What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
CNET Top Weekly Download for Free Anti-Virus view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
312 Comments
- BullBearMS, on 02/25/2009, -3/+181The US Government already gave 200 Billion ***** dollars to the Phone Companies to improve broadband.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996, signed by President Clinton and passed by the Republican House and Senate, provided 200 Billion dollars in tax credits and other considerations to the phone companies. In return, we were supposed to get 45 megabit connections everywhere.
"Over the decade from 1994-2004 the major telephone companies profited from higher phone rates paid by all of us, accelerated depreciation on their networks, and direct tax credits an average of $2,000 per subscriber for which the companies delivered precisely nothing in terms of service to customers. That's $200 billion with nothing to be shown for it."
Read All About It: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen.
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_200 ... - Ainvar, on 02/24/2009, -4/+146The reason our broadband sucks is you are letting companies like comcast charge a huge fee for something that is cheap as in bandwidth. Yes it takes some money to roll out the equipment and hardware. You also gotta get people who know what they are doing to manage it. but come on 60 bucks a month for 12mbits down and 768k up where in other countries they have ds3 equivalent connections that do internet, tv, and phone for something like 20-25 bucks a month.
- daedalus256, on 02/24/2009, -3/+125I don't think the government pretty much controlling broadband companies is really a good idea. Maybe intervention is required to break some of those cable monopolies that are so common in the US. I have no choice in my cable company, I'm forced into comcast if I want cable. In other markets, you're forced into Time Warner. Something needs to be done to break up these monopolies, someone call Teddy Roosevelt.
- Kevin108, on 02/25/2009, -1/+43A lot of ISPs are started "prioritizing" traffic. YouTube, ZIPs, and Torrents are taking the punishment. In effect, they are offering us less bandwidth for the same money. ***** suckers!
- inactive, on 02/24/2009, -6/+44For US broadband speeds and penetration to increase, we got to break up the huge broadband companies that are charging a lot of money for very little bandwidth. Have the government create monetary incentives to spread broadband through the country sides to places where there is only 56k offered. If the government did this, then the entire United States could be better connected and broadband would be cheaper for all.
- omenmedia, on 02/25/2009, -7/+42Try using Australian broadband, then see which is more craptastic.
- oriondr, on 02/25/2009, -1/+34Canada isnt one of those countries that has the edge on the US in the broadband arena..
countries like Sweden & South Korea are. - Nephersir7, on 02/25/2009, -0/+33In Canada, I get 1,8 mbps down, 600k up for $30/month, throttling included
I seriously want your crappy broadband - ViperX116, on 02/25/2009, -2/+32Compare to better Japan speeds and continue bitching?
- LJSeinfeld, on 02/25/2009, -3/+30Meanwhile, the rural areas of the country are damned lucky if they can even get DSL or Cable.
I think development money would be better spent in providing good connectivity to a large area then providing awesome speed to a small area.
I finally was able to get DSL 2 years ago... $40/month for 3mb down and 780-something up. - Hiltonizer, on 02/25/2009, -10/+36the FCC creates those monopolies.
government is the problem, not the solution. - chaoswings, on 02/25/2009, -2/+27Since the government created this problem we are at a stage where only the government can fix it.
Despite what people want to believe, the internet has become so intertwined with our society that you need it just like you do a phone. People expect you to have an e-mail address, expect you to be able to fill out forms for the office online and they expect you to be able to submit that assignment electronically so it can be checked for plagiarism.
Broadband is not like going out to buy a pair of shoes. You are completely locked in and the only way to get different service is to move, which is not like driving to a shoe store. They don't have to cater to you because you need internet and only they can provide it to you. You can't tell them that you will take your money elsewhere they'll just laugh in your face. - spyd3rweb, on 02/25/2009, -0/+22I have come up with a free solution for ripping up all the copper. Tell the meth tweakers where all the wires are.
- scoottie, on 02/25/2009, -0/+21edit: fiber
- BullBearMS, on 02/25/2009, -0/+21The US Government already gave 200 Billion ***** dollars to the Phone Companies to improve broadband.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996, signed by President Clinton and passed by the Republican House and Senate, provided 200 Billion dollars in tax credits and other considerations to the phone companies. In return, we were supposed to get 45 megabit connections everywhere. This was also the act that allowed Phone companies to go from a small regulated profit margin to charging anything they thought they could get away with.
"Over the decade from 1994-2004 the major telephone companies profited from higher phone rates paid by all of us, accelerated depreciation on their networks, and direct tax credits an average of $2,000 per subscriber for which the companies delivered precisely nothing in terms of service to customers. That's $200 billion with nothing to be shown for it."
Read All About It: The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen.
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2007/pulpit_200 ... - drewhoo, on 02/25/2009, -0/+19Well you can't expect too much when you leach our wifi from across the tasman ;-)
- roxgod666, on 02/25/2009, -2/+21I can't even load a youtube video anymore without waiting for 10 minutes. "Double the speed" my ass.
- iamorangehat, on 02/25/2009, -1/+20because they donate huge sums of money to our elected officials they can continue to offer crappy service and over charge like crazy. elect some officials who give a sh*t about Americans if you want change.
- jn1167, on 02/25/2009, -9/+28Call me crazy but I live in NY and I get 30-32MBs down and 5-6MBs up. I wouldnt exactly call that crappy. Did I mention i pay a whopping $40 for it?
- scoottie, on 02/25/2009, -3/+21rip all the copper and replace it with fier
- dafin0, on 02/25/2009, -0/+15http://my.bigpond.com/internetplans/broadband/adsl ...
$30 for 200MB limit... god bless Australia - inactive, on 02/25/2009, -0/+15That 300gb I downloaded last week? Oh that was Linux ISOs, swear.
- defenswens26, on 02/25/2009, -7/+22Regulation. You let greedy bastards like Comcast run it anyway they want and we'll all be paying tiered pricing like cable one day.
- digghans, on 02/25/2009, -1/+16Do what Larry Lessig suggests and bury the FCC. They are still managing things as they did over 30 years ago with only minor changes. Replace it with a new regulatory agency called the innovation economy protection agency, or IEPA. http://www.spectrumofgreed.com/?p=247#more-247
- inactive, on 02/25/2009, -4/+19The government is always involved in corporations which IS the problem. They create the monopolies. This is why we have no true capitalism today. If the governments would let private companies run..the ***** companies would fail and the good ones would become successful. But noooo...government always has to step in and do things like give these corporations bailouts because they SUCK at running a business. Therefore we will always be stuck with ***** service and less than acceptable products until the government steps aside and lets these corporations fail, so that new businesses can come in and do a better job for the people.
- DavidGX, on 02/25/2009, -2/+17Net Neutrality would be a nice start. More competition as well.
- defektiv, on 02/25/2009, -1/+14Amazing how much the US is always behind other countries, particularly in Asia, when it comes to technology that cuts into the profits of established corporations.
- dgr8one, on 02/24/2009, -19/+32and in other countries you get an 8mbit connection for about $140 a month!
(eg. http://www.etisalat.ae/index.jsp?lang=en&type= ... - dagamer34, on 02/25/2009, -1/+13When you have an effective duopoloy in markets (1 cable provider, 1 DSL provider), it's far too easy to lock up the market into high prices that consumers have no control over.
- LJSeinfeld, on 02/25/2009, -1/+13Dude.. Seattle.
Kinda like saying: I live in Palo Alto and, I don't know why, but the internet service here is great! - simplyintricate, on 02/25/2009, -3/+14I disagree, the state creates duopolies. The reason is to lessen choice and make it easier for you to choose but it also makes it less competitive. The reason why Fios can't go to some states is because the state does not allow them to.
- aijazbaig1, on 02/25/2009, -0/+11man..u need to come to sweden .....its blazing fast and i pay not more than 180 swedish kroner or $20 i guess
- sleeknerve, on 02/25/2009, -0/+11there is no other cable option where most people live. You either have it, or you dont.
- SilverBlade2k, on 02/25/2009, -4/+15It's the ISP's that hinder broadband development. They'd rather restrict services, restrict development so that they can squeeze every last dollar from you.
In short; ISP's are cheap bastards who don't want to give anyone fibre, look to ***** studies that say rural people don't want high-speed (If those people had a chance to use high-speed, they'd want it). - mfc5200, on 02/25/2009, -2/+13I think it is paradoxical to complain about broadband speeds and a pay-per-GB pay scheme.
I can pretty much guarantee that if we paid per GB, the networks would do everything in their power to boosts speeds.
As it stands, those who don't use broadband as much as others are subsidizing the use of the heavy users. - kitsua, on 02/25/2009, -1/+11I pay £35 a month for 20Mbit/s right now. Soon, I'll have 50Mbit/s with no limits whatsoever and a choice of vendors.
I'm happy with my UK broadband, thanks. - sint4x, on 02/25/2009, -2/+12You all need to come to Canada.
- willrs, on 02/25/2009, -0/+10It's different when you live in a big city. In San Fransisco you can get anywhere from 45mb to 100mb downstream.
It's not the cities, but the suburbs and rural areas that have speed and quality of service problems. - inactive, on 02/25/2009, -2/+12what
- Ghostalker, on 02/25/2009, -1/+11I live in NYS as well, we pay $55 for 10Mb/s down, 2Mb/s up via RoadRunner. Verizon has kept saying FiOS has been coming to our part of town for the past 5 years, but despite laying the fiber, they've yet to turn it on.
Somehow, I doubt that competition will make a difference when they both will charge a disproportionate amount of money cause they know we have no choice. - inactive, on 02/25/2009, -2/+11 Hopefully the plan is not to write huge checks to the provider companies so they can decide how to implement their strategy.
- liquisoft, on 02/25/2009, -9/+18Broadband is always going to be a bit behind here in the US because of the sheer size of our country. In smaller countries it's easier to roll out faster technology and the transfer speeds are going to be much higher due to the literal proximity people have to one another. In the US, data centers tend to be much much farther apart. I do think it's time for a price change, and I do agree that we need less monopolizing of internet companies, but I completely disagree with some comments about "nationalizing" broadband. That's ridiculous. The last thing we need is for our government to control more crucial infrastructures and inevitably screw them up.
- Nintendesert, on 02/25/2009, -4/+13That's not what Engadget told me!!
http://www.engadget.com/2009/02/23/usa-1-in-broadb ... - sittered, on 02/25/2009, -0/+9When people stop their bitching, innovation stops.
- xexx, on 02/25/2009, -0/+9I pay $70 a month for 3MB/1.5MB fixed wireless internet and I live in the country. If cows could jump I wouldn't be able to get any internet.
- minorthreat, on 02/25/2009, -8/+16I've noticed that we, the US are starting to suck at alot of things now days...
- macinit1138, on 02/25/2009, -1/+9We rank lowest in just about anything of value these days, thanks to the corporate takeover of the American government.
- Hiltonizer, on 02/25/2009, -0/+8the FCC only gives one cable company a license in any given area.... that's why there aren't more than one cable company beating down your door for business.
Fiber is different technology than cable, so fortunately that is starting to bring some competition in some areas. - klaser, on 02/25/2009, -5/+13The broadband market in the US is stale because it is controlled by government granted monopolies (utilities). They have no incentive to innovate. A government incentive is not a solution as once the incentive has been used up, the broadband market will become stale again. Removing the monopolies is unlikely to occur, so a different solution must be created. The government could build out and "own" the network infrastructure and allow companies to create broadband products. The consumer would own their modem and port the modem between carriers.
- cjh24, on 02/25/2009, -2/+10Try using NZ broadband
-
Show 51 - 100 of 319 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is