Here in California, Governor Schwarzenegger's broadband task force recently released the most thorough analysis of broadband access and use ever conducted in the US.
The task force found that 96% of Californians already have access to wireline broadband, but only 56% subscribe.
The policy strategy should focus on increasing demand for broadband (through consumer-focused incentives).
Why should taxpayers subsidize AT&T to increase supply when they can't afford to subscribe to the services already available to them?
With regards to California, not all states have the availability to connect to broadband.
The ability to connect needs to be worked on either first or in conjunction with promoting subscription to broadband services.
However first we need to conduct an inventory of broadband penetration and broadband capacity nationwide. Similar to that which has already been completed in California and Kentucky. This will be the first logical step before building or trying to obtain subscribers.
Derek, you must've not gone to the panel yesterday at the conference where a rep from the OECD, among other panelists, mentioned that the particular metric you're citing--broadband uptake per capita-- isn't particularly meaningful when used in precisely the way you've just used it.
It doesn't, for example, take into account some pretty basic statistical controls like population profiles or population density. When you compare Sweden, Korea, or Japan to individual US states with similar demographic profiles and geographic characteristics, the picture is MUCH changed.
The way you've used that number is basically the same as saying that Japanese airlines are much better than US airlines, because you can can fly from one side of Japan to the other much faster than you can fly from one side of the US to the other.
Japan is much smaller than we are. Loop distances are shorter, populations are denser, and even "remote" residents in Japan are reasonably easy to reach. You've compared apples to baseballs and found one of them wanting, which just doesn't make much sense.
And meanwhile, in Beaumont, Texas, Time Warner Cable wants to charge by the byte?
ReplyDeleteThis is a move backward, is it not?
Derek,
ReplyDeleteHere in California, Governor Schwarzenegger's broadband task force recently released the most thorough analysis of broadband access and use ever conducted in the US.
The task force found that 96% of Californians already have access to wireline broadband, but only 56% subscribe.
The policy strategy should focus on increasing demand for broadband (through consumer-focused incentives).
Why should taxpayers subsidize AT&T to increase supply when they can't afford to subscribe to the services already available to them?
With regards to California, not all states have the availability to connect to broadband.
ReplyDeleteThe ability to connect needs to be worked on either first or in conjunction with promoting subscription to broadband services.
However first we need to conduct an inventory of broadband penetration and broadband capacity nationwide. Similar to that which has already been completed in California and Kentucky. This will be the first logical step before building or trying to obtain subscribers.
Derek, you must've not gone to the panel yesterday at the conference where a rep from the OECD, among other panelists, mentioned that the particular metric you're citing--broadband uptake per capita-- isn't particularly meaningful when used in precisely the way you've just used it.
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't, for example, take into account some pretty basic statistical controls like population profiles or population density. When you compare Sweden, Korea, or Japan to individual US states with similar demographic profiles and geographic characteristics, the picture is MUCH changed.
The way you've used that number is basically the same as saying that Japanese airlines are much better than US airlines, because you can can fly from one side of Japan to the other much faster than you can fly from one side of the US to the other.
Japan is much smaller than we are. Loop distances are shorter, populations are denser, and even "remote" residents in Japan are reasonably easy to reach. You've compared apples to baseballs and found one of them wanting, which just doesn't make much sense.
I just had a bad feeling about this post.
ReplyDeleteDid Google just lose the bid to Verizon? Or can I do a victory dance? :-)
~Darnell
PS
Hey Google, now that Blogger has embraced OpenID, would you consider turning it on for your comment section for your blog?