A Bazillon bits per second! I have it! You don't!

[MikePA]

Subsidizing and standardizing the interstate highway system was a good idea...facilitated growth.

Similarly, we need super high speed internet distributed nation wide...as a foundation for future growth in unforeseen ways.

I'm ready for it. Government research invented the technology (DARPA NET), private industry gives us the mish mash we have now. Time to be the best we can be...nation wide.

Comparing the interstate highway system with residential Internet service is incorrect as is the comparison of the federal government of the 1950s to today's.

An Interstate highway doesn't run to your driveway and the Internet backbone, the 'Interstate Internet', is quite robust. A government that spent 23% of GDP in 1950, rising to 28% in 1959 is not the government that's projected to take 36% of GDP in 2015. (Austria took 54% in 2007) Anyone who thinks the federal government would stop at regulating just the speed of your Internet connection, is dreaming. Over time, they'd be 'recommending' the content that is delivered. You need look no further than the food 'recommendations' from the federal government to local schools who receive federal funds.

A frequent complaint on TBN are 'city' people who move to the country and complain about wild animals, farm animals, and other differences from city life. One of those is Internet service.

Regarding pricing; Residential electricity and telephone service are based on usage because they are delivered at a constant speed, no other way is possible. Internet service can be based on both, and some already are, usually speed based with a monthly data cap.

 

[riptides]

....

A frequent complaint on TBN are 'city' people who move to the country and complain about wild animals, farm animals, and other differences from city life. One of those is Internet service.

....

In general I would agree, but internet service really knows no such boundary as "country". It is limited by subscribers and use models.

Like I said, I am surrounded by high speed technology, however our subscriber base does not warrant the build-out to our house.
The telephone company did the nation with copper, hmmmm..... rather odd that time no?

 

[Coyote machine]

Not a good way to do things.

Maybe I missed something? Can you elaborate on why its not a good thing?

Thanks,

CM

 

[Coyote machine]

Comparing the interstate highway system with residential Internet service is incorrect as is the comparison of the federal government of the 1950s to today's.

An Interstate highway doesn't run to your driveway and the Internet backbone, the 'Interstate Internet', is quite robust. A government that spent 23% of GDP in 1950, rising to 28% in 1959 is not the government that's projected to take 36% of GDP in 2015. (Austria took 54% in 2007) Anyone who thinks the federal government would stop at regulating just the speed of your Internet connection, is dreaming. Over time, they'd be 'recommending' the content that is delivered. You need look no further than the food 'recommendations' from the federal government to local schools who receive federal funds.

A frequent complaint on TBN are 'city' people who move to the country and complain about wild animals, farm animals, and other differences from city life. One of those is Internet service.

Regarding pricing; Residential electricity and telephone service are based on usage because they are delivered at a constant speed, no other way is possible. Internet service can be based on both, and some already are, usually speed based with a monthly data cap.

The highway reference, if I understood the intent of the post, was about the government doing the buildout. No one is suggesting today is the same as the 1950s. Maybe Austria has, as one example, the right idea. If the US took more GDP to build out a more equalized internet access to speed/service to all parts of our country, and spent less on the killing machine around the world, we might be better able to tap the brainpower of our citizens to everyone's benefit.
I can skip ads and content suggestions on my tv, it should be able to skip them on the internet, in fact I block all ads from TBN as we speak. Sometimes you steak comes with some gristle, and one deals with it accordingly. There is no perfect solution, but that doesn't preclude numerous ways to solve the problem.

 

[Coyote machine]

In general I would agree, but internet service really knows no such boundary as "country". It is limited by subscribers and use models.

Like I said, I am surrounded by high speed technology, however our subscriber base does not warrant the build-out to our house.
The telephone company did the nation with copper, hmmmm..... rather odd that time no?

I tend to disagree on the build-out. If built people will use it. Country means our section of the global internet/www, etc. It takes all the pieces to make it most robust; our piece is lacking compared to other countries/ pieces, and we need to bring our A game to this situation, similar to the race for space of the space exploration era.
Copper wire land based telcom build-out was the early part of a technology revolution that became monopolized by AT& T and their like kind

 

[MikePA]

Like I said, I am surrounded by high speed technology, however our subscriber base does not warrant the build-out to our house.
The telephone company did the nation with copper, hmmmm..... rather odd that time no?

If a household has a phone line, they have access to the Internet.

I think some people, usually politicians looking for votes and power, purposely blur the debate and lump access to the Internet with 'high speed' access to the Internet.

The US Census defines High Speed Internet access as '...Internet service type other than dial-up alone. This includes DSL, cable modem, fiber-optic, mobile broadband, and satellite Internet services.'

If the government dictates and/or uses taxpayer dollars to provide 'high speed' Internet access to every household, what's next, defining a minimum speed of that access? Price caps for that speed? The kind of information that must be streamed over that 'high speed' connection?

As sure as the sun sets in the west, it was all but certain someone would bring up the 'killing machine around the world'. Catchy but content free. The same could be said of the entitlement spending. One of the jobs of the federal govt is to protect the US. That's not done with James Taylor singing songs or by funding gigabit Internet connections. Sad that some people rail against a supposed private monopoly (that was broken up) but have no qualms about granting govt that same power. High speed internet access to every home, if built by the federal government will come with strings attached. But that's OK, as long as I have my gigabit Internet connection, eh?

 

[texasjohn]

The highway reference, if I understood the intent of the post, was about the government doing the buildout. No one is suggesting today is the same as the 1950s.

Yes, when something clearly extends beyond the bounds of any state or area, with high initial expense and long term payback and the promise of changing/improving lives and lifestyles, then governmental influence/standards/support/construction is warranted. Very high speed internet access across 99% of the US would allow population dispersion away from city work centers and reduction of city congestion. We've already seen many life style and work changes even with the hodge podge of connectivity now available.

 

[ray66v]

I just upgraded, to the highest speed internet available here, (excluding sat), 12Mbps.

I am not downloading movies, so what I have is actually working fine.

Personally, I would rather have a natural gas line run out here, than a fiber optic cable.

 

[MikePA]

Very high speed internet access across 99% of the US would allow population dispersion away from city work centers and reduction of city congestion. We've already seen many life style and work changes even with the hodge podge of connectivity now available.

I'm trying to understand - What do you mean by 'very high speed'? In this thread, we've gone from 'high speed' to 'very high speed'. The definition determines the technology needed.

As I said earlier, the Internet backbone in this country is already in place. The last time a cable company guy (not Verizon or Comcast) was at our place, just this summer, he said Verizon is losing money for every fiber customer they connect. He also said their existing copper based infrastructure has plenty of speed capacity, they just have to change out some of their head end equipment. There's no need for fiber and it's expensive installation and repair equipment.

 

[Ken]

Yeah, yeah. I've got Hughes Net baby! I actually typed this back in November and you are just now reading it.

No cell service at my house, propane no natural gas.

Flip side no building permits, burn permits, nothing permits. Not many neighbors. I can shoot off my back porch and nobody minds.

Hi neighbor any where in the Ozarks. is good place to live. I can shoot 5 miles to the north and know only tree would get hit.
And last on the line of phone DSL so slow also reading your post of yesterday.

Are you close to the Black river area? Some where around Jonesborough .
ken