Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Sunday September 11 2016, @04:58AM   Printer-friendly
from the realistic-expectations dept.

It's long-accepted common knowledge that high-speed internet access is a key to education, economic growth and even maintaining interpersonal connections. While the internet began as a public venture, in the last 20 years the private sector has provided the public with broadband connectivity. Internet service providers like Comcast and Charter have built out networks covering large swaths of the U.S., and for years have effectively monopolized internet connections to homes and businesses.

Because they operate with little or no competition, these companies have little incentive to upgrade their networks or reduce prices. This has left the country that invented the internet ranked 30th in the world for internet speed and affordability.

Communities frustrated with their available options – or without any options at all – have taken on the challenges of delivering fast and cheap internet for themselves. Often this municipal 100 times faster than the national average internet connection speed.

For the consumer this means faster Netflix streaming, clearer Skype conversations, faster downloads, better gaming and quicker uploads for video, documents and pictures. It also means stronger health care provision, emergency preparedness and business advantages.

That's why it was disappointing to learn of last month's Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals decision that upheld laws in North Carolina and Tennessee that discourage the growth of municipal broadband. The ruling overturned a 2015 decision by the Federal Communications Commission that voided these laws in the interest of promoting greater broadband access. How the issue gets resolved from here will affect American connectivity, competitiveness and communities. With all five members of the FCC slated to testify before Congress this month, in a general hearing about the commission's work, it's important to understand the legal and regulatory gymnastics that got us here in the first place.

By law, the FCC is charged with promoting advanced telecommunications (including Section 706 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which is vaguely worded. Through several years of court rulings, this part of the law has become both a powerful tool in the FCC's regulatory arsenal, and its Achilles' heel when interpreted by the courts.

[...] The digital divide is not shrinking as fast as it could be, and universal broadband is only becoming more of a necessity for participation in American society, culture and business. What action the FCC takes now – and how it interprets the range of its power – will send an important message to all Americans about their connected future.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by requerdanos on Sunday September 11 2016, @11:27PM

    by requerdanos (5997) Subscriber Badge on Sunday September 11 2016, @11:27PM (#400415) Journal

    That's some powerful bigotry you have there.

    There's something to what you say - there are many ways to connect to Internet.

    In pointing out that either someone is directly connected to the other hosts on the Internet, or they aren't and go through a radio-based gateway instead, I did not mean to cause you personal offense. For that, I do apologize.

    However, the above is based on a simple observation, and I don't think as such it qualifies as a "sack of lies". Can you elaborate?

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2