News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Obama: "It is unacceptable that the U.S. ranks 15th in th... by axod on Monday December 08, 2008 @12:45PM (#390078)
I think the bigger issue is the lack of choice/competition.
Re:Obama: "It is unacceptable that the U.S. ranks 15th in th... by vaksel on Monday December 08, 2008 @01:51PM (#390159)
there is competition, the problem is that since the whole broadband thing is just starting out, they companies are focusing their efforts on the big cities.

I mean think about it..why would the companies put all that effort and resources into laying fiber to and around a town of 10,000 people, if for only a little bit more they can lay down the fiber in a city of 10 million

Re:Obama: "It is unacceptable that the U.S. ranks 15th in th... by jmtame on Monday December 08, 2008 @02:31PM (#390227)
I think you're mistaking the word "competition" for "oligopoly." Let me introduce you to 99% of the broadband market, their names are Verizon, Comcast, and AT&T.

By the way, they don't let municipalities build their own infrastructures. It's "anti-competitive." Any company that is profitable enough is acquired, otherwise they will charge you an arm and leg just to use their cables.

The focus on "wealthy" neighborhoods is called redlining. These three guys I just introduced you to don't care about poor people. They only want to charge as high a price as possible for the people who can afford it. They're not too worried about actually building a good network (ie fiber optics, instead of their 100-year old coaxial cables designed for telephones).

Just thought I'd chime in and clarify that.

Re:Obama: "It is unacceptable that the U.S. ranks 15th in th... by Xichekolas on Monday December 08, 2008 @02:30PM (#390225)
Two companies trading customers back and forth isn't exactly vigorous competition.

The nature of the last-mile problem means that the only way you are going to get more than one cable company and more than one phone company to compete is to treat them like electrical utilities and either regulate their rates or force them to share their lines with competitors.

Wireless broadband solutions don't have this last mile problem, so don't need to be regulated in the same way. Their Achilles Heel will always be latency, which is why I don't think they are a long-term replacement for wired connections.

Re:Obama: "It is unacceptable that the U.S. ranks 15th in th... by astine on Monday December 08, 2008 @08:33PM (#390750)
The problem is that most telcos refuse to compete with each other. You can't 'choose' between Comcast and Verizon; they litterally divy communities up between them. This is at least in part because it is expensive to lay lines and they require that there be some return on investment.