| ||||||||||||
PRINT
COMMENT
SUBSCRIBE
RSS"Production is controlled by a tiny cartel that sets prices high and keeps them there," Wu said today at a press conference about broadband access at the Personal Democracy Forum.
The analogy impressed fellow speaker Vinc Cerf, widely credited as the father of the Internet. "Wow. That's cool, Tim," he responded.
Both were speaking at the launch of Internetfor Everyone.org, a Web site that aims "to make universal, affordable high-speed Internet access a national priority." The event was organized by Internet access advocacy group Free Press.
Joining Wu and Cerf on stage was FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein, who lamented what he called eight years of failed broadband policy. "It's clear that what we are doing in Washington isn't working," Adelstein said.
Josh Silver, executive director of Free Press, offered some discouraging statistics. Only around 50% of American households have high-speed Web service, while 10 million rural Americans have no access to broadband.
Other speakers included Michael Winship, president of the Writers Guild of America-East, and Brad Burnham, a partner in Union Square Ventures.
Speaker after speaker decried the sorry state of broadband availability in the U.S. but without discussing any concrete proposals. In fact, during the Q&A, one of the journalists present, Wired's newly hired Steven Levy, asked how broadband was supposed to improve when no one was suggesting any specific reforms.
But at least some of the speakers indicated that reform needs to begin with a change in expectations. Wu pointed out that between mobile service and Internet connections, some households are spending as much on bandwidth as on energy -- yet precipitating little of the same complaints about cost. "We've just accepted that bandwidth is something that American families will spend hundreds of dollars on a month," he said.
1 person recommends this article.
RSS FEEDS
Would it really a good idea to move all this network building decision making into the hands of government? Then prices could be set artificially low but the investment would still have to be paid for through higher taxes.
Energy versus bandwidth? What is the point of that comparison? I guarantee that 10 years from now the cost of these 2 things will have gone in opposite directions. The per megabit cost bandwidth will continue to go down and the per kilowatt hour cost of energy will in all likelihood go up. And let's not forget that the cost of energy is articificially low once you start to come to terms with the hidden environmental cost.
Supply and demand determines price, and government should stay out of the equation, unless they intend to magically increase the supply. A warning: City governments who jumped on the wi-fi wagon found out that business is tougher than it looks. There's a reason why broadband is expensive: It takes huge investments (risk). Just like Vegas gamblers, businesses are rewarded (and just as often punished) for taking huge risks and making huge investments.
Now go back and read the last paragraph of the new story. Anyone willing to sell something for less than the customer is willing to pay must be thinking of something other than increase shareholder value. Like big oil, if you don't like the prices, go buy some stock in the company.
Before I get words like"Troll!" hurled at me, I merely offer this up for comment along with this thought: is this a hurtle that technology needs to meet head on? Or even become a governmental issue with tax incentives offered?
Larry Le Francis, S4 Studios
http://cparente.wordpress.com/2008/06/21/will-the-internet-break-under-peak-load/