dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
18
share rss forum feed
« Horrible.
page: 1 · 2 · next
This is a sub-selection from


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

1 recommendation

reply to Telco

Re: 9;

said by Telco:

This is precisely why government needs to step in an own a wholesale FTTH network that anyone can use to deliver high-speed internet to Americans.

That worked quite well for Amtrak.
--
Romney/Ryan 2012 - Put a couple of mature adults in charge.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO

1 recommendation

Funny you pick Amtrak, why not the highway system? Oh that's right.. it would be contradictory to the BS you are trying to spread.

Amtrak is a niche form of traveling whereas a nationwide fiber infrastructure is vital to the entire country's digital future.


pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
said by Skippy25:

Funny you pick Amtrak, why not the highway system? Oh that's right.. it would be contradictory to the BS you are trying to spread.

How is what I said BS? Can you prove to me that Amtrak is efficient, profitable and well-run? Some citations would be helpful.

said by Skippy25:

Amtrak is a niche form of traveling whereas a nationwide fiber infrastructure is vital to the entire country's digital future.

That's your opinion, you can invest in it with your own money.
--
Romney/Ryan 2012 - Put a couple of mature adults in charge.


Rich

@ptd.net
Funny you try to make the assumption that a nationwide fiber network will be similar to amtrak. Fiber itself is profitable (unlike amtrak), it's the obscene build costs that are the reason the private sector won't get involved. The government could subsidize the build out a nationwide fiber network to every home, and eventually not only make the money back, but profit from it too. See: Electricity/Electric companies.

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
reply to Skippy25
said by Skippy25:

Amtrak is a niche form of traveling whereas a nationwide fiber infrastructure is vital to the entire country's digital future.

We already have a nationwide fiber infrastructure. The debate is about extending that infrastructure into the last mile and ensuring that it reaches every single property in the United States. There's a bit of a difference between the two, and I'd be curious to hear your argument as to why our future is dependent on every home in America having access to gigabit+ speed internet connections.

funny0

join:2010-12-22
said by Crookshanks:

said by Skippy25:

Amtrak is a niche form of traveling whereas a nationwide fiber infrastructure is vital to the entire country's digital future.

We already have a nationwide fiber infrastructure. The debate is about extending that infrastructure into the last mile and ensuring that it reaches every single property in the United States. There's a bit of a difference between the two, and I'd be curious to hear your argument as to why our future is dependent on every home in America having access to gigabit+ speed internet connections.

HEY america DONT DO IT , we the rest of the world applaud your leaving citizens out of the future

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
Nice talking point, now tell me our future is dependent on every residential property in the United States having access to gigabit+ internet speeds? Name me another country, particularly one with a significant rural population, that is spending tax dollars to build out a nationwide last mile fiber network.

C'Mon, I want to hear an explanation for why we need to spend billions of dollars to ensure that every house has a faster connection to the internet than most currently have to their home LAN. Do tell, what driver of economic prosperity will emerge when Grandma has a taxpayer funded gigabit+ internet connection?


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5

1 recommendation

reply to Skippy25
said by Skippy25:

a nationwide fiber infrastructure is vital to the entire country's digital future.

A nationwide fiber infrastructure exists and has for many years. It just doesn't extend to individual residences.
--
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-plat···onalism/

biochemistry
Premium
join:2003-05-09
92361
reply to Crookshanks
Australia.

TuxRaiderPen

join:2009-09-19
reply to pnh102
said by pnh102:
said by Telco:
This is precisely why government needs to step in an own a wholesale FTTH network that anyone can use to deliver high-speed internet to Americans.
That worked quite well for Amtrak.

Is the broadband policy in this country borq'd beyond belief?

YES!

Are sleasy investors killing a great project?

YES!

Is passenger rail service in this country borq'd beyond repair?

[b]YES![b/] has been for decades since they let the RR's weasel out of servivce both passenger and freight... decades ago.

Sad , truly sad, no, absolute disgrace that this country has no high speed rail service to go between coasts, and feed local passenger service to smaller areas... absolute disgrace that countries like Japan and even the french put this country to shame on high speed rail. Disgrace!

Amtrak is a joke, even Canada, *mariginally* gets it better, just slightly, and not by much... they too let passenger rail service be chisled away piece by piece...

Then the whole idiotic rails to trails... URRRGH!

NO MORE TRAILS! LOTS AND LOTS OF RAILS! RIP THE TRAILS DOWN AND PUT THE RAILS BACK!

Let the smoke bellow and the whistles blow!

Alllllll ABBBBOOOOOARDDD!
--
1311393600 - Back to Black.....Black....Black....


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
reply to Crookshanks
I don't think anyone has said anything about REQUIRING gigabit speeds. A bit overkill there, but let's run with it anyway.

If broadband wasn't essential in this country, then why not do without? You mean that might be devastating to our economy? Oh, but isn't broadband just a luxury? Right...
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to pnh102
My point was simple. You mention Amtrak, which is very niche and very unprofitable trying to compare it a fiber network as though a nationwide fiber network is doomed just like that niche market. Which, as I stated, is total BS.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to Crookshanks
Clearly I was speaking of a complete fiber network and I think your other talking points were taking care of in below comments so I wont address those.

Telco

join:2008-12-19
reply to Skippy25
Yep

Telco

join:2008-12-19
reply to pnh102
Amazing how you fail to mention that rail is not profitable in America because, unlike the rest of the world, the private companies own the actual rail here.

Whereas, rail is one of the most efficient and cheapest mode of transportation in every single country on the planet but America. That's over 95% of the world's population right there.


DrDrew
That others may surf
Premium
join:2009-01-28
SoCal
kudos:16

1 recommendation

reply to biochemistry
said by biochemistry:

Australia.

Read about the NBN in Australia again....it never planned to roll out fiber everywhere. They're using wireless and satellite to cover HUGE chunks of Austrailia outside of the major metro areas.
--
If it's important, back it up... twice. Even 99.999% availability isn't enough sometimes.

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY

1 recommendation

reply to The Limit
Look, I tend to think that everyone should have access to broadband. I just don't see why those of us in rural areas should get subsides for it, nor do I think that decent broadband service requires fiber to the premises. On the last point at least, it seems we agree, so there's that.

As far as my first point, before you reply with an analogy to rural electrification or some such, rural areas still pay more money for the basic necessities of life. My wife and I have to pay to maintain a well and septic tank. We use propane to heat our home, on a BTU to BTU basis it's three times as expensive as natural gas! Fuel oil is an alternative, one that would "only" cost two and a half times as much as natural gas. Electric heating costs range from 2x to 5x the cost of natural gas, depending on where you live, so that's not really an affordable alternative for most people. Around here it would be about 4x the cost of natural gas, so there's that.

Where are my subsides for these basic necessities of life?


The Limit
Premium
join:2007-09-25
Greensboro, NC
kudos:2
Reviews:
·Windstream
Invest in alternative energy sources? I mean, I live out in rural country, and we don't use propane. I don't understand why someone would want to use propane, as from personal experience, it's highly variable, unless that's your only option.

It varies from location to location. Based on your argument, electricity isn't a basic necessity, only a luxury. So why not do without? Do you see the hole in your logic? Broadband, as I've argued time and time and time and time again, is not finite. These basic utilities are based on nonrenewable sources of energy (I mean sure, nuclear, but there's always that pesky issue in dealing with waste).

I feel that there were people that thought this way about electricity. Now it's broadband, so hopefully in 20 years the thought process would be changed. I'm just saying, doing away with broadband entirely would bring our economy to a screeching halt. Broadband is becoming more of a necessity every day.
--
"We will evaluate these integrals rigorously if we can, and non-rigorously if we must".
---Victor Moll, invited talk, Tom Osler Fest (April 17, 2010)

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
said by The Limit:

Invest in alternative energy sources? I mean, I live out in rural country, and we don't use propane. I don't understand why someone would want to use propane, as from personal experience, it's highly variable, unless that's your only option.

If you have a cheaper alternative that will heat a home through a harsh northeastern winter I'm all ears.

said by The Limit:

Broadband, as I've argued time and time and time and time again, is not finite.

The cost to deliver broadband is real and measurable. Rural areas take away economy of scale, thus increasing the capital expenditure necessary to achieve full coverage. So the question is, who should bear the cost of the initial capital expenditure? The ISP might be able to do it, but they'll want to charge rural customers more money to recoup their investment. Do you take issue with that?

Alternatively, we can fund it through tax dollars and/or a surcharge on existing customers. Personally, I don't really regard this as fair, and if it happens I'm going to be seriously peeved that we aren't doing the same to bring natural gas to rural areas. Once the infrastructure is in place it wouldn't cost any more to deliver gas to rural customers, you just need someone to foot the initial bill to install pipelines, compressor stations, etc.

said by The Limit:

I'm just saying, doing away with broadband entirely would bring our economy to a screeching halt. Broadband is becoming more of a necessity every day.

To be sure, it's becoming more and more essential to life in the 21st century. But it does not follow that we need to subsidize the installation of broadband services for those areas currently lacking them. In any case, the market seems well on it's way to solving this problem with wireless services, which are much cheaper to deploy in rural areas than landline services. WISPs and cellular data are the way to go in rural areas, not investing billions of dollars to string wires all over God's country.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
I'm sure there were people like you that claimed the same thing when electricity was being rolled out. And yet you have electricity in your rural area dont you? So it was OK for that subsidy to be had for electricity but it is not OK for the "next big utility" of broadband?

Or do you think yourself and those like you should be running wind mills, damming up streams or running hamster wheel farms to satisfy your electrical needs?


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
said by Skippy25:

Or do you think yourself and those like you should be running wind mills, damming up streams or running hamster wheel farms to satisfy your electrical needs?

Ever hear of a diesel generator? They provided electricity to farms for decades before Franklin Roosevelt rolled out his rural electrification pgm.
--
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-plat···onalism/

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
OK and your point......?

Wait so what you are saying is that government brought electricity to them just like they should broadband.

Agreed!


FFH5
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Tavistock NJ
kudos:5
said by Skippy25:

OK and your point......?

My point was that the examples you chose to make fun of the previous poster were ridiculous when a perfectly usable technology like diesel generators were around forever.
--
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/
»www.gop.com/2012-republican-plat···onalism/

JTR

join:2012-05-19
Carbondale, IL

1 recommendation

reply to biochemistry
Not gigabit, it won't be completed for 9 more years, and it's not all going to be covered by fiber.

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
reply to TuxRaiderPen
said by TuxRaiderPen:

Sad , truly sad, no, absolute disgrace that this country has no high speed rail service to go between coasts, and feed local passenger service to smaller areas... absolute disgrace that countries like Japan and even the french put this country to shame on high speed rail. Disgrace!

Fastest passenger train speed: 200mph
Time from NYC to LA: 14 hours

Jumbo jet cruising speed: 485mph
Time from NYC to LA: 6 hours

Hmm, perhaps this has something to do with it?

Cobra11M

join:2010-12-23
Mineral Wells, TX
reply to Crookshanks
..I believe your still better off with wirelines, goverment should step in and expand or give a initiative otherwise it wont happen period.

Its unacceptable that our country continues to drop in speed ratings (AND WE ARE THE GREATEST COUNTRY ON EARTH) China for criest sakes is rolling out fiber.. they at least will have a option for rural areas in china...

it can be done here (their needs to be a option for rural areas) DSL as its stands wont be.. Sat isnt ready but it getting their, either way it does affect our great country weather or not you want to see it the 21st century relies on data and internet connections, from paying bills online, shopping, music, entertainment, and so on


a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
reply to Crookshanks
Sometimes it's not just the speed of a mode of transport that matters... if that were the case, we'd all be flying coast-to-coast in Concordes at this point... trains offer a significantly more comfortable journey, more legroom, not being squeezed inside the equivalent of a pressure chamber for > 4 hours, and quite a few amenities that either cost you an arm and a leg on aircraft, are impossible, or force you to buy business-class tickets at... an arm and a leg. Besides, there are plenty of long-range high-speed railways around the world that are operating quite successfully in terms of passenger and freight traffic (Channel Tunnel/High Speed 1, TGV, Shinkansen.) Also, within the next few decades, I'd venture to say that Maglev technology (which the Japanese have been testing for over 2 decades, and say is finally approaching readiness for commercial marketing) will be a reasonable proposition for new railways, making speed even less of an issue.
--
Physics: Will you break the laws of physics, or will the laws of physics break you?
If physicists stand on each other's shoulders, computer scientists stand on each other's toes, and computer programmers dig each other's graves.

Crookshanks

join:2008-02-04
Binghamton, NY
If passenger trains are so great why can't they successfully compete without support from the government? Why aren't they self sustaining anywhere outside of the Northeast Corridor? Do you really think that high speed rail offers benefits compelling enough to justify the use of eminent domain against countless property owners? What of the environmental impact of thousands of miles of new track? How does it ever compete financially against air travel, which requires no new infrastructure, no use of eminent domain, and has no NIMBY pushback from the communities between point a and b?

I'm sorry, but I've never understood the fascination that people have with rail. It's great for moving freight, getting around the city, and for regional trips. Cross country trips? Not so much.


a333
A hot cup of integrals please

join:2007-06-12
Rego Park, NY
Reviews:
·T-Mobile US
Perhaps not cross-country trips, but linking up the length of each coastline and its major centers using the EXISTING tracks (but improving them so that they are worthy of high-speed service) is certainly something worth pursuing. There is a whole lot of track that could be put into service similar to the 300 Km/h (~ 187 Mph) service found in portions of the UK, and in a lot of Europe, but we need to renew the trackbed, install concrete sleepers, and install cab-based signalling (typically, safe operation of a train cannot exist with traditional lineside signals above ~125 mph). All of those combined cost quite a lot less than building a whole new line (and don't require the headaches of new zoning/permits/et. al.)

Also, air has its own growing pains these days... increased traffic means we have to re-think an air traffic control system that hasn't been re-thought since the 1960's. New runways also lead to NIMBY cases who do not want to be put in the approach path, and experience the associated noise (or at least the perceived noise), or the potential safety hazards.
--
Physics: Will you break the laws of physics, or will the laws of physics break you?
If physicists stand on each other's shoulders, computer scientists stand on each other's toes, and computer programmers dig each other's graves.

xexx

join:2004-09-03
Aledo, TX
Reviews:
·Skybeam.net
reply to FFH5
said by FFH5 See Profile

Ever hear of a diesel generator? They provided electricity to farms for decades before Franklin Roosevelt rolled out his rural electrification pgm.
[/BQUOTE :

Are you seriously claiming a diesel generator is anywhere near as useful or powerful enough to run modern farming areas and homes with power? Who needs electricity when you have horses to pull equipment anyway!

« Horrible.
page: 1 · 2 · next
This is a sub-selection from