Government Broadband

Continuing the FCC theme from the prior post. I stumbled across a great article on ZDNet demonstrating a handful of negative effects of the FCC controlling cost and infrastructure of broadband. The following is an excerpt from that article by the David Gewirtz, the executive director of the U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute, founder of the ZATZ technical magazines, and the cyberterrorism advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism and Security Professionals:

But there is a dark side. First, you gotta know that the minute FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski mentioned providing broadband to another 100 million DVD-buying-cause-they-can’t-watch-Hulu-yet Americans, some movie industry executives somewhere went full-goose bozo.

And that’s even before Julius mentioned those juicy upload speeds of 100 megabits per second. Can you say BitTorrent? Sure, I knew you could. Now, think about the FCC’s stated goal of “access to at least 1 gigabit per second broadband service to anchor institutions such as schools.”

In schools all across America, there will be armies of teenagers who’ll use their schools’ increased bandwidth to share every movie and every TV show ever digitized. After all, if it takes less than ten minutes to download a full-length movie, why not? Yes, I know, there’s software to prevent that. Do you seriously think any security software can stand up to an army of teenagers who want free movies?

Somewhere in Hollywood, an accountant in an overpriced suit just screamed into his latte.

Where else could this thing go off the rails?

Broadband For The Masses

The FCC is revealing its plan this week to use Stimulus money to upgrade our internet infrastructure. The problem: Too many people cannot access broadband internet. The plan will:

"provide high-speed Internet access to the estimated 93 million people in the U.S. without it. The plan, mandated by Congress last year as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, aims to increase home broadband use to 90 percent of the population by 2020 (Scientific American)."

The U.S., as of 2009, had 26.7 percent of the population on broadband. That is 81 million people were using broadband. The next closest country, in raw numbers, was Japan with 31 million. 90 percent would equal 245 million people with broadband. Comparing percentage of population (or penetration), the Netherlands had the highest percentage at 38 percent. But I don't need to tell you the population and land size differences in comparing our country to The Netherlands or even Japan. Our usage already trumps all other countries. Then what is the issue of access? Now, if it was faulty infrastructure, I could understand federal concern. If goats kept chewing through the cross-country trunk lines we would all agree that would be a problem. But the United States has no issue with goats. The FCC estimates that cable TV is accessible to 99 percent of the U.S. population. Cable broadband available to 96 percent. DSL 82 percent. If 96 percent of the nation already has the option, then why aren't more people using it and what exactly does the FCC mean by "access (all stats from OECD.org)?"



Obviously they don't mean connecting to broadband.

"The number one reason people cite for being offline is cost," Clyburn said. "Some might be in the position of having to choose between paying for basic necessities or paying for broadband, while others might not see the value of broadband relative to other things they could pay for like cable TV"(Scientific American)."

Those poor people; having to choose between paying for necessities or paying for broadband. How terrible. Cost is the issue: in FCC lingo "cost" must equal "access." Until two weeks ago, I too was one of the 93 million choosing not to use Broadband. I had no desire to pay the high rates. I chose to buy camping gear instead. Why is it suddenly a federal issue that I would rather spend my money buying some other product instead of broadband?


Are costs in the United States that bad? The average monthly bill is $45.52 putting us safely in tenth place for lowest monthly costs in the world. The world average is $51.55. Sounds like we don't have too much to complain about. Remember the Netherlands, which has the highest percentage of citizens on broadband? They are paying an average of $66.79 a month.


So why is it suddenly a national issue that we have nine countries paying a few dollars less than us for broadband? I don't know.

Instead of making people decide how to spend their money, the FCC wants to regulate the costs so we don't have to choose between cable TV or broadband internet. Or 60 inch TVs. Or speed boats. Or fast food. We can afford it all.

Sounds like a good idea; it has got me thinking: why stop with the internet? We all have access to roads. Most of us have a car to get around the roads on. But those who can't afford a car have access through public transit. And some of us splurge for sports cars. But we all have access to the roads. But you know, I'm sick of not driving a Ferrari like my rich neighbor. I'm also concerned that the penetration of Ferrari's is far higher in Italy than in the United States. And they are paying less. Why should I have to drive an old Honda so I can afford to buy food? Where do I live, some third world country? This is the 21st century. I don't think I should have to suffer like this. Not when I have to watch my hard working neighbor driving his Ferrari. And the people taking public transit should suffer no more. Where are their Ferraris? Imagine how wonderful the world will be when we all can travel in more style than any other country. I hereby declare Ferraris our right. Oh, and broadband internet.

Canon Mug

Now this is a cool advertising idea. Mugs designed to look just like a camera lens. How awesome is that? Someone over at Canon has a good sense of humor. You know, if you are going to give out and design swag, why not make swag that is your product? Everyone does hats and pens. Mugs are common to, but not mugs like these.

Review: Church History

Church History in Plain Language Updated 2nd Edition by Bruce L. Shelley


My rating: 4 of 5 stars
This was a long read. Its subject matter is rather dense: the history of the Christian religion from the time of Christ until now (actually late 1990's). It was suggested to me by my LDS World and Christian History teacher. I can see why now.

The chapters are kept short so you can read one a sitting without hassle. Shelley manages to provide a constant onslaught of names, dates, locations, and significances while interweaving stories and keeping it entertaining. I especially enjoyed the look at the 1900's to present and the growing onslaught of secularism.

View all my reviews >>