psychomf
join:2000-06-01
Silver Spring, MD
1 edit | reply to deepblackmag
Re: Depends on the situation
i agree on not letting bush control anything of importance, but i think the decision here is about government providing ACCESS to the internet and not exercising any control over its content...
EDIT: sorry this reply was for deepblackmag's comment about govt control of the internet, not your post.... |
|
Jafo232
You Can't Spell Democrat Without Rat.
Premium
join:2002-10-17
Boonville, NY
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Tarheels Fan
said by Tarheels Fan  :I don't believe there is any "essential" utility. Civilization has survived for thousands of years without such utilities, therefore in our short time, making them a luxury. Yes, survived barely.. The sharing of information is the only thing that has saved mankind, considering the weapons he has developed..
--
Design, Hosting, Programming At MediaFlavor.com. |
|
Tarheels Fan
Premium
join:2006-01-05
 ·Embarq
1 edit | reply to deepblackmag
I don't believe there is any "essential" utility. Civilization has survived for thousands of years without such utilities, therefore in our short time, making them a luxury.
Webster's definition of utility:
Main Entry: public utility
Function: noun
: a business organization (as an electric company) performing a public service and subject to special governmental regulation
So yes, it could easily fit the definition of utility.
It is not on the same scale of as the telephone and sewage system, but in 50 years, I am sure it will be there once 99% of the country is connected. |
|
deepblackmag
join:2004-12-27
00000
1 edit | reply to maartena
BROADBAND MUST NOT BECOME A UTILITY!
The second we start thinking of it as a utility, the government is going to start demanding absolute control of it. the internet is NOT a government system. the backbones are owned, operated, and interconnected through PRIAVATE COMPANIES who solely control it. If we create an internet communications commission (FCC of the future) all of a sudden our information freedom ends and the internet will become utterly useless. Do you really want a bunch of BUSHes dictating the future of the internet? I sure as hell dont. |
|
maartena
Stacked.
Premium
join:2002-05-10
Orange, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to King P
If I think hard about it, the absolute necessities for me to use the internet CAN be done with a dial-up modem, which is mainly e-mail and the occasional website.
Of course, pleasure wise I do a LOT more on the internet, and I could not live without broadband internet for a long time.
Personally, I don't think Broadband should be a utility, however I do feel that INTERNET should be a utility, and with that at least a DECENT connection to the internet.
My problem with the current dial-up situation, is that there are MANY areas where you can't even get a better connection then 26400 bps. My mother-in-law (who now has DSL) could not get any faster then 26400 bps on her 56k modem, no matter what she tried.
I think we have the technology available to deploy a nationwide network of 128 kbps connections through phonelines, regardless of the distance to the CO using ISDN type technology, and if areas cannot get the speeds of DSL due to its distance limitation, I believe there should be a federal, nationwide effort to get everyone that has access to a phone line in the United States to at least a 128 kbps connection speed to the internet.
--
"I'm honored to shake the hand of a brave Iraqi citizen who had his hand cut off by Saddam Hussein." - Bush, May 2004. |
|
