What is Digg?Sponsored by Guitar Center
When Heavy-handed Hints Fail--Guitar Center Wishlist Posters view!
guitarcenter.com - Cool personalized designs send a friendly reminder that a new Stratocaster would rock, thanks.
314 Comments
- zombird, on 05/12/2008, -16/+266Other countries don't spend their money disassembling a third world country every decade or so.
- inactive, on 05/12/2008, -9/+67we dont have faster connections because our infrastructure is old. all these other countries have much much newer equipment installed than we do, in order for us to speed things up we have to renovate our entire infrastructure to update, this would cost much more money than the telcos are willing to spend.
- Chatchkie, on 05/12/2008, -1/+55The related stories link is quite interesting http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20080511-broa ...
It claims that it would cost the US $100 billion to to fiber every home, with a third of that being paid by the government.
116 days of the Iraq war would cover that investment. - inactive, on 05/12/2008, -7/+561) Yes, many of them do
and
2) Go away. - dinsy, on 05/12/2008, -16/+71The US government would only ***** it up. That's all they're capable of. We're not going to get anywhere until we get rid of the bastards.
- Wargalas, on 05/12/2008, -0/+43Actually Zombie, you may not know it, but the telecos were offered $200 billion in tax breaks to upgrade the country from copper to fiber back in the 90's I believe. They took those tax breaks and now only Verizon is doing something about it. THAT'S where you should point your anger.
- wendelgee2, on 05/12/2008, -9/+47Actually, they do.
- Rotzooi, on 05/12/2008, -0/+38Not exactly. Europe has, still, old copper phone lines going everywhere. Connected to the same old equipment that we do. They're just quicker to upgrade. It's the competitive market for ISPs that has really opened up broadband availability. In Belgium, it's still piss-poor, because of the monopolies in the different regions (it may be relatively fast, 20Mbit going everywhere, but with silly limits, like 20GB a month). Where there is good competition, internet is cheap, fast and available even in rural areas.
When I lived in Holland, my entire apartment building (normal residential, in a suburb, 120 odd apartments) had *standard* 24/24Mbit lines included in the rent. For a bit extra (20 bucks or so) you could make it 50/50, and for 70 dollars 100/100Mbit. - Aensland, on 05/12/2008, -4/+36The amount you spend on "disaster relief" is a fraction compared to the amount you waste on those wars.
- ZenMojo, on 05/12/2008, -3/+36Damn Socialists and their cheap 20Mbps DSL...where's my rake so I can shake it at them angrily...?
Seriously, though, someone's asking why the US government can't get better DSL even though they've put it in the hands of telecommunications companies and wondering why they aren't making it easier for new competitors to enter the market? - slaizer, on 05/12/2008, -2/+28"I don't like socialism"
It's not socialism, it's having a conscience, you selfish, ignorant asshat. - slothlovechunk, on 05/12/2008, -3/+31The US may be a big country, but it's also the richest country in the world, and we have, what, 300 million people?
Lets upgrade some internets bitches and quit making excuses. If you notice, Canada is on top of their broadband and they are huge with barely 30 million people?
This is something the government has to do because no company is going to give a ***** about the whole country. - cdigioia, on 05/12/2008, -1/+24I pay ~$37/month for at least 70mb down/15mb up in South Korea.
I'm not sure my exact speed since @ the time I couldn't read the contract, and I have yet to find a S. Korea-based speed test I can navigate.
Based on downloads I know my speeds peak at least as high as the above figures.
When I can find a torrent that's well enough seeded (and after tweaking Vista), it's fun to occasionally download a movie in < 4 minutes... - inactive, on 05/12/2008, -7/+30It's time to aggressively denounce the neostalinist ideology of US leaders and force them to move back to humane capitalism, decent checks and balances, less morbid disparities between incomes, protection of normal people from corporate predators and real free market mechanisms as opposed to corporate welfare. The US needs a smaller, non-fascist, non-totalitarian, non-social darwinist government. If the US gets its house in order and reigns in the out of control drunk with power corporate sector things will be A LOT better.
Let's start by throwing some corrupt executives and war criminals in prison. - freezerburn666, on 05/12/2008, -0/+20in thought verizon put in an ass load of fibre lines?
- Lurick, on 05/12/2008, -3/+21Actually, EACH ONE of the countries listed in this article not only provide disaster relief and governmented-implemented welfare programs, but ... well, they do so at a far higher percentage of their per capita than we do. What you did there, my friend, is just said something that you felt was "probably" true, without bothering to know whether or not it was "actually" true. This is the very essence of *****, at its most pure.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 05/12/2008, -2/+19116 days in this war could have covered almost ANY damn investment we could think of. Healthcare for everyone -- free college. National energy infrastructure or a train system that works to reduce the number of cars on the road. You name it.
No, apparently, we don't have money to "waste" on making things better, because we will get a story about Buses, wasting gas. Any "social" program, has to be absolutely perfect and walk on water, to steal one dollar from a military bomb. Somehow, nobody says "waste" when a laser-guided bomb blows up a house that cost 1/10th the price of that bomb. Not to mention, that whoever it hit is "automatically" guilty -- I'm just talking dollars and cents. - BlueSkyfish, on 05/12/2008, -11/+32It's either them or the insurance companies who do everything they can to rip you off.
Lesser of two evils, I guess. - slothlovechunk, on 05/12/2008, -0/+16Or we could have foregone that stimulus package and had the government invest in real infrastructure that could pay for itself over subsequent years, but that would have been too smart.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 05/12/2008, -1/+16LOL.
I guess you PWND everyone with that!
That's why with 13 million people in New York, it's still 1/10th the speed of Tokyo -- when we aren't too sparsely populated -- we are too densely populated!
Remember that quote; "You can fool some of the people all of the time -- and those are the ones you need to concentrate on." -- George W. Bush. - inactive, on 05/12/2008, -4/+19Well then, move to one of those countries who don't provide relief to "every ***** hole on the planet" if you are so furious that your tax dollars are spent to help people less fortunate then you.
- inactive, on 05/12/2008, -20/+37And yet so many want the US government to run their health care.
- inactive, on 05/12/2008, -4/+18Here, I think you dropped you tin foil hat...
- computershack, on 05/12/2008, -4/+17Well BT, a private company, are managing to do that across the UK fine. Live in a 3 house hamlet 5 miles away from the nearest town? No problem sir - 2Mbit for you. It's nearly at the point in the UK that if you can get electricity, you can get broadband.
- Phylodome, on 05/12/2008, -3/+18One word, inertia. With our current infrastructure, the investment just doesn't make sense when we're at a threshold moment for information technology where a single innovation could change the entire game. America invested in its infrastructure heavily throughout the 50s and 60s, helping us to entrench our position as a singular superpower, but also entrenching a particular paradigm of infrastructure. Countries investing in massive broadband efforts with early 21st century technology will look foolish in 10 or 15 years, and will be stuck with their infrastructure, as we are now stuck here in America. But the beauty of a free market is that when the time comes, we can adapt more quickly. Most importantly, the slant against a free-market in this piece is ridiculous. First of all, WE DONT HAVE A FREE MARKET AND NEVER HAVE. Second of all, the communications industry is one of the best examples of companies taking advantage of corrupt federal bureaucracy in order to entrench economic behavior that a real free market would kill off quite quickly. Also, consider the fact that the type of "social democracy" practiced in small countries around the world, when scaled up and implemented in a country as large and diverse as the US, usually ends in tyranny, wasted money, and ruined economies. Lastly, spending 1 trillion dollars to protect a sandlot when we could have used the same money to do a number of things, namely infrastructure development or, say, increasing the rate of solar research by some 1000% odd percent, makes zero sense and is one of the larger blunders in American history.
- slaizer, on 05/12/2008, -0/+15I wouldn't be so sure about that, fella.
Finland: Population density - 40/sq mi(161st)
United States: Population density - 80/sq mi(144th)
So, your country's population density is double of mine, and still I'm writing this post from a 100/100Mbit line, which costs me about 30€ a month. - JKAL, on 05/12/2008, -1/+14relief money? phffff , what is mostly sent as relief is out date medicine, powdered milk (to places where the water is mostly unsafe to drink), basically dump corporations' unwated (i.e. garbage) goods, and then claim the monetary value of that good's "good shelf life" , tell me that once again relief? phfff i say again.
- tschau, on 05/12/2008, -2/+15You obviously didn't read the article.
Yes, it was cheaper than Sweden, but we have far, far more money than Sweden. And around 50 times as many people. We can afford this. - Jimmerz, on 05/12/2008, -2/+14You sort of prove the point of the article. There are some things the collective power of government can do that the private sector cannot. Rural electrification would not have happened without the government, it needed to be done, but there was no profit motive. Problem is all the idiots that parrot the line 'government can only make things worse'. This may be true in many instances, but to make it one's mantra is retarded.
- VitriolAndAngst, on 05/12/2008, -4/+16Haven't the highly paid industry lobbyists explained all this to you already?
The US is too sparsely populated to do this inexpensively. Except in cities, where there are too many people to do this economically.
/snark - djbon2112, on 05/12/2008, -1/+15I disagree with the Canada one. Our ISPs are worse than the US. They're all slow, expensive, and throttle. Oh, and we can't get fiber except at exorbitant cost, almost anywhere.
- JKAL, on 05/12/2008, -1/+13here's an idea spend money on building the country's infrastructure(ie. progress) instead of destroying another's (i.e. war), money spent on 6months of war would be a handy start.
- clokwise, on 05/12/2008, -0/+13FWIW, I live in Thailand, and I have fibre to the door. My max speed? 768/256. Serious. Not only does that suck, but this country regularly blocks YouTube and many other random sites, caps ports higher than 1024, and throttles bittorrent and all int'l traffic. I get all that for $100 a month! Yes I have options, I can get ADSL from the national telco at 512/128. There is a private telecom option, however they don't serve my area.
So don't believe the hype, it's not all wonderful out here in Asia. - Chatchkie, on 05/12/2008, -0/+15I pay $80 a month for 16 mbps.
Wouldn't it be worth it to develop a new infrastructure here?
You would think that many businesses would be much more efficient is the internet was 10x faster. - Rufunki, on 05/12/2008, -3/+14Because the US takes the same attitude towards IT Infrastructure as they do with everything else computer related, only spend as much has one needs to, never go over that, even though it runs the entire company. Lets instead take fishing trips.
- dncarlson, on 05/12/2008, -3/+14The Government enables the insurance companies to act the way they do. Remove the cancer, and the organ has a chance of surviving at least, whereas no matter what you do, a malignant tumor is still going to kill you.
- jahurt, on 05/12/2008, -5/+17Sometimes it amazes me how little Americans know about the US Constitution.
A one vote majority isn't going to get much done against a determined minority.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/226/story/18218.html - CrazedLeper, on 05/12/2008, -7/+17True, also greed. Americans have no sense of camaraderie. Everyone is in it for self and immediate profit all the time. Creating a good national network of computers requires a national network of good people. We have corporations instead of that.
- barnett25, on 05/12/2008, -0/+10Did you read the article?
- inactive, on 05/12/2008, -3/+13I understand that people don't like their tax money going to something they don't agree with, but I really don't see why foreign aid is an issue to people. The way I see it, if you cut out the whole morally it's a good thing to do thing, you are basically just laying the groundwork to create a foreign ally. Why is that an issue? That sounds like tax money well spent to me.
- wendelgee2, on 05/12/2008, -1/+12How are those his good points? He's done jack and ***** on those issues.
- smaskat, on 05/12/2008, -7/+18NO!
We need all the money we can to fight wars!!
Who needs broadband... or education.. or social security... we need bigger MISSILES!!
...
/sarcasm - VitriolAndAngst, on 05/12/2008, -6/+18And yet people like you trust this US government with a military that has nukes, loses $2 Trillion and fails to protect our air space and the Pentagon goes "Oops. Now trust us."
You either have a business running an infrastructure that gives it a monopoly or you have a government controlled monopoly -- which one allows you and me any say in the matter? Hint; somehow other countries that are Democratic Socialists, are able to get fast and inexpensive internet access.
Maybe the problem in America, isn't government, it's a bunch of crooks who decry Big Government who never are held to account because they got people voting based upon gods/guns/gays? You think there might be a connection? - sodade, on 05/12/2008, -0/+10Get bandwidth/QoS to the last mile and TelePresence in the home of every white collar worker. Commuting to a job is ***** backwards for a large % of the white collar world.
- acc355, on 05/12/2008, -1/+10Well, Finland and Sweden with roughly half the population density have you beat by a large margin.
- Phylodome, on 05/12/2008, -0/+9Because large telecoms use our government to shield themselves from the market, not the other way around.
- inactive, on 05/12/2008, -2/+11Canada isn't a huge nation by any means. It's a population of about 33 million most located south near the US border. Try getting broadband way up north in Canada and tell me how that goes.
- Ellipsys, on 05/12/2008, -2/+12But see, in other countries sometimes the government says things like "You know what, lets do something that's good for us as a society that may not be immediately profitable". We used to do this here, back when we landed on the moon.
- inactive, on 05/12/2008, -2/+13RIght. That Interstate Highway System really is a huge failure.
/sarcasm. - VitriolAndAngst, on 05/12/2008, -1/+11Yeah, and we've paid AT&T how many thousands of times for that Taxpayer funded infrastructure?
And you know this because,... I have fiber everywhere in my city and copper ONLY on the last 300 feet to my house. I don't even think our telephone poles are 10 years old. -
Show 51 - 100 of 319 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is