2009: The FCC Finally Makes A Broadband Plan Now the real test: shaking off lobbyist influence... According to an FCC announcement, the FCC will finally start developing a national broadband strategy this week, after more than a decade of assuming we didn't need one. That assumption resulted in the United States' mediocre global showing when it comes to speed, penetration, competition and price, with Americans paying more, for less -- than more than a dozen developed countries. Since any useful plan would increase competition and therefore reduce revenues, carriers are lobbying against substantive changes or tough rules of any kind. The FCC's new broadband plan is expected to take about a year to complete, and will explore all options -- including a government subsidized broadband network, network neutrality protections, improved broadband mapping, and a higher standard (than 768kbps) for what we consider broadband. Developing a working, useful plan may be the easy part. After (and while) it's being cooked up it will run through a gauntlet of K-Street telecom lobbyists -- some of the best in any business. That's where the real test occurs. As we've noted, the problem with getting a real broadband plan in place certainly hasn't been a shortage of ideas -- we've seen an endless flood of industry round tables at which a myriad of techno-celebrities and Ivy League pundits offer their insight into the best possible course of action. The problem has been that telecom lobbyists have such a tight grip on DC, truly consumer-friendly policy never survives the incubation period. It's not clear the "new" FCC will be any less beholden to carrier lobbyists. One thing you can be sure of, if lobbyists are running this show, you'll see the FCC very quickly throw their wholesale support behind a program called Connected Nation, which consumer advocates argue is little more than a sophisticated con cooked up by the nation's largest carriers, and dressed up as a real national broadband policy. Stay tuned.
|
 Duramax08A Challenger AppearsPremium join:2008-08-03 San Antonio, TX | about time someone makes a game plan. -- OM NOM NOM | |
|  |  cchhat01Dr. Zoidberg join:2001-05-01 Elmhurst, NY | Re: about time This is deal is far frmo sealed. Just you watch how these lobbyists will drive some of the fine print into the ground. -- Chirag's Website | |
|
 unknvoipRIP goosePremium join:2006-07-25 Rochester, NY kudos:1 | Caps?
I wonder if they will recommend Caps in the plan?? | |
|  |  me1212 join:2008-11-20 Pleasant Hill, MO 1 edit | Re: Caps? I hope not! A throttle yes, cap no, unless it is a 1t cap.
If they want to make 768k not broad band they had better hurry up and serve more areas then. In some all you can get is 768, maybe less. | |
|  |  |  RobIn Deo speramus, God Bless the USAPremium join:2001-08-25 Kendall, FL kudos:2 | Re: Caps? said by me1212:I hope not! A throttle yes, cap no, unless it is a 1t cap. If they want to make 768k not broad band they had better hurry up and serve more areas then. In some all yo can get is 768, maybe less. I rather have caps than throttle. I'll keep Comcast's 250GB cap, and no throttling. | |
|  |  |  |  me1212 join:2008-11-20 Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: Caps? Why? Slower speeds for a short time then back to normal speeds, with no one telling you how much you can up/down load sound better then a cap to me. | |
|  |  |  |  |  RobIn Deo speramus, God Bless the USAPremium join:2001-08-25 Kendall, FL kudos:2 | Re: Caps? said by me1212:Why? Slower speeds for a short time then back to normal speeds, with no one telling you how much you can up/down load sound better then a cap to me. Because I don't want my Internet speed slowed down whenever the company feels that it should be. It could possibly hinder my Netflix watch now viewing, hulu viewing, and other stuff. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  me1212 join:2008-11-20 Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: Caps? Yes, it could, but they will not tell you how much you can do, just make it take longer. A cap does more or less tell you how much you can do. That said I would rather have an ISP like FiOS no cap no throttle just pure internet. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium join:2002-03-03 USA kudos:4 | Re: Caps? said by JRW2: None of this "UPTO" crap!  Let people decide how much "speed" they want to pay for, and then DELIVER it... Then get a dedicated DS3 from your telco. Because the internet is a shared medium and no one will guarantee a specific speed "no matter what". "UPTO" is the only way it can be offered and not be lying about it. -- My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  JRW2R.I.P. Mom, Brian, Ziggy, Max and Zen.Premium join:2004-12-20 La La Land kudos:5 | Re: Caps? Interesting, FIOS seems to be able to do this.  | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  openbox9 join:2004-01-26 Alexandria, VA kudos:2 1 edit | Re: Caps? FiOS is dedicated and guaranteed? | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  JRW2R.I.P. Mom, Brian, Ziggy, Max and Zen.Premium join:2004-12-20 La La Land kudos:5 Reviews:
·Optimum Online
| Re: Caps? Nope, never said it was, I was just commenting that it seems that FIOS delivers what they advertise. So if they can do it, why can't others be truthful in what they can actually deliver, not what they MIGHT deliver... -- RIAA/MPAA... Bite me!!!! In constant search for intelligent life on Earth! | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  openbox9 join:2004-01-26 Alexandria, VA kudos:2 | Re: Caps? My cable company currently offers what they advertise. So I'd suggest that like any other service, the quality of your connection to the Internet will vary from location to location and provider to provider. As much as you don't agree with him, TK's point is valid. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  JRW2R.I.P. Mom, Brian, Ziggy, Max and Zen.Premium join:2004-12-20 La La Land kudos:5 Reviews:
·Optimum Online
| Re: Caps? So you would have no problem with your cable company offering you upto 100 HD channels, yet you can only get 20, but your friend in the next town, can get 80 HD channels from the same company, for the same price. -- RIAA/MPAA... Bite me!!!! In constant search for intelligent life on Earth! | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  openbox9 join:2004-01-26 Alexandria, VA kudos:2 | Re: Caps? Different method of delivery...at least until cable fully migrates to switched digital video. | |
|
 |  |  |  |  hklm join:2002-03-29 Vallejo, CA | said by me1212:Why? Slower speeds for a short time then back to normal speeds, with no one telling you how much you can up/down load sound better then a cap to me. lol slower speeds for a short time?? It's more like all the time. Sure every download starts out with the "power-boost" fast speed, but after the first 2 min, your connection is automaticly throtted to god awful slow speeds. | |
|
 |  |  | | Sorry but 1TB just is not enough for people who telework and deal with a lot of large data sets. I used close to 2TB last month and luckily Verizon could care less. I would have no problem with a throttling system so long as it does not effect HTTP/S, VPN, DNS, and EMail traffic and is only used when the network is heavily congested and in that case there needs to be documented proof. | |
|  |  |  |  me1212 join:2008-11-20 Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: Caps? Thats why we still need business packs with no cap, like comcast's. Verizon still has the best deal IMO. | |
|
 |  |  me1212 join:2008-11-20 Pleasant Hill, MO | Re: WOW I know, did we wake up in another universe? | |
|  |  | | We'll see. If it's anything like what they're doing now with the 'economy' it'll be just another abomination. | |
|  |  cchhat01Dr. Zoidberg join:2001-05-01 Elmhurst, NY | said by GlenQuagmire:Wow the US Government is actually doing it's job. This can't be true  . Oh thats nasty!!!! sorry i couldnt resist the family guy pun since i saw a quagmire on board.
I hope I'm wrong for everyone's sake, but I doubt this will materialize to anything fabulous. But hey, this administration could actually get this to work. I hope they are more determined than the lobbyists. -- Chirag's Website | |
|
 | | Finally Republicans will hate the FCC introducing regulations that increase competition. Competition is exactly what the telcos and cable companies need. For that matter, if the FCC can eliminate Caps and establish requirements for roll outs of some kind of reasonable broadband services to rural areas (such as LTE) then it will be a good thing. The prize chicken is going to be net neutrality and the telcos and cable companies hate this one even more. I think it should be regulated to be neutral so that you can do what you want with the connection you pay a lot of money for every month. Throttling should be allowed but only on certain protocols such as bittorents and only when there is more than 60% network link utilization in a given part of a system (you don't want much more network utilization than that or the system will suffer from high latency, lost packets, etc.) Anyway, as I said the reds will hate all of this because all they care about is stuffing more money in their pockets and getting the lobbyists in washington to beat politicians over the head for their corporate welfare (read: whiney, want more money attitude). | |
|  Simba7I Void Warranties join:2003-03-24 Billings, MT | Yes! No more 256k = Broadband BS.. Finally. I've been waiting quite awhile for this.
No longer will (less than) 768kbps be considered Broadband and being charged ridiculous rates for it. I hope this goes through FAST.
So, the question is.. What will the telecom companies do? Charge even more for their new 768k tier? I hope not. | |
|
 | |
|
|