Topic 'Re: Good' in forum '' - dslreports.com http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239041 en Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:49:00 EDT Fri, 10 Feb 2012 05:49:00 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21244411 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21244411 Fri, 10 Oct 2008 05:46:28 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21243107 said by pnh102:

I don't understand how you have concluded that I get offended ? Because you generally haven't been appearing to come here with any desire to learn and grow, nor do you feed those desires in others.

I really do not believe that this is as important as people think it is. Other countries that have invested significant tax revenue to build higher-end networks still have yet to surpass us in terms of GDP.
THERE. Thank you. This is good stuff.

I see a correlation between a strong per-capita GDP and broadband penetration.

Take a look at this report »www.itif.org/index.php?id=143
or this report »www.websiteoptimization.com/bw/0809/

and compare it to the per-capita GDP »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co···r_capita (sort the "rank" columns to see the data) and many of the same names pop out. While the relationship isn't perfect (expensive oil and cheap labor tend to skew some countries), I cannot conclude that availability of broadband and national productivity are unrelated.

I believe that people who want broadband should invest their own private funds to build their own broadband solutions without the government getting involved.
I know that's what you want. But let's, theoretically, say that you don't get your first wish and we're going to do this. What is the best way to proceed and why?

There are numerous places that have gotten broadband that did not have it before. You can see numerous examples posted on this very site about private companies extending service to previously unserved areas. That can't possibly be an increase of 1%.
What examples?

I am slightly off, I thought it was 2006-2008. The OECD data shows that between 2006 and 2007 years, the U.S. has advanced 1.36% and Canada is 0.00. So (for us in the US) it's one year and more than 1%. I really don't think 2008 will come in very strong, do you?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21243107 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 21:02:50 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21242427 said by Sammer:

Their corporations depend on there being a lawful society and when corporate greed exceeds reasonable boundaries that isn't possible. Doesn't the government bail-out tell you something? There has to be limits to corporate greed just as we have laws against theft or our economy will collapse. I agree with you that companies must be expected to operate within the law. I also have believed that any bailout was wrong. I think that the markets would have sufficiently punished companies that behaved badly by allowing them to go under had the government not bailed them out.
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21242427 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:05:27 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21242420 said by funchords:

Maybe you're on ignore because you don't add any substance.No, I think people ignore me simply because they do not agree with me. I don't bother to ignore anyone because I don't care enough about them to put them on ignore.
said by funchords:

I have just read 6 definitive messages in a row from you, none exhibiting any hint of critical thinking that might challenge your own positions.
And exactly what did I say that was incorrect?
said by funchords:

We've had less than 1 percent of additional penetration -- in two years!
Complete bull. There are numerous places that have gotten broadband that did not have it before. You can see numerous examples posted on this very site about private companies extending service to previously unserved areas. That can't possibly be an increase of 1%.
said by funchords:

So how do YOU purport to increase the availability of broadband to more Americans?
I believe that people who want broadband should invest their own private funds to build their own broadband solutions without the government getting involved.
said by funchords:

On the other hand, if the government does decide to take a role in retaking our top broadband ranking someday, what do you think should it do to move forward?
I really do not believe that this is as important as people think it is. Other countries that have invested significant tax revenue to build higher-end networks still have yet to surpass us in terms of GDP.
said by funchords:

If you're just going to be offended or give me back another flat answer, then don't bother.
I don't understand how you have concluded that I get offended ?
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21242420 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 19:03:46 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21242386 said by nasadude:

I don't have the answers, but this canard the government can't do anything is a load of bull.Except for the fact that pretty much everything the government has gotten into that is beyond the scope of its duly delegated powers has proven this notion correct.
said by nasadude:

the government can't do anything right when it's run by incompetents that don't believe in government - I believe that's been amply proved over the last several years.
And during this time, the private sector has succeeding in expanding broadband availability all through the country with no money from taxpayers. Given government's proven track record of failure, why should we entrust it with something as important as broadband?
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21242386 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:54:52 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241503
Maybe you're on ignore because you don't add any substance. You don't give anyone any credit for a different opinion. Neither you nor your readers grow as a result of your contributions. I have just read 6 definitive messages in a row from you, none exhibiting any hint of critical thinking that might challenge your own positions.

As you pointed out, private companies can (and DO) determine on their own where the most profitable areas to build will be. So where are they building? For the past two years, they've been building where broadband already exists! We've had less than 1 percent of additional penetration -- in two years! So how do YOU purport to increase the availability of broadband to more Americans?

Can government manage a large-capacity network? We'll, it already manages several but that's beside the point. You and I probably agree that just because the government can do something doesn't mean that it should -- and we both probably agree that this particular idea has very limited merit. On the other hand, if the government does decide to take a role in retaking our top broadband ranking someday, what do you think should it do to move forward?

If you're just going to be offended or give me back another flat answer, then don't bother. But here's a chance to consider that those who respond to you are also serious about their own convictions and are inviting you to influence them -- not belittle them.

Robb
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241503 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 16:06:12 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241395 said by pnh102:

And again, how will the government make that happen? Do you really have faith that the government can manage anything in a good capacity lately?
I don't have the answers, but this canard the government can't do anything is a load of bull.

the government can't do anything right when it's run by incompetents that don't believe in government - I believe that's been amply proved over the last several years.

But yes, I do believe the govt is capable of managing whatever it sets it's mind to when it has competent leaders - it's done so in the past and will do so again in the future, when we have competent leaders.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241395 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:48:36 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241251 said by pnh102:

said by Sammer:

So there is no need to point out how the corporate greed that is dooming our country's economic future is unpatriotic.
Why is it wrong for business owners or shareholders to be greedy? The whole point of a business is to make money.
Their corporations depend on there being a lawful society and when corporate greed exceeds reasonable boundaries that isn't possible. Doesn't the government bail-out tell you something? There has to be limits to corporate greed just as we have laws against theft or our economy will collapse.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241251 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:26:29 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241209 --
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241209 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:18:20 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241202 said by funchords:

The Verizon database is terribly broken and Comcast apparently validates any address as available for service in places where it serves one address. (Customers apparently find out on install day when nobody shows.) Why is it that most of the people with those problems seem to hang out here? While no system is always going to be perfect, I would dare say that for most people, these databases are accurate enough. The government's mandate for something better is not going to change things, at least, not at a price that we'd be willing to pay.
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241202 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:17:34 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241189 said by Sammer:

So there is no need to point out how the corporate greed that is dooming our country's economic future is unpatriotic. Why is it wrong for business owners or shareholders to be greedy? The whole point of a business is to make money.
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241189 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:15:38 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241184 said by viperlmw:

II can't tell, except from people quoting him, as I have him on ignore. You want me.
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241184 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:14:42 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241180 said by nasadude:

said by pnh102:

I am saying the government has no need for such information, as there is nothing it can do to improve broadband.
so you already have your 100Mbps symmetric connection for $50/mo?
And again, how will the government make that happen? Do you really have faith that the government can manage anything in a good capacity lately?
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241180 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:13:52 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241172 said by BF69:

Sure it can. I can give insentives to companies to build out broadband. Hard to do that when you don't know where it's needed. Private companies do not need the government to tell them where to build. Most private companies can determine on their own where the most profitable areas to build will be.
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21241172 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 15:12:56 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239969 said by pnh102:

said by Karl Bode:

So you're saying that customers having access to limited one-off pre-qualification databases is the same thing as the government having accurate national broadband penetration, coverage and deployment data before making massive decisions?
I am saying the government has no need for such information, as there is nothing it can do to improve broadband.
I wouldn't go so far as to say that the government has no need for that information, but considering that the national debt just passed $10 trillion and we just appropriated $700 billion for the bailout, I hate to say it but broadband mapping is one of those things that might have to be sacrificed until we get our financial house in order.
--
"Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so too."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239969 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 11:39:06 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239874 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239874 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 11:19:16 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239647 said by pnh102:

I am saying the government has no need for such information, as there is nothing it can do to improve broadband.
So there is no need to point out how the corporate greed that is dooming our country's economic future is unpatriotic. BTW the fastest growth in government spending is now in corporate welfare.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239647 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 10:35:54 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239642 said by pnh102:

Congress should just scrap the bill altogether. No national broadband "plan" is needed, and as has been pointed out before, it is trivially easy for people to find out if a residence to which they are moving is serviced for broadband.

»Re: Point Has Merit

If broadband providers are not providing data that explains where they are providing service, then why is it possible for customers to access said data?
The Verizon database is terribly broken and Comcast apparently validates any address as available for service in places where it serves one address. (Customers apparently find out on install day when nobody shows.)

Meanwhile, as far as the FCC knows, 99 percent of the nation have broadband access and that 91.5 percent has three or more choices. Trouble is, those figures are apparently only true on a zip-code by zip-code basis, and the per-address basis is far, far less.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239642 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 10:35:23 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239426 said by pnh102:

said by Karl Bode:

So you're saying that customers having access to limited one-off pre-qualification databases is the same thing as the government having accurate national broadband penetration, coverage and deployment data before making massive decisions?
I am saying the government has no need for such information, as there is nothing it can do to improve broadband.
Sure it can. I can give insentives to companies to build out broadband. Hard to do that when you don't know where it's needed.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239426 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:55:37 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239370 said by nasadude:

said by pnh102:

I am saying the government has no need for such information, as there is nothing it can do to improve broadband.
so you already have your 100Mbps symmetric connection for $50/mo?
I'm sure it comes through the same corporate phallus he has rammed up his rectum.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239370 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:44:45 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239290 said by pnh102:

I am saying the government has no need for such information, as there is nothing it can do to improve broadband.
so you already have your 100Mbps symmetric connection for $50/mo?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239290 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:28:47 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239152 http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239152 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:02:05 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239139 said by Karl Bode:

So you're saying that customers having access to limited one-off pre-qualification databases is the same thing as the government having accurate national broadband penetration, coverage and deployment data before making massive decisions? I am saying the government has no need for such information, as there is nothing it can do to improve broadband.
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239139 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 09:00:00 EDT Re: Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239099 If broadband providers are not providing data that explains where they are providing service, then why is it possible for customers to access said data?So you're saying that customers having access to limited one-off pre-qualification databases is the same thing as the government having accurate national broadband penetration, coverage and deployment data before making massive decisions?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Re-Good-21239099 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 08:50:43 EDT Good http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Good-21239041
»Re: Point Has Merit

If broadband providers are not providing data that explains where they are providing service, then why is it possible for customers to access said data?
--
"At the moment of conception."]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/Good-21239041 Thu, 09 Oct 2008 08:37:40 EDT