http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/10/15/finland.internet.rights/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

Fast Internet access becomes a legal right in Finland

On the other hand, the United States is the only industrialized nation without a national policy to promote high-speed broadband, according to a study released in August by the Communications Workers of America, the country's largest media union.

:_P)

Standard Disclaimer : IMHO

We don't need a national policy, we're Capitalists; the private sector profit is sufficient drive (noting the explosive growth since the Feds passed "The Internet" over to commercial development.

---

ScottMac wrote:

We don't need a national policy, we're Capitalists; the private sector profit is sufficient drive (noting the explosive growth since the Feds passed "The Internet" over to commercial development.

 

---

With "competition" it all works without the governement getting involved. Anyone remember what it costs for high speed internet before competiion from cable? I rem paying $100 a month for IDSN 128

Right now most people have 2 companies competing... many only have one so I'm not really happy with the very small number of options that most people have for their internet in regard to leaving this "limited" competion to truely compete.

---

erazoner wrote:
There we have it -- federal agencies making laws. So tell me again why we have a Congress? Putin must be proud.

---

It's called "campaign Finance Reform" and they are fighting it tooth and nail. Sure they publically claim they support it but in private they abhore it because "most" have long forgotten why they are there - to serve US and not lobbyists (bribes) or big business (paying lobbyists to give bribes).

They play us for fools... playing to our worse fears in an attempt to keep us divided....

If only the (insert the word Demorcrats or Replublicans) were in control and then all life would be perfect.

Well how many years do they keep swapping control of the country with nothing being done? Last time I checked the problems of education, health care, social security, jobs, border control etc... have been serious issues for 20+ years and during that time both sides have had control yet they continue to foster hate and fear (both sides) in an attempt to control the masses.

Divert their attention and you can keep control. We are being played and played like fiddles!

They say one thing to one crowd and another to the next. They tell us what we want to hear and then vote with the lobbyists (bribes) -

so yes Congress should be the ones doing all of this and like everything else we need a BALANCE of federal power and federal constraint.

Too little intervention and monopolies (or near monopolies) form and competition drops (Pay TV industry) and too much intervention and then we stiffle competiton and overburden them with silly rules.

Remember... everyone loves the status quo when everything is going good for "them" but when things take a turn for the worse... we lose our jobs, our jobs move overseas, someone we know gets very sick etc... then we look for the governement to help. When we need help we want the government.... when we don't then we want the governement to stay our of "everyones" lives.

So which is it? You cannot have it both ways. I suspect that those who have been lucky enough to have never "needed" help will say one thing.... those who have needed help will say another.

If one day we woke up and our ISP's were very slow because they were charging different teirs of service and wanted double to get back the level of service we have always had.... well people woould cry FOUL! Until that happens and many people would once again (because they are either not affected by it or are so shortsighted that they cannot see where this is going) fall back to the "stay out of our lives" line.

Will the Internet Survive its 40th?

In highly regulated industries, regulations become barriers to entry. It's costly for new competitors to comply with the rules, which are designed for incumbents. As the U.S. falls further behind in broadband, we need more innovation and more competition, not a cozy, regulated cartel.

Technology may be changing faster than we can keep track, but we are well acquainted with the frailties and foibles of human institutions in Washington. Sometimes it's wiser for mortals to stand aside and leave technology to advance at its own pace. After its first 40 years delivering freedom and abundance, the Web has earned the benefit of the doubt.

---

erazoner wrote:

 

Will the Internet Survive its 40th?

 

In highly regulated industries, regulations become barriers to entry. It's costly for new competitors to comply with the rules, which are designed for incumbents. As the U.S. falls further behind in broadband, we need more innovation and more competition, not a cozy, regulated cartel.

Technology may be changing faster than we can keep track, but we are well acquainted with the frailties and foibles of human institutions in Washington. Sometimes it's wiser for mortals to stand aside and leave technology to advance at its own pace. After its first 40 years delivering freedom and abundance, the Web has earned the benefit of the doubt.

---

Let's not forget that we are comparing Apples to Oranges in most cases. If the US was as small as some of these other countries that have much faster overall internet then that would be one thing but it's far far more expensive to string up fiber for very large areas.

Sure you can fiber up a small, highly dense area of population and by spreading the cost to a zillion customers do fiber much cheaper. Now try to do that in a large country like the US where the poulation is not in very tight areas and see the cost.

I wonder how the US would rate if you only compared large cities to large cities? Now I know we have alot to do but when I read these things about "small country A" kicks the pants out of "large country B" I have to laugh because the numbers are cooked.

The other thing is how much money the government is chipping in? Did Finland wire up their country, for exmaple, with zero help from the government? Did a private company pay for it all? Maybe or maybe not but in teh US we have large cities with excellent net speed and rural communities still using modems.... not because the US is still in the stone age but because of the large expense of doing full fiber in the middle of no where.

Then you have the "damned if you do.... damned if you do not" factor.... if the government steps in to "chip in" to help fiber the rural areas (where it will NEVER be cost effective to run full fiber and maintain it) some people will cry foul that "competition" will work everything out and without the government either mandating or chipping in that rural areas will NEVER get fiber.

"This focus on broadband is a reflection of a recognition that the U.S. is lagging behind," FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said Wednesday at the agency's monthly meeting.

link

fwiw

randy

Standard Disclaimer : IMHO