What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
84 Comments
- TheSavant, on 10/10/2007, -7/+55God forbid we do something that helps the average person in America. If it doesn't make the rich richer, it needs to be smacked down!
- emmanuelsotelo, on 10/10/2007, -2/+34AT&T mu$t have given the FCC $some good rea$on$ why thi$ i$ not a good idea.
- GnuTzu, on 10/10/2007, -0/+22"would be supported by ad revenues"
In what form would the ads be presented? - ikzeidegek, on 10/10/2007, -1/+15The fact that the FCC is not opening up the 700Mhz range frequencies, but instead intends to sell these frequencies to high-bidding AT&T or Verizon is much worse than this. AT&T and Verizon are willing to pay top dollar, but only to make sure that their monopoly and their monopoly profits persist.
- pbaehr, on 10/10/2007, -0/+11Beamed directly into your dreams, of course.
Now's the time to buy stock in Lightspeed briefs! - Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -2/+9malware installed without your knowledge, of course!
- MeMongo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Wrong! The 700 Mhz freq. is currently occupied by analog television
http://www.engadget.com/2007/04/27/up-next-on-the-fcc-spectrum-auction-block-700mhz-band/
You really ***** that up didn't you? - livevil, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8***** the FCC!
- catalysis, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6M2Z is a for-profit company. Did you think they were doing this out of the kindness of their hearts?
- Casedot, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6I sat in a conference where the president of M2Z was giving a speech. I guess he used to be a high-up official in the FCC or something like that (it was last year so I don't remember everything specifically). He talked about what they want to do and how they are going to do it. It is a fairly slow network, like 4x the speed of dial up, but it is completely wireless which is nice. I am not sure exactly how the ads would work, but I believe they would be shown on a captive portal type of site (like Sarbucks where you have to sign in to a website before you can get online).
It is a really great idea and they don't need THAT much spectrum, but the only problem is they are completely relying on government funding for it, and we all know how good the government is at helping people... - CraigJ, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Moron troofer. blocked.
- Cyber_Akuma, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6Don't gamma-burst all your eggs in one basket.
- sw17ch, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7Agreed. 20Mhz is huge. Also, "free" is a dumb term. Also, supporting with ads scares me... where do they go? How do they get to me? Cheaper broadband I'm okay with... perhaps even gov't funded internet (but I'm skeptical of that), but outright free? Some one gets something, and I don't like ads.
- DietMountainDew, on 10/10/2007, -6/+11Why does our government hate us?
- Rodman930, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Die in a Fire???
- Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -7/+1120MHz is a lot of bandwidth to hand over to *any* single company.
I am glad the FCC is blocking this... even though I would like to see this sort of service. - defektiv, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5why would the government support any free internet service? there's many a politician that got campaign financing through some telecom giant. they aren't going to support something that could potentially take revenue from the people that paid their way to the top.
- eboy, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6it sure would be great...but screw the average guy out of anything.
- Tripw0l, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Wait, they're threatening to sue the FCC if the FCC doesn't give them an answer? Hold on, so you're also saying that the FCC doesn't really HAVE to say "yes" they indeed have a better option of saying "no" and letting some one else bid on it AND give them a percentage. So let me get this straight, you're basically threatening the FCC that they face legal action in case they don't answer and it's in their best interest to say "no" quickly. It's a noble effort and people should be thinking more in the direction of making luxury items like broadband service free but come on.
- Myonosken, on 10/10/2007, -1/+5Well the FCC is a US group, so...
- MonkCanatella, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3First of all, MeMongo's an idiot. Second of all, it's easier to control us.
- gebx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3You have to listen to a 30's second commercial before your number is dialed... It's that simple.
Canadian Beer Company had a similar promotion for free long distance calls, call a special number listen to a beer commercial then dial your long distance number.. voila free long distance...Campaign was targeted at college/University students and I think it worked pretty well, I didn't mind the ads and I got to call home for free. - malcolmlo, on 10/10/2007, -1/+4Imagine the potential: anywhere you are you can plug into the net. Sure the free version has ads, but i'd be more than willing to deal with that while I'm traveling, or if i wanted to work somewhere outside while on my laptop.
Of course this poses another problem for our government: more US citizens have access to the "free and open" medium of the internet where people can freely share ideas, ie they have less control. Could this mean citizens who are more informed on public policy and elections? Maybe even citizens who can develop their own ideas an opinions instead of what they are fed on television. Uh oh!
At least thats a dream of mine anyways. - 123AlanJohnson, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5I have to say, there are actually few things which surprise me these days :)
Great story btw, appreciate it - sysadmin88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I see what you did there.....
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4Our corrupt gummint at it's best.
- jtb4, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2true, but still I'd check out an ad for free access- you know get up and grab a soda while the ad plays or whatever, like the old days of TV before cable.
- numlok, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Anyone else interested in learning more about how corrupt and incestuous the FCC is (as well as some hopeful plans for reform), I whole-heartedly recommend the book "Digital Destiny: New Media and the Future of Democracy" by Jeff Chester:
http://www.amazon.com/Digital-Destiny-Media-Future-Democracy/dp/1565847954
It's an extremely enlightening (if often depressing/infuriating) read. - thunder7, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Heaven forbid 'everyone' should have broadband.
In case of an emergency you know,... - MonkCanatella, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Way to ***** up the quote.
- chancel, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Most comments are crazy! This company wants to make revenues from its services just like any other company. But they want to cut a deal with the FCC to give it to them for free upfront. Give me a break. Auction it to the highest bidder.
If you want real *free* and not for profit there are the ham radio bands that the FCC has sit aside. Let's get something going to fuel development in those bands already given for free. - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3It would be easy enough to block their proposed ads. Only way I could see ads supported would be with some proprietary software like AOL used. Which of course there would probably be some kind of open source work around I'd assume.
- razor150, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Probably would have last as long as the free internet connections did. Ad supported just isn't sustainable.
- inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You like Bush, right?
- geddon, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1your government love$ you
- senfo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The 20 MHz. band wouldn't have been good, anyhow. HF frequencies are ideal for long-distance communication. On the 20 MHz. band, it is possible to communicate around the world with as little as 150 watts. Amateur radio operators have [for lack of better words] owned this frequency for as long as I can remember. And that's not to say that amateur radio operators should have the right to restrict growth of a market that has the potential to help many Americans; however, HF frequencies are not ideal for cell phone communication. HF frequencies, by nature, are incredibly noisy and people communicating on the frequencies often sound like Donald Duck. In addition, with very little power, HF signals carry vast distances, so the potential for overlap is extremely high (ever hear a distant radio signal from another state on your FM radio during certain times of the year?).
Ever wonder why there is always a push to move cordless phones to higher frequencies? Many consumers believe that a 5.8 GHz. phone can communicate further than a 900 MHz. phone. This couldn't be further from the truth. Unlike HF frequencies that bounce off of the atmosphere to return to Earth, VHF, UHF and frequencies beyond go right through that atmosphere and into space. As a result, higher frequencies are generally less noisy than the lower frequencies.
Just something to think about. - OBKenobi, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Nuke AT&T.
- jmnormand, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1the kicker is the majority of the bandwidth would be used for their paid 3mb service rather than the 384k/128k free service
- Weebs43, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Easy, require they login through a specific client to get the connection, and the client presents adds occasionally.
- secion8, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1We don't own the airwaves, The government (FCC), OWN the air waves!
- senfo, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1By the way, I'm a complete moron and only just now realized that this was about broadband and not cell phone communication. However, the same principles apply.
- jtb4, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I hate it when people say that for $tupid obviou$ rea$on$
- Moduliz0r, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I don't understand how someone can say you can or can't broadcast on certain frequencies. I could understand if it was in use by someone else, but actually being able to say "You have to pay to use the air" is silly. But it's the reality of things sadly.
- jtb4, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1No. They don't care so much about the money as the do about the PRIVACY. See, if you're a good old fashioned capitalistic company then you want to make sure you play by all the government's rules. If you're some kind of let's say "open source" based company or enterprise, then the distributed nature of how you do business lends itself to breaking the rules.
Really, the government is scared as ***** that somehow there will be the Linux equivalent of the Internet, where no one is accountable, traffic can't be regulated or traced, and that it can't control what we hear or see. - jtb4, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1God you make me sick. Google is becoming the government. They are building a government-only Internet for the DOD with the fiber they own and the government is handing them the airwaves because Google complies and works with Internet surveillance.
- Cyber_Akuma, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Thing is, all they can do is reserve either some physical space (newspapers) or playtime (radio and tv) to show you the ad. And they can't do anything about you ignoring the ad or just doing something else until it goes away.
When it comes to PCs where content has no standard, can run code, and in some points can force you to see/do something before it allows you to access said content. The term "ad supported" becomes more like "ad infested". - gebx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Television is ad supported.. radio is ad supported... Local news papers (some) are ad supported.
Now please tell me what the hell is wrong with "ad supported" - shitton, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1"citizens who are more informed on public policy and elections"
That's just crazy talk.
// Begin questioning of your patriotism - inactive, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Do you know what the name of the body equivalent to the FCC is in the UK?
No? Then why should I know the US one? - Cyber_Akuma, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1I think people like you would be happer if they offered free tinfoil hats.
-
Show 51 - 84 of 84 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is