Why they use misleading data ...
quote:Since Martin, et al, are laissez faire ideologues, they believe the total lack of regulation must lead to broadband nirvana for everyone, no matter what the reality turns out to be. This belief requires them to conclude that any data which shows broadband deployment is proceeding well must be accurate, while any data that shows otherwise must be wrong. Their belief system requires them to think this way; they'd probably self-destruct if they attempted to think otherwise.
Still, every six months the FCC releases the data as required by the 1996 Telecom Act, which declared that if the FCC found anything wrong, they were supposed to take immediate steps to fix it.
This is no different than Paul Bremer's belief that total laissez faire policies in newly-occupied Iraq would lead to a paradise in the Mid East, or Mike Brown's idea that privatizing FEMA as much as possible was the best method to prepare for emergencies.
| |RobIn Deo speramus.PremiumReviews:
Re: Cellular/wireless broadband is where broadband is going ....
said by FFH5:" Isenberg argues it's not fair to include these capped, pricey and restrictive connections because the[y] violate the FCC's own free-access guidelines, and without them the U.S. broadband growth rate is only actually 27% -- which would mean it has the 26th fastest growing number of broadband Internet access lines. "
... for the future and to NOT count it is ludicrous. Everyone, including BBR says wireless broadband is the future. So, why shouldn't the FCC count it as broadband growth?
Pretty much sums it up.
YourIP.US - It's Your IP .. and more!
rr.cx - Personal Site.. coming soon.
| |JTRockvilleData HoPremium,MVM
Re: Can there be any more question... Even if that's what your boss asked for?
Re: Can there be any more question...
said by JTRockville:Then, you should start looking, seriously and aggressively, for new employment. Why? Because when the boss get's his procreative nodules in a mangle over the bad data, he's gonna blame you and deny all knowledge.
Even if that's what your boss asked for?
You will take the hit, while the lying slug gets off.
Re: Can there be any more question...
said by Karl Bode:Sorry, Karl. I will make sure I get my meds upped, so I can get into the correct and drooling frame of mind for such a position.
Listen you two...the sooner you get on board and start blaming everything on "regulatory uncertainty," the better off we're going to be.
Re: Its all defined wrong...
said by haplo2112 :The US leads in the production and consumption of McChickens. Unfortunately we are a long way from being a leader in broadband.
The US should be in the lead, with the fastest speeds, the highest penetration and cheapest prices.
Registered Bandwidth Offender #40812
| |DoctorDoomTroll hunterPremium
Satellites are not evil
quote:I'm a HughesNet user in an otherwise unserved rural town in MA. There is exactly zero possibility of any option BUT satellite here. The telco and cable companies have stated flatly that they have no intention of, nor interest in, wiring the town for broadband. Re FIOS, an invasion from Mars is almost infinitely more likely. And being of a practical bent, I agree with them that it is financially unjustifiable. The installation and maintenance costs could not be recouped.
(anyone who has ever been stuck on satellite would probably contest that)
Critics are fond of citing countries where broadband penetration is vastly higher than in the US. They neglect to note that America's rural area is larger than most of those countries, and that population density is the determining factor for broadband deployment.
A wireless broadband company is exploring this area for a Motorola Canopy setup, but they don't call it the Berkshire Hills for nothing. The geography limits the utility of wireless.
There is nothing that big government can do to change the laws of economics. Unless some magical technology is developed that can make it profitable to wire 38.7 square miles with about 200 households (5.17 per square mile), the situation will not change, and the town will continue to choose between 28.8 Kbps max dialup or satellite. As for me, a consistent off-peak speed of 1 Mbps with HughesNet Pro vs 20-24 Kbps typical with POTS does not represent a tough choice. It isn't fiber, but ...