more on labeling and NN

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

Begin forwarded message:

From: Rob Raisch <info () raisch com>
Date: June 20, 2006 7:16:32 PM EDT
To: dave () farber net
Subject: Re: [IP] more on labeling and NN


Dave,

Of course, defining "what the Internet is or must be" will open a  
whole raft of other product definition issues, not the least of which  
is our current, scabrous national definition of "broadband".

According to Teletruth, the New Networks Institute and others, the  
broken promise of residential broadband is one of the largest  
scandals ever perpetrated on the American public.
By falsely promoting a vision of ubiquitous residential broadband in  
the early 1990's, the Baby Bells persuaded state's legislatures and  
public utility commissions to provide substantial tax incentives and  
to allow them to charge increased consumer fees.  The Telcos argued  
they needed these increases and incentives  to pay for needed  
infrastructure improvements if they were to fulfill their promises.   
Since that time, these public subsidies amount to more than $200  
billion, or about $2000 per U.S. household.

What were they promising?  In the Telcos' own words, this wonderful  
"broadband" was to offer at least 45Mbps *in both directions*, enough  
to provide "high-quality video services" into and out of your home at  
the same time!  Further, by 2006,

What did we receive?  After a time, they all rolled out ADSL which  
appears to max out at 3Mbps/768Kbps, but only if you live next to  
your local Telco Central Office. Today, no one in the United States  
can purchase 45Mbps bi-directional residential broadband service, at  
any price.

In Korea today, you can purchase 100Mbps residential broadband for  
the equivalent of $40 per month.
The top offering from Verizon's FIOS offers only about 30% of that  
for $180 per month.
However, FIOS is not generally available and doesn't offer a bi- 
directional service; it's an asymmetrical service of 30Mbps into your  
home and only 5Mbps out.  Also, Verizon does not guarantee these  
speeds: "Speed and uninterrupted use of the service are not  
guaranteed."  But even if Verizon's FIOS offered the same type of  
service but with speeds equal to Korea's, it would cost the consumer  
13.5 times as much or $540 per mo.

According to experts, the U.S. economy has lost more than $5 trillion  
due to the emergence of foreign competition in high-speed services  
and lost business opportunities here at home.

How we allowed the Telcos and Cablecos to redefine this critical term  
to mean some multiple of low-speed 56Kbps modem lines where "Actual  
speeds may vary and are not guaranteed." and residential services are  
designed for "couch-potato web surfers" who only need "big bandwidth  
in" and "almost none out" is left to the reader's imagination.

See http://www.newnetworks.com/

--
/rr (Rob Raisch, Technology-Gadfly and Internet Greybeard)


-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
 http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/