dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer

Search Topic:
uniqs
990
share rss forum feed


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD

RESTITUTION

For everyone who said that only the government could produce an accurate broadband, all of you people, every last one of you people, should be made to pay back that $300 million.

This information was LONG AVAILABLE from the ISPs themselves. Anyone who wanted to know if broadband was available at a given location could have found out about that on their own with no government help.

Don't make me post the links.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.

lesopp

join:2001-06-27
Land O Lakes, FL

1 recommendation

Evidence of more wasted tax dollars brought to you President "Spend-O-Potamus".


Bogers Matt

@above.net
Knee-jerk much? This map was made, pursuant to the Broadband Data Improvement Act, passed unanimously in both houses, and signed into law by President George W. Bush.

It's still a $300M waste, but to pretend that the out of control DC spending is new is folly.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:

This information was LONG AVAILABLE from the ISPs themselves.

Are you kidding? Most general coverage maps were a load of bunk. It wasn't until you locked & loaded your individual address that they'd actually assess if they *really* provided internet to your location.

Hell, AT&T's own site is still borked for my DSL for displaying offerings, simply because I'm signed up for DSLExtreme ATM. Simply having another service exempts me from even seeing the speeds they may advertise.

I don't know if this was really $300 million worth, but with broadband almost becoming a requirement for access to a full job market, it's good to have a one-stop shop. It's unrealistic to ask every person to enter their information 1001 times across the internet's various ISPs in order to get accurate internet offerings.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to pnh102
The problem isn't the Government. It's the Corporations who provide false, misleading, inaccurate data rife with omissions and errors. To deliberately foul it up.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to Bogers Matt
said by Bogers Matt :

Knee-jerk much? This map was made, pursuant to the Broadband Data Improvement Act, passed unanimously in both houses, and signed into law by President George W. Bush.

It's still a $300M waste, but to pretend that the out of control DC spending is new is folly.

Owned.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
reply to Bogers Matt
said by Bogers Matt :

Knee-jerk much? This map was made, pursuant to the Broadband Data Improvement Act, passed unanimously in both houses, and signed into law by President George W. Bush.

It's still a $300M waste, but to pretend that the out of control DC spending is new is folly.

Agreed.

I do not want to make this about the current president. Both he and his predecessor suck when it came to fiscal discipline. My comment is directed at all the people who argued that "only the government could come up with the best possible map."
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
reply to KrK
said by KrK:

The problem isn't the Government. It's the Corporations who provide false, misleading, inaccurate data rife with omissions and errors. To deliberately foul it up.

I told you not to make me post the list.

FIOS Lookup by Address - »www22.verizon.com/residential/fi···lity.htm

Verizon DSL Lookup by Address - »www22.verizon.com/Residential/Hi···Internet (follow "Check Availability" link on this page.)

Qwest DSL Lookup By Address - »www.qwest.com/MasterWebPortal/re···Hsi=true

AT&T DSL Lookup By Address - »www.att.com/dsl/ (Click on "Start Now" link under "Get DSL Without Phone Service")

AT&T Uverse Lookup By Address - »www.att.com/u-verse/explore/inte···ding.jsp (Click on "Shop Now" link)

Comcast Lookup By Address - »www.comcast.com - (Under the "Shop" menu click on "High-Speed Internet")

Cox Service Lookup - »ww2.cox.com - Enter ZIP Code then go to region specific site.

Charter Service Lookup - »www.charter.com - Enter address on front page.

Time Warner Cable - »www.timewarnercable.com/ - Enter ZIP on front page.

--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Thanks, but that was my point.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
reply to pnh102
One, all these ISPs have generic coverage maps that aren't worth the paper they're printed on. Only once you submit a "hook me up" order do you actually get real data.

Second, your list doesn't cover every ISP out there. Given independents, communal fiber, and other choices that vary from region to region, there's many more address lookups to check into. Also, if I wish to keep up-to-date on offerings for all these services, I need to re-enter my information manually for each site.

So yeah, the information was "already there" in that regard...but it was in a useless format. I mean, if we were to extrapolate that thought, there's also no "need" for search engines. All the information they provide is simply a reprint from somewhere else.

Now, whether this could have been done cheaper is a different question altogether.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
said by Thaler:

One, all these ISPs have generic coverage maps that aren't worth the paper they're printed on. Only once you submit a "hook me up" order do you actually get real data.

For most people, these lookup tools work just fine. It simply isn't in any ISP's self interest to hide this information. My point is that you people here act like this information is some state secret when it isn't.
said by Thaler:

Second, your list doesn't cover every ISP out there.

Then do your patriotic duty and help to complete it.
said by Thaler:

So yeah, the information was "already there" in that regard...but it was in a useless format.

Except that it seems to work for most people.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
said by pnh102:

said by Thaler:

One, all these ISPs have generic coverage maps that aren't worth the paper they're printed on. Only once you submit a "hook me up" order do you actually get real data.

For most people, these lookup tools work just fine. It simply isn't in any ISP's self interest to hide this information. My point is that you people here act like this information is some state secret when it isn't.

Then here's a better question, why isn't that information already on their public coverage maps? Why do they claim to cover an area when they really don't service it?

said by pnh102:

Then do your patriotic duty and help to complete it.

I'd rather be a capitalist and wait for someone else to do it for cheap/free, or get paid to do it myself. My time's not free.

said by pnh102:

Except that it seems to work for most people.

I'll have to agree to disagree here. I've come across plenty who didn't know they had other broadband options out there.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
said by Thaler:

I'd rather be a capitalist and wait for someone else to do it for cheap/free, or get paid to do it myself. My time's not free.

Tell that to all the people here who believe religiously that nothing can get done correctly unless it is the government that does it. I am going to reason that the fact that no one in the private sector has bothered to do this is because there's no value in the information.
said by Thaler:

I'll have to agree to disagree here. I've come across plenty who didn't know they had other broadband options out there.

I agree with you that the lookup tools are not 100% perfect. Nothing of course is. My main bone of contention was that the government has now borrowed and wasted $300 million to prove something that most people already knew.
--
"Net Neutrality" zealots - the people you can thank for your capped Internet service.


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
said by pnh102:

My main bone of contention was that the government has now borrowed and wasted $300 million to prove something that most people already knew.

True, while the information was public access, the government actually did do something by refining that data into something useable. Rather than having to plug individual addresses into 5,10,30,etc. number of sites to get a total broadband picture, now I plug it into one and get all the results. The investment does serve its purpose in simplifying ISP research into something manageable.

I mean, hell, I plugged in my address and got information regarding an ISP that services my area that I had no clue about before: »cybernetcom.com/

Granted, they're more of a business-solution ISP, but I thought all we had to go on out here was aging AT&T 3.0 MBps DSL. Thankfully though I'm hooked up via DSLExtreme and have a 6.0 MBps plan for the same price (through AT&T's own lines, go figure).

In a similar comparison, Google itself doesn't provide any new information - it's just hyperlinks to other existing sites (ie. known information). However, people utilize the absolute hell out of their search engine though.


elios

join:2005-11-15
Springfield, MO
reply to Thaler
said by Thaler:

said by pnh102:

This information was LONG AVAILABLE from the ISPs themselves.

Are you kidding? Most general coverage maps were a load of bunk.

I stopped there. AND THIS ISNT? it shows FTTH in Springfield MO. now go call AT&T or Mediacom and see if you can get FTTH. Go head ill wait....


Thaler
Premium
join:2004-02-02
Los Angeles, CA
kudos:3
said by elios:

I stopped there. AND THIS ISNT? it shows FTTH in Springfield MO. now go call AT&T or Mediacom and see if you can get FTTH. Go head ill wait....

Well then the carrier is lying both on a per-address basis and on their coverage maps. Fortunately though, I do believe there are methods to update the broadband coverage maps on an individual basis. ISP coverage maps? ...eh, not so much. They'll happily peddle the same lie regardless of user input.

Long story short, this is a first revision to a new product - it's not going to be 100% perfect at release. At least they update their information sources on a bi-annual basis (which is better than never being updated).