuffed with constantly-revised, telecom-related facts. He's been talking with the FCC and rehashing the plan in its current state, and in a newsletter to industry watchers has concluded that with a few exceptions, the plan "accomplishes very little for affordability, quality, speed, or availability of broadband in the U.S."

Why? According to Burstein, lots of talented and bright people collected data and worked on the plan internally at the agency, but the end result is a timid mess due to three factors. One, it's not clear that the money or Congressional support is there to accomplish what needs to be done. Two, Levin and a number of FCC higher ups are playing it politically safe, and the political influence of carriers like AT&T is too potent in DC. Three, FCC boss Julius Genachowski is unwilling to impose tough, substantive regulation where necessary (see point number two).

"Genachowski made it almost impossible for the plan to accomplish very much when he pulled strong government action off the table," says Burstein. "Where the market doesn't work, you need to use government power to get results -- that could be direct regulation or indirect influence," he says. "Companies that large are constantly coming to government for favors, from tax breaks to merger approvals. Refuse those occasionally and they have to make a deal. Almost every government except the U.S. sees the regulator as a negotiator for a better deal for consumers," argues Burstein.

Much more at the above links, so please take the time to read them if interested.


The FCC chairman will answer questions via youtube on the 16th of Mar details can be found in this article:

thehill.com


Who to believe? Being skeptical of the gov't ever getting anything right these days, I would have to go with sentiments of the analyst in the 2nd article linked here.

I hope I am wrong on this one.

What I would like to know is why the Fed would be so interested in closing the digital divide, when it's clearly something that's dictated by market forces.

Getting broadband to those who are currently 'off the grid' is too expensive infrastructure wise, and in the long run wouldn't be profitable for the companies that provide service.

Besides, the internet isn't something that really helps the government or the country in any way. If one is so inclined, they can get some sort of education going with the internet, but for the most part, Americans are interested in only a few things that the internet provides. Social network BS, videos of cute kittens and puppies, porn, gambling, and violating copyright law.

My only guess is that once the Fed has their hand around the internet politically, then they can regulate and tax, or possibly have access to information on as many individuals as possible.

Originally posted by DeltaChaos

My only guess is that once the Fed has their hand around the internet politically, then they can regulate and tax, or possibly have access to information on as many individuals as possible.

Sounds like a feasible reason for their interest especially the taxing, they aren't too good at regulating last time I looked..

Here's the broadband gov site for those interested:

www.broadbandusa.gov...

and a recent release showing some grants and loans awarded by the gov't to rural broadband projects:

www.usda.gov




[edit on 3/10/10 by SaveTheDrama]

More like they are missing the full picture from peoples likes and dislikes corelated by the way people think and click this is relayed in things from an inocent click uping a comment on forums or online news papers political comments section just a click to approve a persons comment when we click to give a point to some ones comments and up his score approval /disaprove your ip is logged on click i bett the computers at the papers sell data back to gov or mi6 .Now thats the real reason for broadband in every home not to mention the backdoors to evesdrop from across the globe to a unsuspecting persons pc and maybe thats why they dont like a whole family useing one login account or shareing ats acounts like i do .They dont do favors its the NWO not a real peoples goverment and i mean most even eu goverments and aussie,Wait i think Except Iceland at the moment ,new world order remember,remeber the nwo agenda.
Sooner or later my house is going internet free around the moment they start rolling out the internet 2 and banning certain websites
the gov wants us all to have broadband for the govs purpose only.
just a thought


sorry for gobbledegook with words but i aint good at articulateing with words at all


[edit on 3/10/2010 by dashar]

[edit on 3/10/2010 by dashar]

Well, I don't believe I would want to participate in a Government operated internet service.

This smells of Big Brother watching you.

I don't even have a web cam or microphone attached to my computer.

I truly believe they can access them at will,you would not know, and they can spy on you.

Can't plot the overthrow of the establishment if they are watching or listening.

Also,can you name one government program that is well run???

There is none.

[edit on 10-3-2010 by Oneolddude]

If they GIVE it too you... like healthcare...

then they control it, regulate it, and tell you how you can use it.


They can't do that right now because we privately pay for it.

The answer is simple.

Big Brother Conspiracies aside, I do believe it is important to make sure that all who wish to participate on the internet in this day and age, should have access to broadband technology, whether it be wireless, dsl, or even powerline delivered BB.

56k dial up isn't the answer.. and the big ISPs are concentrating on the bigger population centers where the consumers have multiple options to choose from.

I am not looking for the gov't to provide free service, but they should be involved in making sure that BB internet is accessible to the majority of the country at a fair price.

Here's an interesting research project on a future way to enjoy broadband via LED light bulbs. Tested in the 100Mbps range, improvements in the receivers have now increased their numbers to 230 Mbps.

www.dnaindia.com

WASHINGTON: Getting a broadband connection may soon be as simple as flipping on a light switch, say researchers from Germany. According to the scientists, the light coming from the lamps could one day encode a wireless broadband signal.

"The advantage is that you'd be using light that is already there," said Jelena Vucic of the Fraunhofer Institute for Telecommunications, Heinrich-Hertz-Institute in Germany.

Vucic and her colleagues have found a way to get the most from this synergy of illumination.

[edit on 3/11/10 by SaveTheDrama]

Another viable option to increase Broadband accessibility is through BPL (Broadband over Power Line), using this method along with a wireless option would give rural citizens the benefit of choice, and with choice, hopefully reasonable fees for service.

link


PISCATAWAY, N.J.–(BUSINESS WIRE)– IEEE, the world’s leading professional association for the advancement of technology, today announced that sponsor balloting on the draft IEEE P1901 Broadband over Power Line (BPL) standard is open through April 8, 2010. IEEE P1901 will introduce a new standard for secure, high-speed communications via electric power lines, a key enabling capability for the Smart Grid worldwide.
IEEE P1901 defines data distribution among all classes of BPL devices—for the Smart Grid, first-mile/last-mile service connections, in-building LANs, vehicle platforms and other security-sensitive applications. Driven by the requirements of diverse end users, the standard is designed to ensure efficient use of the power-line communications channel, define coexistence and interoperability among multi-vendor BPL devices, deliver sufficient bandwidth and support Quality of Service (QoS).
The Smart Grid—a next-generation, managed electrical power system—leverages increased use of communications and information technology in the generation, delivery and consumption of electrical energy. BPL is expected to emerge as a critical driver for the Smart Grid worldwide. Consequently, IEEE P1901 is expected to benefit Smart Grid-related enterprises, such as smart-meter providers and home-appliance manufacturers, and the new standard is targeted for deployment across a range of industries, including utilities, broadband and Internet service providers, consumer electronics manufacturing, transportation and telecommunications.

Originally posted by JonInMichigan

If they GIVE it too you... like healthcare...

then they control it, regulate it, and tell you how you can use it.


They can't do that right now because we privately pay for it.

The answer is simple.

Private health care companies? They have more regulations and restrictions than any government agency. They are the definition of gatekeepers. Private insurers make the U.S. Government look like saints.

For the government internet to be like private insurers, you would have to phone them or fax them a request for every web site you wanted to visit.

Some of the plans details are now known according to this article:

FCC to call for 10-year broadband plan, 100Mbps access

The FCC's promised national broadband plan should have its formal unveiling on Tuesday, an early scoop of the details claimed on Saturday. Over the next 10 years, the agency would subsidize broadband Internet access for rural areas, creating a combination Internet and cable set-top box, and a previously hinted at plan to relicense as much as 500MHz of spectrum for wireless Internet access. Speed would be a critical focus as well, as the 100 Squared plan woube part of the proposal and promise 100Mbps Internet access to 100 million homes.

Some of the wireless spectrum would go deliberately unlicensed to allow for new technologies to develop, the FCC officials passing information to the NYT said. FCC officials have long been an advocate of using white space frequencies between used parts of the spectrum that could provide long-range Internet access.

More details also hint at education programs to teach computing skills to the inexperienced and that between $12 billion and $16 billion would be set aside for a national wireless public safety network to improve communication between emergency workers.

Another interesting tidbit is how the FCC would like to change the Universal Service Plan to reallocate up to $8 Billion towards broadband expansion which was slotted for telephone lines.

Sure sound like this will become another heated battle on Capitol Hill as the telco companies and television companies try to defend their turf especially after reading this portion of the article:

the FCC's goal would be to have Internet access replace phones, TV and other conventional technologies as the primary form of communication in the US.