dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
794
share rss forum feed


baineschile
2600 ways to live
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI

1 edit

Will Vote...

And Will Fail. Government taking over broadband will saturate it and deliver a lower quality product than if in the hands of private companies.

Plus, 768k in 10 years!??!?! Comcast and Verizon have 50,000k hsi THIS YEAR. what will the point be then?


ArrayList
netbus developer
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Brighton, MA
Reviews:
·RCN CABLE
·Comcast
said by baineschile:

And Will Fail. Government taking over broadband will saturate it and deliver a lower quality product than if in the hands of private companies.

Plus, 768k in 10 years!??!?! Comcast and Verizon have 50,000k hsi THIS YEAR. what will the point be then?
so are you saying that the private sector has produced a good product? this nationwide broadband is not meant to replace the comcasts and verizons or at&t's out there. i know my grandma would love to get something like this. think about it. it may be slow but it could easily replace the remaining dialup users.


DrModem
Trust Your Doctor
Premium
join:2006-10-19
USA
kudos:1
Indeed. This would be a great replacement for my 26k.

voipdabbler

join:2006-04-27
Kalispell, MT
reply to baineschile
The vote is not about the government running it--it's about auctioning this bandwith of spectrum with conditions imposed on the buyer. Problem I see is there isn't enough oversight on the spectrum already sold off to the private sector. That's why the last data published on how many of the 425 Rural Service Areas in the cellular market show fewer than 50 percent (specifically 150) actually have any cellular service. Communication infrastructure is a critical national security asset and the government needs to start overseeing the private sector that's given the privilege of operating it--remember all the complaints and concerns about cellular failure during 9/11. If they don't comply with government imposed conditions, then they need to be stripped of their license and fined.

Sammer

join:2005-12-22
Canonsburg, PA

1 recommendation

said by voipdabbler:

Problem I see is there isn't enough oversight on the spectrum already sold off to the private sector. That's why the last data published on how many of the 425 Rural Service Areas in the cellular market show fewer than 50 percent (specifically 150) actually have any cellular service.
A condition to provide 768 Mbps service to 275 RSAs first at a reasonable price (maybe $30 / month maximum) would make sense. Conditions such as free internet service to 95% of the country in 10 years with smut filters are just stupid.


baineschile
2600 ways to live
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
reply to ArrayList
Although there are some problems with the major ISPs, they still have done a far superior job than a government run agency would have.

Everyone has a service outage once in a while; poor weather, wiring, network upgrades, etc. Would government run broadband work any better?


Glaice
Brutal Video Vault
Premium
join:2002-10-01
North Babylon, NY
reply to DrModem
Does this mean there will be more spamming, scammers, typhoid marys and people who just don't give a shit.
--
»[FS] PC games, music and movies for sale