3 edits | $350,000 million ??? gobble up the lion's share of the $350,000 million You can do a lot with $350 billion. I'll bet even Connected Nation can map broadband for that amount.  
|
|
Reviews:
 ·Verizon FiOS
 ·Cox HSI
| is not that they cannot... is that they will do using bad data provided by the providers, which have influence all over Connected Nation.
So, you are asking the people that today tell you are covered if at least only one in a zipcode is covered to do the same for the nation. |
|
 baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI
·Comcast
 ·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to fAcEtIOUs
If I open a broadband company, i dont want people to tell me where I have to provide service, and i certainly wouldnt want the government to subsidize their own network in populus areas that already have a ton of competition.
i dont expect att, comcast, or any other provider to feel any differently. what if the government told wal mart they had to open stores in country-north dakota, where building a store wouldnt pay for itself because of lack of population?
socialism at its best. |
|
|
|
3 edits | said by baineschile:If I open a broadband company, i dont want people to tell me where I have to provide service, and i certainly wouldnt want the government to subsidize their own network in populus areas that already have a ton of competition.
socialism at its best. True, even if the amount was only $350 million and not "$350,000 million" like the story said.
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
 wifi4milezBig Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07
New York, NY | reply to chemaupr
said by chemaupr:So, you are asking the people that today tell you are covered if at least only one in a zipcode is covered to do the same for the nation. The fact remains that it (zipcode data) is really the only reasonable way to measure broadband availability, NOT broadband installations. I think people need to realize the difference. For instance, and entire county could be wired (at the CO) for DSL, however only one resident might have ordered it. Would you then say that the provider (or Connected Nation) listing that county as 'served' is an incorrect assessment??
If the whole point of this excercise is to determine how many people have actually ordered broadband (not just can order) then this is doomed to fail.
--
When you can't make them see the light, make them feel the heat.
-Ronald Reagan-
|
|
| reply to baineschile
said by baineschile:If I open a broadband company, i dont want people to tell me where I have to provide service, and i certainly wouldnt want the government to subsidize their own network in populus areas that already have a ton of competition. i dont expect att, comcast, or any other provider to feel any differently. what if the government told wal mart they had to open stores in country-north dakota, where building a store wouldnt pay for itself because of lack of population? socialism at its best. The same was said years ago about electricity, telephones, roads and mail delivery. Today in the internet economy it is broadband.
When you look at it, telephone and cable companies (among others) have gotten tons of handouts and access to private property given to them by the Government. I think it's only fair that the public gets something back, even if it's initially unprofitable for the companies.
Otherwise, just give back all of the utility easements and rights of way and let each utility negotiate with individual land owners. |
|
