Google Wants Your Broadband Thoughts 3,755 votes on 91 ideas from 296 people and counting.... While you can use Uncle Sam's public comment system (provided you know the notice of inquiry (pdf) and related proceeding number) to opine on our as-yet-unformed national broadband policy, the submission process isn't particularly clear to the average Joe. In the hopes of making the process easier, Google and the Google-funded New American Foundation have created a moderated comment website to collect user broadband plan ideas, the most popular of which will be submitted to Uncle Sam on your behalf. Of course one of the most popular ideas already comes from Google attorney Richard Whitt: "Install broadband fiber as part of every federally-funded infrastructure project. Most of the cost of deployment is due to tearing up/repaving roads. Laying fiber during public works projects already underway would dramatically reduce costs." As we've covered at length, Google is already engaged in a lobbying war with AT&T and Verizon, and isn't particularly popular among incumbent ISPs, given Google's positions on network neutrality, wireless competition, and their push into voice services. Given incumbent ISP opposition to competition in any form -- particularly when it comes from municipally driven fiber deployment -- we're guessing they won't much care for Whitt's comments. Judging from early leaders, incumbent carriers aren't going to like most of the popular comments, the majority of which involve holding incumbent carriers accountable for failed promises while increasing competition. It should be interesting to see if traditional AT&T and Verizon lobbyist rhetoric like "allow the free market to organically create telecom utopia" (something that hasn't worked for the last decade under a toothless regulatory structure) will survive the moderation system.
|
  baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI | Dear Google I want a 1gig mirrored internet with no downtime or caps, unlimited bandwidth, and I dont want to pay more than 10 bucks a month.
Please and thank you. | |
|  | | | Re: Dear Google I would settle for 50meg connection with no caps for $79, but instead its $149 for 50/1 150gig cap talk about a deal | |
| | | Core0000Premium
join:2008-05-04
Somerset, KY | Re: Dear Google I'd settle for a 5/5 meg with no caps for 50$ a month. o.- | |
| | | | | | Re: Dear Google For now, I'd be happy with 10/2 (at least for the rest of this year) and hopes it goes to 15/3 next year. I'd only be willing to pay $40/month for either tier and a cap of 250 GB is fine by me.
Currently, I have 10/1 and I have not noticed any improvements in gaming; even though my ping times have been halved. | |
| | | | iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 | I'd be happy with 15/15 with no caps for $70. Which is doable, right? FiOS does it... | |
| | | | |  w0go.O
join:2001-08-30
Springfield, OR | Re: Dear Google I have to have at least 10Mbps/10Mbps, unmeterred. | |
|
| Pv8man
join:2008-07-24
Hammond, IN | I assume that you (Baineschile) made that comment in sarcasm against anyone in this forum that want's a reasonable quality product for a reasonable price.
I don't think the cost of broadband will ever go down, at least not any time soon.
But if these ISP's are planning on imposing caps with high overage fees, and THEN charge us more at the same time, then they have another thing coming.
That's double dipping, the cost of bandwidth for carriers are only getting cheaper, as they want to fool the world into thinking that bandwidth is very expensive.
If they want to impose caps, fine let them do it, most would say that they can just move to another carrier, but they can't when THEY HAVE A MONOPOLY, YOUR STUCK.
If they want to increase price, then they can't have the caps.
if they want caps, then they better lower the price and make the caps reasonable.
But they can't have it ALL. | |
| | | baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI Reviews:
 ·Comcast
 ·magicjack.com
| Re: Dear Google said by Pv8man:I don't think the cost of broadband will ever go down, at least not any time soon. Wrong. Broadband cost just went down in my area. I was paying $43 for 6 megs, now I am paying $43 for 12 megs. The cost per meg of service just was cut in half. | |
| | | |  funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | Re: Dear Google said by baineschile:said by Pv8man:I don't think the cost of broadband will ever go down, at least not any time soon. Wrong. Broadband cost just went down in my area. I was paying $43 for 6 megs, now I am paying $43 for 12 megs. The cost per meg of service just was cut in half. Another way to look at it (and an accurate way,too) is that your speed increased while the price stayed the same.
Comcast does have an economy tier, though, that's below $43.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- District of Columbia -- KJ7RL
Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth, or by misleading the innocent. --Spock and McCoy stardate 5029.5 | |
| | | |
1 edit | Your cost did not go down as you are still spending $43 a month for service. Even if they boosted it to 10Gigabit your cost are still the same and it's individuals like you that they are attempting to blow smoke up that think it is "cheaper". Unfortunately, there are way to many people like you in the world.
Regardless, the probable incremental amount of additional bandwidth you would use as a result of this speed increase is a farce in the cost per mb service you have. | |
| | | | | | | Re: Dear Google said by Skippy25:Your cost did not go down as you are still spending $43 a month for service. Even if they boosted it to 10Gigabit your cost are still the same and it's individuals like you that they are attempting to blow smoke up that think it is "cheaper". Unfortunately, there are way to many people like you in the world. Regardless, the probable incremental amount of additional bandwidth you would use as a result of this speed increase is a farce in the cost per mb service you have. its still only 1.43 a day for service. Not a bad deal.
--
I'll do it later. | |
|
| | | I can't tell if you're being sarcastic over the internet, but that sort of connection has become increasingly available in places like Japan and South Korea since 2005. Yes, 2005, *four years ago*. | |
| | | baineschile2600 ways to livePremium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI Reviews:
·Comcast
·magicjack.com
| Re: Dear Google said by sonicmerlin:I can't tell if you're being sarcastic over the internet, but that sort of connection has become increasingly available in places like Japan and South Korea since 2005. Yes, 2005, *four years ago*. No, I was not being sarcastic. That is what I want. | |
|
| | | HAHA! and I wanna blue unicorn that $hits gold! | |
| | | | I'd take 100/100 for $33.99. No mystery taxes. I said $33.99, I meant $33.99. Not $50.99 once all the "magical taxes" are applied. $33.99.
100/100 Megabit Internet.
Not 100/100 Kilobit. Megabit.
The following is a list of things I want that encompass the ENTIRE industry.
I want 99.99% guaranteed uptime - discounting for uncontrollable situations such as power outages, cut cables, or - as some like to put it, acts of god.
I want uncapped, unshaped, unmetered bandwidth. If I am paying for 100/100 internet and I wish to transmit 100 megabits down or up at any given time, I want the ability to do just that. If I want to send or receive (or a combination of both) exactly 100megabits per second for every second of day, I want to do that as well.
As a bonus factor, if possible though not required, I want 1/1 gigabit to in network persons. I.E., if my neighbor has the same service I do, I want to have a 1/1 connection to them. If I have an office across town with the 100/100 service, I want 1/1 to it as well (Hello, VPN!).
This, however, is required. Anything past this point is entirely serious on my part and, in my opinion, should be heeded as law. I personally think what I have to say below is reasonable. Maybe I should forward this to my senators and representatives...
A service provider entering into a service agreement with a municipality shall not engage in the act of cherry picking, meaning it shall not pick where it can build. To this end, a service provider must provide service to ALL homes, dwellings, and buildings within the municipality. To not do so constitutes violation of the service agreement and the provider shall be fined daily until resolved if the area is not fully served by the time agreed to within the contract.
A service provider cannot, and shall not, under penalty of law to all parties involved, enter into any exclusivity deals with a municipality, MDU, or home owners association. To do so inherently violates anti-trust and anti-monopoly laws.
A service provider shall not interfere in anyway with a municipality seeking to provide service to the area. The municipality serves as nothing more than another competitor entering into a fair market place which the service provider shall not interfere with or seek to monopolize the market. Fair lobbying shall be allowed as to not allow such would be a violation of the first amendment.
As part of the census, a person shall have the option of indicating what their service provider is, if they have more than one service provider operating in their neighborhood (a satellite service shall not substitute for a service provider nor shall dial-up, a 3G provider, 4GB provider, or a neighbors Wireless Access Point), their current level of service, and if they know of any other providers in the area (see: if there is more than one). To this end, the level of broadband penetration shall be determined, though due to the nature of the census, shall not serve as the only determining factor.
A customer shall have an expectation of privacy. This means that a customer shall not be wiretapped in any form or manner including Deep Packet Inspection by the service provider. The only exception to this rule is if there is a court-ordered wiretap by a police agency (including the NSA, CIA, FBI, or INTERPOL) for which, if the customer questions, the service provider and police agency MUST render the warrant for such. To not do so shall be illegal and warrant an immediate dismissal of any charges and the evidence in accordance with such. It also shall open the involved parties, including both the service provider, and police agency to prosecutorial action in both criminal and civil court. As an extension of such, all actions, logs, references, and materials shall be made publicly available. No redaction's are to be allowed. The refusal to make available materials as evidence shall constitute withholding of valuable materials and be punishable by criminal prosecution and/or possible jail time (contempt of court).
A service provider must not place limits upon the amount of traffic a person may use hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, or any other denotation of time one may possibly fathom.
A service provider shall not interfere with VoIP traffic of any form in any manner.
Likewise, a service provider shall not engage in network management (traffic shaping) beyond what is reasonable and shall inform the customer of the exact methods which they will use to perform reasonable network management. Per this, a service provider shall not provide any individual protocol or port special treatment. All must be treated the same, fairly.
As an extension of the above, The service provider shall not manipulate or block any outbound or inbound ports to any customer. This includes both residential and business customers.
The customer shall have an expectation of 99.99% guaranteed uptime - discounting for uncontrollable situations such as power outages, cut cables, or - as some like to put it, acts of god. In this day and age where persons are using internet phone providers as there primary communication resource, a loss of service can result in serious consequences if a person is unable to make a 911 call.
The customer shall be guaranteed immediate attention over the phone within 5 minutes. If there is a wait, it cannot be more than 10 minutes though 15 minutes is acceptable. This number is cumulative. This means if I am being transferred between departments because one department can't help me and transfers me to another who can't help me who transfers me to another who maybe can help me but needs to transfer me to their supervisor, then the wait time between each transfer counts. 30 minutes on hold is not acceptable and shall be subject to fine upon repeated (and citable) incident.
I demand a service technician to be there within a reasonable time limit and no more than 15 minutes late. If the technician arrives early and I am not available, it is not my responsibility and I am only required to be within the window of the appointment. If my appointment is set for 12:00PM and my technician arrives at 11:45 and I am not there, then the technician must wait 30 minutes for my arrival. Likewise, there must be a 15 minute window for a customer to answer the door which is extended to the technician who must wait 15 minutes past the time of appointment before leaving.
All service appointments are to be free without hassle and counted as part of the service agreement and subsequently part of the charge for monthly service.
A request for a service appointment shall not be met with hostility or difficulty on the part of a technical representative or customer support representative.
A customer support representative or technician must treat the customer with respect and actually listen to what they say if there is a problem rather than repeating something from a script. While there is a significant portion of customers who may not know how the car runs (metaphor) and doesn't have a clue how to make it work again, there are some who actually know how to do more than turn the ignition and press on the gas (Yes, that was a metaphor).
Likewise, a technician must show up on time, dressed properly (pants must not be hanging and I should not see their cracks.), and for the love of god, smell decently. Nothing is worse than a technician who smells like crap and subsequently, makes the house smell like crap. Using cologne, Old Spice, Axe, or any other form of aerosol deodorant does not and will not substitute for a shower and clean clothes.
The technician must be courteous to the customer and greet them appropriately. A technician must ask permission to enter the house and to enter areas in which they will need to operate. If a technician needs to drill holes in the walls, they must inform the customer of such and likewise, clean up their mess afterwards. I've seen places where technicians have left wires strewn all over the places, holes in the walls, etc. Sometimes, a customer - especially a technical oriented one, may have a certain level of curiosity. Remember that they are the customer and have the right to have such. A technician should therefore explain to the customer what they are doing if the customer is to ask such. A technician shall not install or run software on a customer's computer, or handle it in any way without their express prior written AND verbal consent. Consent to handle their computer, however, cannot be substituted for consent to install programs on their computers. That must be given separately (loophole: closed). A technician must also adequately explain why it is required of them to handle the customer's computer and/or why they need to install or run software.
Early termination fees for choosing to end a service contract must be truncated in cost on a monthly basis. Likewise, a company must also, for the entire length of the contract, honor the price agreed to. In example, if a customer enters into a 2 year contract with a company, that company must pro-rate the contract to no more than exactly 50% by the end of the first 12 month period to the date. Therefore, a 24 month contract (used here forth, but 12 month periods have been seen as well) with a $175 starting ETF must be down to no higher than $87.50 by the end of the 12th month.
During these 24 months, a customer must be given a 31 day trial period in the first 31 days (month) of a service agreement. This 31 day period does not start from the moment of an order, however. This 31 day period starts from literally the second the switch is flipped, the customers service is activated, and their modem passes a DHCP response. However, if there is a problem (see below), the 31 days shall be offset till it is resolved and customer has service. The 24 month period though (see below) shall not.
If there is a service outage that is caused by hardware error (i.e., a bad modem or router provided by the service provider), or error on the part of the service provider (downed routing point, downed dhcp provider, downed dns, and all other applicable possibilities), then the 31 day period must be extended and the monthly bill prorated to reflect the period of lost service. This, however, cannot extended the 24 month period and it must still end on the day on which it was originally set to end, per the terms of the contract.
A power outage, though, does not constitute an error on the part of the service provider unless: the power company also provides internet service (in cases such as BoPL), or, upon the restoration of power, internet service is not available within a 60 minute period (120 minutes if one feels 60 minutes is too tight of a time period).
If a customer chooses to terminate service within the first 31 days, no Early Termination Fee shall be levied. The customer shall only be responsible to pay for the service provided for the period it was provided. If a person is paying $40 a month for service and cancels at 15 days, they will be responsible for paying $20 to the service provider for the time period in which they were rendered service. If the terms of the agreement were for a free setup and installation, those terms must be honored and an installation fee must not be levied against the customer. However, if the customer does not own the equipment (only applicable to things such as a modem or a cable box or provided router) and is instead renting it from the service provider, the customer is required to return the equipment, in proper order, to the service provider. The customer shall be given a 31 day time period within which to return the equipment. After which, a charge for the cost of the equipment (not to exceed $100 per item) shall be levied against the customer until the customer returns the equipment as of which the fine is to be immediately retracted. If, however, the terms of the service were that there would be no equipment cost to the customer, then the customer shall not be required to pay any amount for the equipment over time, nor shall the customer be required to return the equipment upon the termination of service.
Furthermore, on the subject of leased equipment: If a customer is paying for the leasing of equipment, then that monthly fee shall be reflected upon by the cost of the equipment to the service provider. If the service provider purchased a single modem at the cost of $40 and a customer is paying $5 a month for that modem, then the cost of said modem shall be displaced per month and the customer, at the end of 8 months, shall take ownership of that modem. After that period, no further charges for the cost of the equipment shall be levied against the customer.
As an extension of the above and an earlier point, if a service provider makes a substantial change to its terms of service or to its network, such as engaging in network management (traffic shaping) after the service has been agreed to, then the Early Termination Fee is rendered void and a customer may freely cancel their service without a service charge being levied against them. Likewise, the time of service during the current billing period shall be assessed and a customer shall only be responsible for a pro-rated bill for the time in which they were rendered service. A customer MUST be informed via all channels including e-mail, snail mail, and phone calls (including leaving a voice mail) that the provider has changed the terms of service so that they may make an informed decision. They shall be granted no more than 60 days to make this decision. That 60 day period begins at the moment the last form of communication is made. Continuation of service past 60 days constitutes agreement to the new terms of service and/or changes in the network, but does not constitute the agreement to binding arbitration.
The customer shall be made aware of any and all associated charges with the rendering of their service.
The service provider shall pro-rate the cost of their service to a customer if they advertise it for a lower price at any point in time during which the customer is contractually receiving service. To give an example, if a service provider is providing 50 megabits down by 50 megabits up to a customer at a cost of $40, and subsequently later lowers the price and advertises a new cost such as $30, then the current cost of that service for the customer shall be lowered. The exception to this is if the service provider provides a faster service such as 100 megabits down by 100 megabits up in its place for $40 a month, then the customer shall see their service raised to 100 megabits by 100 megabits a month while no billing changes shall occur. The cost of equipment though, to upgrade the customers service, shall fall solely upon the provider and not be transferred to the customer in any way other than what is already reflected in billing prices. To this extent, the above tenants all apply and shall be assessed and reflected here. For clarification purposes, if a customer is already paying for the cost of their prior equipment, then that shall be transferred to the new equipment and the cost to the customer shall be pro-rated. | |
| | | rayePremium
join:2000-08-14
Orange, CA | Re: Dear Google what you are asking for is business-class service. $3399/month more likely than $33.99 for what you want. | |
| | | | | | Re: Dear Google No, what I am asking for is reasonable service. I think the tenants above are just that: reasonable. Why shouldn't the average consumer have a fair expectation of the above? | |
| | | | | |
| | |  Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | said by raye:what you are asking for is business-class service. $3399/month more likely than $33.99 for what you want. 2nd that. | |
| | | | |
1 edit | Re: Dear Google said by Romney2012:said by raye:what you are asking for is business-class service. $3399/month more likely than $33.99 for what you want. 2nd that. So basically, you two are saying I should have to pay $3400 dollars to get this:
A request for a service appointment shall not be met with hostility or difficulty on the part of a technical representative or customer support representative.
A customer support representative or technician must treat the customer with respect and actually listen to what they say if there is a problem rather than repeating something from a script. While there is a significant portion of customers who may not know how the car runs (metaphor) and doesn't have a clue how to make it work again, there are some who actually know how to do more than turn the ignition and press on the gas (Yes, that was a metaphor).
Likewise, a technician must show up on time, dressed properly (pants must not be hanging and I should not see their cracks.), and for the love of god, smell decently. Nothing is worse than a technician who smells like crap and subsequently, makes the house smell like crap. Using cologne, Old Spice, Axe, or any other form of aerosol deodorant does not and will not substitute for a shower and clean clothes.
The technician must be courteous to the customer and greet them appropriately. A technician must ask permission to enter the house and to enter areas in which they will need to operate. If a technician needs to drill holes in the walls, they must inform the customer of such and likewise, clean up their mess afterwards. I've seen places where technicians have left wires strewn all over the places, holes in the walls, etc. Sometimes, a customer - especially a technical oriented one, may have a certain level of curiosity. Remember that they are the customer and have the right to have such. A technician should therefore explain to the customer what they are doing if the customer is to ask such. A technician shall not install or run software on a customer's computer, or handle it in any way without their express prior written AND verbal consent. Consent to handle their computer, however, cannot be substituted for consent to install programs on their computers. That must be given separately (loophole: closed). A technician must also adequately explain why it is required of them to handle the customer's computer and/or why they need to install or run software.
That about correct? I mean if that's the case, then I'm confused as to why anyone wonders why these companies are consistently rated so poorly in terms of customer service.
Edit: Looking at the rate at which my Google suggestion is being voted down, I must wonder if people actually want broadband reform... | |
| | | | | |  Mr FelFlynn LivesPremium
join:2008-03-17
Louisville, KY
 ·AT&T DSL Service
2 edits | Re: Dear Google I think people are voting you down for two reasons:
1. You don't have the article on the google moderator page (shame on the character limit there) so people voted you down since they don't want to bother with off site links.
2. Those that do decide to check out your article here vote it down since they don't want to bother with reading such a long post.
It's a shame that people don't bother to take the time to read before they vote, which is I only skipped the questions that had me go to an offsite link. I'll read the link later and then vote.
Edit: Just checked your vote count (again), its starting to balance out now.
--
WARNING: This user does not listen to political drivel. Any attempts to communicate political drivel to this user will be rightfully ignored. | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Dear Google said by Mr Fel:I think people are voting you down for two reasons: 1. You don't have the article on the google moderator page (shame on the character limit there) so people voted you down since they don't want to bother with off site links. 2. Those that do decide to check out your article here vote it down since they don't want to bother with reading such a long post. It's a shame that people don't bother to take the time to read before they vote, which is I only skipped the questions that had me go to an offsite link. I'll read the link later and then vote. Edit: Just checked your vote count (again), its starting to balance out now. This is truly a possible reason as to why it was / is.
And, yes, it is indeed balancing out now. Interesting. | |
|
| | | | | Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4 | said by PapaMidnight:said by Romney2012:said by raye:what you are asking for is business-class service. $3399/month more likely than $33.99 for what you want. 2nd that. So basically, you two are saying I should have to pay $3400 dollars to get this: A request for a service appo........ed to install or run software.
No; for asking for this:
quote:
I want 99.99% guaranteed uptime - discounting for uncontrollable situations such as power outages, cut cables, or - as some like to put it, acts of god.
I want uncapped, unshaped, unmetered bandwidth. If I am paying for 100/100 internet and I wish to transmit 100 megabits down or up at any given time, I want the ability to do just that. If I want to send or receive (or a combination of both) exactly 100megabits per second for every second of day, I want to do that as well.
As a bonus factor, if possible though not required, I want 1/1 gigabit to in network persons. I.E., if my neighbor has the same service I do, I want to have a 1/1 connection to them. If I have an office across town with the 100/100 service, I want 1/1 to it as well (Hello, VPN!).
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: Dear Google said by Romney2012:No; for asking for this: I want 99.99% guaranteed uptime - discounting for uncontrollable situations such as power outages, cut cables, or - as some like to put it, acts of god.
I want uncapped, unshaped, unmetered bandwidth. If I am paying for 100/100 internet and I wish to transmit 100 megabits down or up at any given time, I want the ability to do just that. If I want to send or receive (or a combination of both) exactly 100megabits per second for every second of day, I want to do that as well.
As a bonus factor, if possible though not required, I want 1/1 gigabit to in network persons. I.E., if my neighbor has the same service I do, I want to have a 1/1 connection to them. If I have an office across town with the 100/100 service, I want 1/1 to it as well (Hello, VPN!).
Oh, I see. Well still, why should a user not have 99.99% guaranteed uptime, especially if they have VoIP service? I'd hate to have to dial 911 if I have VoIP service and the internet is down... As for uncapped, unshaped, unmetered bandwidth, with the exception of the middle part, I think thats entirely reasonable and I touched on them all, including traffic management in the actual true part of my post. | |
| | | | | | | | | |  Re: Dear Google
Oh, I see. Well still, why should a user not have 99.99% guaranteed uptime, especially if they have VoIP service? I'd hate to have to dial 911 if I have VoIP service and the internet is down...
As for uncapped, unshaped, unmetered bandwidth, with the exception of the middle part, I think thats entirely reasonable and I touched on them all, including traffic management in the actual true part of my post. As if the government can somehow magically eliminate disasters and keep up-time at 99.9% with the stroke of a pen.  | |
| | | | | | | | |
1 edit | Re: Dear Google said by Fox McCloud:Oh, I see. Well still, why should a user not have 99.99% guaranteed uptime, especially if they have VoIP service? I'd hate to have to dial 911 if I have VoIP service and the internet is down...
As for uncapped, unshaped, unmetered bandwidth, with the exception of the middle part, I think thats entirely reasonable and I touched on them all, including traffic management in the actual true part of my post. As if the government can somehow magically eliminate disasters and keep up-time at 99.9% with the stroke of a pen. Nice sarcasm, but as they say, reading is everything:
The customer shall have an expectation of 99.99% guaranteed uptime - discounting for uncontrollable situations such as power outages, cut cables, or - as some like to put it, acts of god. In this day and age where persons are using internet phone providers as [their] primary communication resource, a loss of service can result in serious consequences if a person is unable to make a 911 call.
| |
|
| | Mr FelFlynn LivesPremium
join:2008-03-17
Louisville, KY | Saw you link your idea on Google over to here, good stuff. | |
| | | Pv8man
join:2008-07-24
Hammond, IN | Wow, I gotta say,
I read this whole thing and I think it is reasonable and fair.
Thumbs up here | |
| | | funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | This is too good to waste. I hope you posted it so that the FCC gets it. | |
| | |  major marcoRes Firma Mitescere NescitPremium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA | said by PapaMidnight:The following is a list of things I want that encompass the ENTIRE industry. [...] Nice list but you just described what is guaranteed in the Constitution and various offshoots of the law -due process, privacy, etc.- but is ignored for political /ideological expediency depending on who is in the White House and which faction of the American aristocracy is running the show -either the Demublicans or the Republicrats. Note: Absolutely no difference whatsoever between the two.
The other half of your wish list is what Net Neutrality is all about.
--
The Toll
Tracking Lord Stanley
| |
| | | | | | Re: Dear Google Actually there are very significant differences between the two.
Let's put it this way. If the idiots in this country had voted for Al Gore instead of Bush, do you honestly believe the state of technology and the internet would be where it is now? | |
| | | | | | | Re: Dear Google said by sonicmerlin:Actually there are very significant differences between the two. Let's put it this way. If the idiots in this country had voted for Al Gore instead of Bush, do you honestly believe the state of technology and the internet would be where it is now? It might have been better, but we wouldn't have much of a country to live in. 
But that's for a whole other topic. | |
| | | | | | | said by sonicmerlin:Actually there are very significant differences between the two. Let's put it this way. If the idiots in this country had voted for Al Gore instead of Bush, do you honestly believe the state of technology and the internet would be where it is now? Though this is slightly off topic, by all accounts, the majority did vote for Al Gore. I think you may wish to direct your attention to the Supreme Court on this one. | |
|
| | | | This is already available in countries where there is actual broadband competition.
Obviously it's impossible for a government to regulate incumbents to such fine grained detail, so the only way to ensure such service quality is to increase the level of competition until there are at minimum 5-10 providers in each city. | |
| | | | | I like what you've got there. The constitution and network neutrality cover a lot of what's in that list, though.
However, a 100Mbps symmetrical connection for $33.99 is asking a little bit too much. Most people in the US won't even fully utilize that much bandwidth.
30-40Mbps symmetrical, or 50/25 for $30 is something I'd consider pretty reasonable, though.
It's definitely a whole lot better than my 27Mbit, 60kb fiber connection I pay $45 a month for. | |
| | | | | | Re: Dear Google said by Daniel H :
...network neutrality cover a lot of what's in that list, though.
While this is true, Network Neutrality, as we all know, is not law as of yet (and gets lobbied to hell everytime it hits committee).
said by Daniel H :
However, a 100Mbps symmetrical connection for $33.99 is asking a little bit too much. Most people in the US won't even fully utilize that much bandwidth.
A guy can dream, though, can't he?  | |
|
| | |
| | | all I want is 10/10 Up and Down. Must be able to xbox live, small web server. | |
| |  mrkevinKnowledge comes, but wisdom lingers.Premium
join:2007-08-07
Aurora, ME | I want at least 100 GE on a EASP loop.
$10.00 is good for me. or better yet free. | |
| | | | | Re: Dear Google said by mrkevin:I want at least 100 GE on a EASP loop. $10.00 is good for me. or better yet free. Perhaps a guy can dream a little to hard... | |
|
|  SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | I want my LAN traffic to sustain full Gigabit transfer speeds. What is wrong here!?!@ | |
| | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Dear Google Then get a switch capable of 10 Gbps and the corresponding NICs. | |
| | | | SLDPremium
join:2002-04-17
San Francisco, CA | Re: Dear Google I don't have the $2K per NIC  | |
| | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Dear Google Then no "full gigabit throughput" for your LAN  | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Dear Google Ah! ha ha! ha! Oh the hilarity! Oh dear me, I think my side is about to burst open from the humor. Oh boy. | |
| | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Alexandria, VA
kudos:2 | Re: Dear Google So what's humorous? SLD  asked for "full" gigabit throughput on his/her LAN and then stated s/he couldn't afford the $2000/NIC. Nothing funny about it, but thanks for another thought provoking response. | |
|
| | | | | Me too :3
But I'd settle for anything with an up stream over 5Mbps for $40ish. The current available for my area is 768Kbps for over $60, so I have ~300Kbps instead. T_T | |
| |
1 edit | You'd better have been a very, very good boy (no pirating of software, movies, or music, and no hogging bandwidth!) if you are going to sit on Google Claus' lap and ask for the moon. | |
|
garmst
join:2000-09-17
New York, NY | Laying fiber on every public infrastructure project An awesome project for the fiber optics manufacturer and installers. Little bits of fiber here and there, laid for no purpose other than to lay it. No thoughts of interconnection, topology, type of fiber, who will operate it, who will power it, who will maintain it, who will own it, the terms and price for use. Nothing. Crazy.
Installing public toilets make more sense!
Maybe telephone booths. No phones, just the booth. | |
| |
See 29 replies to this post | |
| | I'll settle for...
'Course, no one will ever buy that "you realize what telecommunications would be like, if your plan was implemented?!?" | |
| |
See 9 replies to this post | |
Romney2012Defeat Obama 2012-Chg we can believe inPremium
join:2002-03-03
USA
kudos:4
1 edit |  Do you trust Google to submit ideas they don't like?
New American Foundation have created a moderated comment website to collect user broadband plan ideas, the most popular of which will be submitted to Uncle Sam on your behalf. NAF is Google's creature. Do you trust Google to submit any ideas not in THEIR BEST INTERESTS instead of yours? I don't.
If you want to submit ideas, submit them yourself directly to the FCC. It is not that hard:
»esupport.fcc.gov/askfccapp/extap···id=bband
And you don't have to go thru the web page at the FCC that Karl supplied: »fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
 Wizeguy
join:2008-08-23
Safety Harbor, FL | When they get done running fiber Here's what you will get..... | |
| | | | Re: When they get done running fiber You know, it can be run underground... | |
| |  HpowerRoflmao
join:2000-06-08
Glendale, CA | LOL I'd be really worried to walk below that mess. | |
|
 atuarreHere come the drumsPremium
join:2004-02-14
College Station, TX | RE No thanks Google. when is Google not working in their best interests, like the spectrum auction? Someone comes up with an award winning idea, and Google brands it as their own, because some where on one of those submission websites in tiny print, there is probably some scribble that states by using their website to submit your idea to the FCC, they get to take the credit for the idea, it becomes their property, and they get to change it/market it as they see fit. No thanks. | |
| | | | Re: RE If you find this mythical tiny print, please let us know. | |
|
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Golden, CO
kudos:2 Reviews:
·Verizon Online DSL
·Comcast
| What you could do Run fiber to government housing projects, to each apartment or what have you. The other end of the fiber would terminate at a predetermined POP, which serves 10,000 potential subscribers or the whole town, whichever is less. If at all possible, this POP should be a zero-mile loop from cable and telco facilities. The POP must be carrier-neutral (i.e. if a carrier wants to run backbone fiber to there, there isn't anyone stopping them).
The last-mile fiber should be rented on a cost-recovery basis to any ISP who wants to run services over it. Through advanced networking techniques, multiple providers (one video, one voice, one data, one security) would run their own services over the fiber as needed.
This effectively kills the last mile and, at least in part, the middle mile. Having 10k or so potential subscribers accessible from one location is a big draw for competition. That's why you can get unlimited dialup for $8-$10 per month.
Granted, this leaves non-gov't housing projects out in the cold, but other entities could participate in the meet-me room if they wanted, and the above is the simplest way to increase broadband penetration at high speeds and low prices.
Thoughts? | |
| | | Trust Google....? I don't trust Google without reservation, but their stated public objectives are WAY closer to what I would like than the incumbents.
Conversely, I have FAR less trust that Verizon, AT&T and their ilk will have any "thoughts" that I might agree with. Their history of obstructing any form of meaningful competition make it clear that any "benefits" I receive will only be accidental in their quest for barely adequate service for inflated prices. And there will be terrifying penalties should I decide to change my mind and switch to another provider.
Just running the "install" CD from their kit will "customize" your browser - and provoke future problems. That's why I never run those things. Try switching from DSL to cable HSI after running the installation CD (especially Windows Vista). All designed to impede any change of service provider, and to get you to cancel the new provider by preventing easy setup.
Plenty of mistrust to go around - I just have a lot more for the incumbent providers.
NetLarry | |
| | | Internet the good way. I want 56k connection for $400 dollars a month.
I want to pay $40 dollars an hour while im connected.
I want to pay another $40 dollars for every K I send over that connection.
I want to be throttled down to 0.1 k all the time.
I want to have a cap of 56k and beyond that I download past the first 56k I wanna be charged $100 dollars.
I want to be spammed constantly so I am always paying.
I do not want privacy, I want companies like phorm to keep track of all my browsing habits and sell them to the highest bidder.
I want only paid subscription plans, that only allow me to pick and pay for each individual website I want.
I want to pay for email on top of that.
I want to pay for dns services on top of that.
I want to pay an extra $1000 dollars a month so the CEO of that company can get a bigger bonus at the end of the year.
This is what I want, your friend the Super Capitalistic Republican.
-----------
If the companies got their way this is what you would get. | |
| | HpowerRoflmao
join:2000-06-08
Glendale, CA | Re: Internet the good way. said by cpsycho:I want 56k connection for $400 dollars a month. I want to pay $40 dollars an hour while im connected. I want to pay another $40 dollars for every K I send over that connection. I want to be throttled down to 0.1 k all the time. I want to have a cap of 56k and beyond that I download past the first 56k I wanna be charged $100 dollars. I want to be spammed constantly so I am always paying. I do not want privacy, I want companies like phorm to keep track of all my browsing habits and sell them to the highest bidder. I want only paid subscription plans, that only allow me to pick and pay for each individual website I want. I want to pay for email on top of that. I want to pay for dns services on top of that. I want to pay an extra $1000 dollars a month so the CEO of that company can get a bigger bonus at the end of the year. This is what I want, your friend the Super Capitalistic Republican. ----------- If the companies got their way this is what you would get. LOL that's hilarious. Love the part of throttled down to 0.1 k all the time. 
--
The Internet is about to go down....it is actually. | |
|
| | you want it, you pay for it I want people to pay for their own damn non-essential services. | |
|
1 edit | Dear Santa (I mean Google) I want everything for free. I don't want to pay for music and video, and I don't care if ISPs and cable companies and telephone companies go out of business. In fact, I want you to lobby them out of business so that the government steps in and gives me free broadband. I want a zillion Mbps, 24x7, for nothing!
Signed, Joe Downloader/Gamer | |
|  altima
join:2002-02-01
Riverdale, MI | I'll take all the above! Living out in the sticks I would love some kinda of fast/reliable internet. 200k just doesn't get it. | |
| | | Google's "poll" seems to be biased Take a good look at Google's site, and you'll see that it keeps pushing an "idea" attributed to Google's chief lobbyist, Richard Whitt, to the top. The idea is rather abstract, would take a long time to accomplish anything, and doesn't mention any direct short term benefit to consumers, so its presence at the top of the list makes the entire system highly suspect. I say it's rigged. | |
|  linicxCaveat EmptorPremium
join:2002-12-03
United State
·Cass Communicati..
·CenturyLink
| Dear FCC Broadband service in rural America is expensive and pathetic. 512/128 is not not a whole lot faster than dial up, yet in some areas it is billed at $100 per month, and touted as 'lightening fast'. Further, using fine print and legalese to make claims such as "their" broadband is 10x faster than 28.8 dial-up is not only deceptive, 28.8 has not been the de facto protocol for several years. I can run faster than a piss-ant, but I should not be allowed to use this type of statement to flimflam the public and neither should they. Rural America should not have the inherent right to carry more than its fair share of the burden of proving service to an area.
Telcos have yet to explain rural pricing. if Telco A sells its customer in Chicago a *hypothetical* 6GB download speed for say $23 per month, the identical service in neighboring Will County cost $30 per month, and $50 per month in Peoria County. Then Telco B with an office in the neighboring Tazewell County seat advertises a whopping 1.5 GB download speed in the neighboring Mason county seat for a paltry $80 per month. The main CO in the county is less than 2 blocks from the courthouse and business district but no more than 8 blocks from every resident in town. What you find here is rural America broadband at is finest with all the dressing you want (all spin you want to hear) on your limp lettuce salad (to explain lousy service). The folks in rural America have been seduced into buying smoke and mirrors provided to you coast to coast by your friendly local telco found on the front of your local phone book.
I've lived this since Mosaic browser was released by the University of Illinois.
In thee many years that have passed I found two local ISPs that serve the public. It is not AT&T, It is not Cox Cable, It is not Century Telephone, nor is it Verizon, MSN, Comcast, Road Runner or any other national rapist masquerading as a rural broadband provider.
As long as telco controls all phone lines and flatly refuses to allow competition in their area, rural America remains bent over with their pants down. Every time a telco or cable company gobbles up a small local provider the rural service degrades. It is now degraded to a point there is nowhere to go but up, and no local telco or cable company is willing to go there.
Why should they? The dream of a true rural America broadband will remain a dream. FCC has no power. Congress no backbone. 50GB download will remain as illusive as a 200 bushel per acre corn harvest. The real answer is give the money to municipalities to build out. Watch the pigs squeal. the telco and cable PACs will be in congressional offices the next day. And the negative ads filled with lies will dominate tv, radio, newspaper, and mail advertising.
Thanks to Justin and this forum no one in rural America needs to to be uninformed any longer, nor confused over broadband, download speeds, why stuff doesn't work as advertised, or what the telco and cable companies are up to in Washington.
--
Mac: No windows, No Gates, Apple inside | |
|
| |
|
|
