Skip to main content

Hand holding the end of a roll of blue cable.
Necessary? Yes. Innovative? Hardly.
Ask the average person who has led the internet revolution, and they'll tell you its companies like Amazon, Apple, Google and Facebook, and the web powers a plethora of innovation at next-generation companies such as these.

The telcos and cable providers, for their part, have leveraged the pipes they built for a previous era to lay new cable. That's pretty much it. Seriously, when was the last time a cable operator did anything innovative? Take away TiVo and we wouldn't even have DVRs. So no one could accuse them of "innovation." Well, no one smart, at least.

House Republican leaders sent Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler a letter today urging the commission to drop consideration of new federal “net neutrality” regulations that would undermine a free and open Internet and hurt our economy at the same time.

Signed by House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), and House Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), the letter states:  

“We are writing to respectfully urge you to halt your consideration of any plan to impose antiquated regulation on the Internet, and to warn that implementation of such a plan will needlessly inhibit the creation of American private sector jobs, limit economic freedom and innovation, and threaten to derail one of our economy’s most vibrant sectors.  At a time when technology businesses need certainty to innovate, this is not the time for the FCC to engage in a counterproductive effort to even further regulate the Internet.”

Got it? If you forbid internet service providers from charging extra to web-based companies to reach the public, then that harms innovation, because nothing is more innovative than being squelched by telcos because you aren't able to pay their access tax.

But my favorite part of that letter is the part about "threaten to derail one of our economy’s most vibrant sectors." Problem for Republicans is that no one in that vibrant sector of the economy agrees with them. Certainly not the venture capitalists who fund that innovation, and certainly not the companies who make the internet worthwhile in the first place. No one would be paying Comcast for broadband if there wasn't something non-Comcast on the other end to visit.

Republicans have aligned themselves with unpopular telcos and cable providers who want to squelch the free and open internet. No reason why Democrats should do the same.

(Bonus nutpick, below the fold.)

So that letter above was posted on the website of the Speaker of the House, speaker.gov. The first comment below it?

Mr. Speaker, Congress, & America, This is just another form of Obama's Democratic, Socialist, Agenda to Silence the Public. So people like me won't be able to tell the World that Barrack Hussein Obama aka ("BARRY SOETORO") is a "Habitual Lying", Liberal, Extremely Weak, Scandalous, Incompetent, Former Homosexual ("Obama has a "LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP" at "THE MANS COUNTRY GAY BATH HOUSE" in Chicago, Illinois"), Racist, Demagogue, Ideologue, Un-American, US Constitutional Law Breaker, Muslim Sympathizing, Phony, Dictating, Socialist, who is on a Mission to Destroy America & is Unable to Deal with Global Issues & Refuses to Acknowledge ("Global Islamic Extremist Terrorism/Terrorists") due to Obama being a ("Muslim Sympathizer"). ("MOST IMPORTANTLY"), Obama is the ("WORST") US President in American History and History will ("REFLECT") all of Obama's ("FAILED LEGACIES/POLICIES") to every American from ("NOW") until ("THE END of TIME").
PP DMC 33* aka Black Man "Airborne All The Way"
In other words, John Boehner's base.

Originally posted to kos on Wed May 14, 2014 at 01:23 PM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  He's just doing the bidding.. (18+ / 0-)

    Everyday Magic
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
    -- Clarke's Third Law

    by The Technomancer on Wed May 14, 2014 at 01:24:52 PM PDT

    •  Respond to Boehner's Masters tonite: #SaveOurNet (0+ / 0-)
      Twitterbomb Tonight at 8pm Eastern!

      From:     JR Gaillot, UniteBlue.org
      Date:     Today, 04:01:55 PM MDT

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      #SaveOurNet

      Join us tonight at 8pm Eastern and help trend #SaveOurNet.

      Share only by direct messages until 8pm ET, then Tweet and retweet others heavily.
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      #3: ensure network neutrality; #2: ensure electoral integrity; #1: ensure ecosystemic sustainability.

      by ivote2004 on Wed May 14, 2014 at 04:34:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Translation (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Technomancer

      WE just need to understand that when a Republican says this:

      "...threaten to derail one of our economy’s most vibrant sectors."
      What he really means is this:
      "...threaten to reduce the profits in one of our economy’s most profitable sectors."

      If Democrats proclaim the the Earth is round and Republicans insist it is flat, we will shortly see a column in the Washington Post claiming the the earth is really a semi-circle.

      by TexasTom on Wed May 14, 2014 at 09:27:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Like Pre Breakup AT&T In His Youth (5+ / 0-)

    He must've really sobbed to see evil little MCI gain a foothold in ma bell's rightful market.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Wed May 14, 2014 at 01:35:25 PM PDT

    •  On the other hand (0+ / 0-)

      when AT&T was a monopoly, AT&T Bell Labs actually did a great deal of important research on which the entire technology economy now depends.

      And the breakup resulted in most of the Labs going away, and most of the rest being focused on short-term, immediately practical development.

  •  He has no idea what he is signing (8+ / 0-)

    I bet some deranged Heritage Foundation intern who decides that he doesn't want to be a professional wingnut anymore could just type up a bunch of bullshit and he'd sign it.

    "What's the frequency Kenneth? What is it? We Demand to know why the chips in our heads randomly alternate between static and Kenny G. as we jerk off like kings. I chew tinfoil, but I have no fillings, so, I don't know what all the fuss is about. Sharknado talks to me. Sharknado 2 does not. Is Sharknado God? Is God dead because Sharknado 2 won't talk to me through the TV? Is Sharknado 2 a new more capricious form of made-for-SyFy God? Help me. What's the frequency, Kenneth?"
    Signed by House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA), House Majority Whip Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), and House Republican Conference Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA)

    "Real journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." -George Orwell

    by LeftHandedMan on Wed May 14, 2014 at 01:37:41 PM PDT

  •  The telcos opposed "net neutrality" from the start (11+ / 0-)

    http://www.cybertelecom.org/...

    AT&T announced Bell Packet Switching Service. The FCC responded to AT&T's application saying "it was uncomfortable with Bell's proposal because it appeared the service had been designed so that American Bell would be the only company that could use it." [Bell Turned Down on Data Link Rate, NY Times (July 30, 1982)] ATT Tariff FCC No 270 Rates and Reg for Bell Packet Switching Service, 92 FCC2d 48, FCC 82-335 (1982). [Nerds p 115]

    AT&T Accunet

    1983

    AT&T resubmitted the application with the new name Basic Packet Switching Service (BPSS), and was approved for service.. [Nerds p 115] AT&T renamed BPSS as Accunet. In 1985 the FCC ordered AT&T to withdraw Accunet Packet Service from service on the grounds that[History of Telenet 42] "it gives AT&T Information Service (AT&T IS) unreasonable preference in its provision of services.

    At least the FCC was on top of things back then.

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Wed May 14, 2014 at 01:41:01 PM PDT

  •  Since we got a nutpick in there (4+ / 0-)

    DELETE MY LIFETIME FUCKING ACCOUNT MEMBERSHIP at THE MANS COUNTRY GAY BATH HOUSE KOS!

  •  Laying cable or fiber (8+ / 0-)

    is a cost, to be avoided like the plague.  Charging more for using the same cable already in the ground for the same service and cutting back or off anyone who doesn't succumb to the extortion, is leveraging assets.  That is good.

    If ATT could bill every family In America but provide zero services, that would be a plan they could get behind.

    •  Tesla (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DEMonrat ankle biter, The Marti

      Cables? We don't need any stinking cables…

      Go with GLOBAL WiFi.

      Beam that shit down from orbit, repeaters on the ground.
      While we're at it do the same with electricity.

      Make Mr. Tesla proud.

      I would tell you the only word in the English language that has all the vowels in order but, that would be facetious.

      by roninkai on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:23:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  There's latency issues involved with that. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        The Marti

        Which is why satellite internet is currently the broadband-of-last-resort for most people.

        It'll get there, but it's not good tech yet.

        Everyday Magic
        Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
        -- Clarke's Third Law

        by The Technomancer on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:55:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Um, no (0+ / 0-)

        There are practical issues involving the required transmitter power to communicate between a satellite and your Wi-Fi connection on the ground.  You'd need one heck of a lot of repeaters to make this viable, because direct communication would require one heck of an antenna.

        There is also an issue with the bandwidth that this would require, since spectral efficiency requires relatively small cells that allow the same frequencies to be used every few miles.

        If Democrats proclaim the the Earth is round and Republicans insist it is flat, we will shortly see a column in the Washington Post claiming the the earth is really a semi-circle.

        by TexasTom on Wed May 14, 2014 at 09:29:38 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  that still requires investment (0+ / 0-)

        which the companies avoid if possible.  A cost to get the sattelites and repeaters, etc.  If they can keep you buying something else, they will.

    •  jfromga says (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Marti, Redfire, jfromga
      Laying cable or fiber (4+ / 0-)

      is a cost, to be avoided like the plague. Charging more for using the same cable already

      My city in Iowa used Obama stimulus and local funds to up grade infrastructure to about 80% of our business community , this included all things high tech fiber and internet technologies , I imagine that it how it happens in most communities  

      The chamber of congress GOP want to pretend the CEO of Comcast did all that hard work ....To be clear , I say that knowing you understand such details all ready , jfromga

      Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers

      by Patango on Wed May 14, 2014 at 03:16:15 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  That is pretty much the service that (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      The Marti

      Ma Bell provided circa 1970. Two weeks to get a phone, mandatory leasing of phones from Bell and customer service line waits of hours.

      And I am Kilrain of the 20th Maine. And I damn all gentlemen. Whose only worth is their father's name And the sweat of a workin' man Steve Earle - Dixieland

      by shigeru on Wed May 14, 2014 at 03:36:37 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  actually (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        shigeru

        Ma Bell was regulated and forced to provide phone to rural and other non-profitable areas in the beginning, so while it was a public monopoly, there were at least some public benefits.  And land lines once in service were pretty reliable.   Now my cell phone service from ATT is hit and miss a good portion of the time.  My unlimited data plan is limited even though it didn't start out that way and they still charge the same, and every other company around here has gone the same way.

        •  Thanks for the amplification. My point is (0+ / 0-)

          to do with innovation and the telcos' reluctance to do it and the difficulty in getting/changing service, but your point is taken.

          BTW we can still get basic landline service here if we want.

          And I am Kilrain of the 20th Maine. And I damn all gentlemen. Whose only worth is their father's name And the sweat of a workin' man Steve Earle - Dixieland

          by shigeru on Thu May 15, 2014 at 06:36:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  there was a time (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jfromga

      When ATT leased all phones, when a second phone on the same line cost a hell of a lot of money even though the marginal cost was minimal.

      Here is a secret.  There would be no internet if ATT was not broken up.  To get online required us to hook non-ATT equipment to ATT line in the mid 80's, something that would have been a non starter a few years before.  When 'the internet' became available to the masses, there was an immediate pool of consumers who had the equipment that could be used to connect to an ISP instead of individual 'bulletin boards' and other limited service portal, some of which were paid.  For instance, my school maintained a number of telephone lines that let us access the mainframe.  Now all they needed was a 'internet' connection.

      Because Bell was not in control of everything, they had no ability to limit what we could do on the Internet.  The breakup was one of the luckiest coincident in my lifetime.  We dodged a bullet by just a few years.

      In the current situation, we either need a heavily regulated situation, even more regulated than it is now, or we need to separate the pipes from those who control what goes through those pipes.

  •  Well 30+ years ago that may have been true (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Elwood Dowd, side pocket, The Marti

    back in the day of Bell Labs

    Then again their view of Solar energy ie "it will never pay for itself" was true 30+ years ago but is no longer true.

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:03:28 PM PDT

  •  Obama appointed the telco lobbyist (6+ / 0-)

    Who is proposing these changes, so there's that.

    If we really want to win this battle for net neutrality, we can't afford to give a pass to the Dem leader who is pushing it. We can't afford to ignore the Dem leader who controls all the purse strings for Dem campaign money.

     Just like Social Security cuts, we will all lose if we don't hold every bad actor accountable and apply pressure accordingly.

    Money is property, not speech. Overturn Citizens United.

    by Betty Pinson on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:06:28 PM PDT

  •  Ulp. Defending cableco innovation. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Russycle, The Marti

    They are an abominable monopoly, they buy politicians, I hope they lose at the FCC. BUT...

    The speed increases that their (cute little industry-wide collusive) development lab CableLabs has ginned up over coax, as DOCSIS 1, 2, and 3, are pretty damn innovative.  And we're better off because they exist.

    (They would still exist and evolve under Title II regulation.)

    •  Slowest in the World (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      atana, stevemb, Patango, The Marti

      DOCSIS has lagged the rest of the world in performance since after DOCSIS 1, when the rest of the world started innovating. We are currently ranked 9th in the world.

      If they were innovative we'd already have gigabit to each premises.

      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

      by DocGonzo on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:31:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not so. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        The Marti

        First, we aren't "slowest in the world." Your data doesn't even suggest that. Why start with a lie?

        Second, deployment lags innovation.  (My own TWC cable company hasn't bothered to deploy v3 yet.)

        Third, the speed differences reported in the Akamai surveys, reflect deployment of fiber vs. copper/coax more than anything else.  That isn't driven by innovation - it's driven by government policies.

        •  Innovation (0+ / 0-)

          It's not really a lie, just hyperbole. I said myself we're 9th. That's pretty bad considering we're talking about Internet speeds.

          Deployment lags innovation, but those other countries are years ahead of us. If we were innovating faster than them we'd have gigabit to the premises. We don't.

          "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

          by DocGonzo on Wed May 14, 2014 at 07:17:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Aside from the fact (5+ / 0-)

      that other countries are delivering faster internet, fact is that making an existing product go faster isn't "innovation". Microsoft keeps pumping out new versions of Word, but no one is accusing the company of being "innovative" anymore. A new XBox with faster processors aren't "innovative".

      Google docs, putting that stuff on the cloud so people could collaborate real-time on documents and spreadsheets and presentations? THAT was innovative.

      Another example: a new Macbook that goes faster, or has a better screen? Not innovative. A power adapted that latches on with a magnet so that you don't smash your laptop if you trip on the cable? Innovative. Original iPhone? Innovative. Newer versions, iterative.

      And so on. So no, the cable companies are not innovating. They're doing the bare minimum to keep up with evolving technological trends.

      •  Yes and no. (0+ / 0-)

        Agreed, there is a difference between innovation that results from looking at a problem in an entirely different way - like the magnet cord - and technology advances that come about from racing to advance things on an accepted scale, on an accepted problem.  That's an important difference.  But they are both innovation.

        When some company achieves a 50% improvement in battery efficiency, making electric cars much more practical for more people?  That's innovation, even though the problem and solution sets were understood.

        Getting data running at gigabit speeds over coax, affordably, is innovation.  The twisted-pair phonew companies wish they saw that innovation in DSL technologies.

  •  A small isp has fiber four blocks from my place (6+ / 0-)

    I will be dropping comcast the second they pull fiber into the building. For the same price point they provide four times the downstream bit rate and ten times the upstream rate. The only area they innovate is billing.

  •  the sad part of this at Senior Sites (0+ / 0-)

       Is that no one either seems to care or learn about what the heck is going on with FCC.    

        Then again, they use the "it won't affect me ruse" to deny all the snooping on American emails, etc.  

         Very scary.

  •  Bring back Ma Bell? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    rduran

    Curiously most of the electronics that power the computer and internet revolutions were made possible by the work of Bell Labs during the time when there was basically only one big communications company.  As a quid pro quo for their monopoly, AT&T was forced by Congress to support Bell Labs and was not allowed to monopolize its discoveries.

    Maybe  that state of affairs need not be restored, but it shows that innovation is not necessarily a result of cutthroat commercial competition.  You need to give scientists the money and freedom to pursue promising lines, regardless of immediate profit possibilities.

  •  Are you kidding me? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sweatyb, The Marti

    Telcos--particularly American ones--do a lot worth complaining about.  Lack of innovation isn't one of them.  You think pushing 1 Gbps through copper isn't a fantastic achievement?  You can argue that American telcos are lagging their companions overseas, particularly in deployment.  And it be hard to find an American equivalent to Erricson's labs these days.  But let's not go overboard.

    Also, comparing end application vendors to the pipe layers is comparing apples and oranges.

    •  The only thing TWC is good at is (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Patango, The Marti, TexasTom

      making my overpay for substandard internet connection that likes to randomly go out for a few hours every week.

      Hillary does not have the benefit of a glib tongue.

      by The Dead Man on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:27:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  he's not kidding, he's shilling (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rduran

      Kos is pushing his agenda (as is his right, it's his site). He wants his users riled up and angry. And he's using the same tactics any company proposing regulation would use, oversimplifying the issue, vilifying his opponents, rewriting history, and even making specious appeals to authority.

      It's like Putin talking about Ukraine or Obama talking about drones: everything he says is so tinged with his agenda that the things that are true start to sound like lies.

    •  Nobody Has That (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rduran

      1Gbps over copper is a lab trick - nobody actually has it installed. Though it will probably save telcos money instead of upgrading to fiber when it does get deployed. Instead of upgrading to fiber, which would leave the upper speed far more open.

      If that one innovation, or close to it, is all telcos can claim, it's damning with faint praise.

      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

      by DocGonzo on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:34:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  That one innovation (0+ / 0-)

        Or, more precisely, that dozens of innovations leading up to it through three preceding generations since the ISDN days, are primary enablers of end application inventiveness.  Having been in both worlds, it'd be nice to see EEs and the hundreds of thousands of line workers get as much respect as the code monkeys.  

        •  Where Respect Comes From (0+ / 0-)

          Software is closer to the public, right on their screens. That's why software people get more respect than EEs. Though we all get dissed as nerds.

          However, the undeployed 1Gbps over copper isn't driving any app inventiveness. 1Gbps over copper just gives incumbent capital owners more time to squeeze subscriptions from neglected geographies before they finally must upgrade the lines. Or divest (and abdicate to government owners), which is more likely.

          It's application innovation, however superficial, that drives demand for bandwidth and connectivity. Which drives delivery of bandwidth. Hyperextending legacy networks does unlock the proceeds of software innovation, but bandwidth hungry apps are always being innovated ahead of the availablilty of bandwidth for fully utilizing them.

          The real innovators are in the CPU/GPU/router processor engineering, and the materials and information science that underwrites them. Telcos and cablecos are completely unlike nVidia, Intel, AMD, ARM and Xilinx.

          "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

          by DocGonzo on Wed May 14, 2014 at 07:24:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  But deployed 10/100 VSDL, DOCSIS, and HSPA do (0+ / 0-)
            Software is closer to the public, right on their screens. That's why software people get more respect than EEs. Though we all get dissed as nerds.
            That's the truth.
            However, the undeployed 1Gbps over copper isn't driving any app inventiveness. 1Gbps over copper just gives incumbent capital owners more time to squeeze subscriptions from neglected geographies before they finally must upgrade the lines. Or divest (and abdicate to government owners), which is more likely.
            The point wasn't the G.fast is deployed, the point was that it's incorrect to say that telcos and cablecos are not inventive.  Infrastructure hardware, apparently, isn't as impressive to kos as Bootstrap.

            Deployment suffers for a multitude of reasons, including but not limited to the lack of incentives for telcos to upgrade lines.  When every residential telco market is dominated by one or two players and your typical customer--hundreds of millions of them--are still satisfied on old style television, you're going to have some problems.  Our situation is closer to Japan's than Korea's, though at least Japan has a strong public communications ministry that at least acts like it's setting standards for improvement.  You're right; without significantly more government intervention than we have today it's unlikely that we'll see telcos make the next infrastructure quantum leap on their own.

            It's application innovation, however superficial, that drives demand for bandwidth and connectivity. Which drives delivery of bandwidth. Hyperextending legacy networks does unlock the proceeds of software innovation, but bandwidth hungry apps are always being innovated ahead of the availablilty of bandwidth for fully utilizing them.
            This is debatable, particularly where it concerns streaming media.  Telcos bundled their own broadband to the premise media streaming solutions to businesses starting in the late 1980s.  We had DOCSIS 1.0 in 1997 with no obvious residential demand for it.  We don't have Youtube 2005 and Netflix streaming until 2008.  Telecom is infrastructure--like roads.  You typically build them in a gamble to generate demand, not the other way around.  Another argument for a greater public intervention.
            The real innovators are in the CPU/GPU/router processor engineering, and the materials and information science that underwrites them. Telcos and cablecos are completely unlike nVidia, Intel, AMD, ARM and Xilinx.
            Depends on the telco.  Up until 1996, you wouldn't even be able to say that.  And people still think of Alcatel-Lucent as part of the telco combine.
            •  Innovation Now (0+ / 0-)
              Telecom is infrastructure--like roads.  You typically build them in a gamble to generate demand, not the other way around.

              Roads haven't been built to anticipate or generate demand since the 1950s. Since the 1970s they are always built to relieve pressure from demand overwhelming supply. Telecom infrastructure is indeed the same. Neither data nor vehicle carriers have taken risks to anticipate or generate demand for several generations. The country is studded with bottlenecks as a result.

              Telcos and cablecos are completely unlike nVidia, Intel, AMD, ARM and Xilinx.

              Depends on the telco.  Up until 1996, you wouldn't even be able to say that.  And people still think of Alcatel-Lucent as part of the telco combine.

              1996 was almost 20 years ago, several eras distant in the past. Bell Labs was already a ghost by then. Telcos don't risk innovating. They acquire innovation by occasionally buying an innovator that has survived by proving success. They just as often stifle innovation by interfering with such an innovator, either by patent trolling or other monopoly tricks, or even buying tech to let it die. The last big innovation rolled out by a telco was Verizon's FIOS, which its board and shareholders nearly killed instead of marketing it.

              1Gbps over copper is an innovation. It's funded to squeeze more years out of already paid-off infrastructure, delaying divestment from it, rather than deliver more fiber. The borrowed time will run out and even more innovation will be required to catch up, from an industry even less inclined to innovate. Compared to the rest of the tech ecosystem in which WANs are the backbone, it's a tiny amount of innovation amidst a sea of innovation from others. Compared to telcos/cablecos in other countries, there's little innovation or buildout.

              That might be because of public policy, but that's the reason why - not a reason why it isn't true, so it shows low innovation is true. And since public policy is so deeply under control of the telco/cableco cartel's requirements and whims, the reasons why start and end with the telcos/cablecos. This is how they want it: US #9 in the world, despite our leadership in the industries that make them money.

              "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

              by DocGonzo on Thu May 15, 2014 at 11:06:15 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Meh. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rduran

      Electric cars were almost killed off a while back in favour of hydrogen fuel cells.  Fuel cells that never made it to market once the electric competition was killed off.  

      My point is that companies often spend a little money in order to avoid real innovation.  In the tech business, innovation is being cheaper and faster and better.  That is "the companions over seas".  There is nobody that actually has 1GPS through copper.  People DO have faster, cheaper internet in other countries.  So I personally would never call being behind, slower and more expensive as "innovation".

      Maybe time will prove me wrong, and telecoms will wake up and we will all have 1GBPS for a great price.  I have my doubts.   Just another way for them to charge more without doing much real work themselves.

      •  Figuring out how to deploy it (0+ / 0-)

        and make money is the trick.  Asia's going fiber because its POTS investment is considerably smaller than US and Europe.  VDSL is growing in Europe because of strong public investment.  We're flat here because our telcos actually have to make money, and that's not easy to do when 70 percent of households are already subscribed to something called "broadband" at prices from $20 to $80 a month.  I don't see the incentive to deploy G.fast--which works--without a serious government intervention.

        •  I agree, but (0+ / 0-)

          I think that is the whole point of the article as well as my own view that corporatization of our economy does nothing but harm.   Corporations actually have very little incentive to innovate, especially if they have as much market power as the telecomms.  But the main problem is one you touch on, innovation takes money and why should corporations spend money on innovation when (a) the current system is so bloody profitable for them, and (b) they can always rely on the government to spend taxpayer money to help them out.

          That is what it always comes down to.  I say fine, let taxpayers pay to put down the best pipes the world has ever seen.  But then the taxpayers own it and telecoms must now rent/lease the space based on taxpayers rules.

          Of course that will never happen either because of "teh socialism" and because rally the only thing government ever cares about is corporate profits.

  •  The real innovators (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    atana, Patango

    Were DARPA, all-public funded, and public universities. Without taxpayer money, the internet as we know it would not exist. This is a prime example of good government spending good money. Let's not forget that.

    Excessive literary production is a social offense. - George Eliot

    by pyramus on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:13:01 PM PDT

    •  I remember the Internet as we knew it (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sweatyb, greenbird, livingthedream

      If you were lucky, you had a T1 connection you shared with hundreds of others.  More likely you had dial-up.  

      A better point to make would be that government subsidy to utilities helped finance the broadband pipe we have today.  An even better argument would be to point out that countries with the highest broadband penetration are countries with the most active public investment in telco infrastructure.  

      •  public investment (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        rduran, livingthedream

        the problem is that currently, the alternative to ISPs laying fiber to the home is nothing.

        We can take the investment made by private companies (with public help) and nationalize it, but that's not going to put more fiber in the ground or hook up more rural areas or address the emerging issue of hyper-utilization.

        We need Congress to authorize spending $billions on infrastructure. New bridges, new rails, new tunnels and new wires and new investment in networking tech.

        But we don't have a Congress that's capable of that. Instead we have Kos writing a daily throw-away diary about how evil the ISPs are and how great the internet is.

    •  Misplaced (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Patango, Mage11an, TexasTwister

      If the US had converted DARPA's Internet projects from military to civilian agency oversight, the Internet would have grown with even more innovation than it did. Indeed, if the US prioritized civilian projects the way it does military, the country as a whole would be a lot better off overall.

      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

      by DocGonzo on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:36:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  RIGHT... as if a neocon knows anything (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DEMonrat ankle biter, The Marti

    about "innovation".

    They're still trying to figure out how to use a blade of grass to get ants out of an anthill to eat.

    Frankly I'm surprised that Feinstein isn't out there swinging he club to get that ramrodded through. If she is, she's doing a stealthy job of it.

  •  Why do not consumer buy thier own satellite (0+ / 0-)

    As a group , it could be in the 100 of million of dollars for the satellite   for a   one time fee and get free internet    for the duration of the Satellite,  and have Space X deliver it in space ,when it goes to the International Space Station

  •  FISA Immunity from Democrats (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brown Thrasher
    No reason why Democrats should do the same.

    No good reason. However, Obama wasn't alone when he voted in 2008 to give telcos immunity for warrantless wiretapping in the renewed FISA (that he'd campaigned on until that day as being "unequivocally opposed to" - until he won the Democratic primaries).

    Democrats aren't as bad as Republicans at acting on behalf of their corporate bribers like telcos. But they sure do a lot of it.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:25:06 PM PDT

  •  ...this has nothing to do with innovation... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    The Marti

    ...it has to do with the RW knowing they'll be able to take over the internet with their crap. It's that simple...

    Ignorance is bliss only for the ignorant. The rest of us must suffer the consequences. -7.38; -3.44

    by paradise50 on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:25:55 PM PDT

  •  Virgin Mobile (Sprint) Announces throttling (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    stevemb, The Marti

    Just got a message on my phone that they're going to throttle "big data users"

    Thank you FCC...not!

  •  Roads and cars (0+ / 0-)

     It ike saying road builders are responsible for automoile inovation.  The reality is a good easily accesible highway sytem helped make possible the varied drivng and vacation opportunities we have today.  Just as an excellent postal delivery system made possible Sears and other mail delivery based services.

    Inexpensive broadband will make possible the really good stuff.

  •  republicans haven't clue where to find innovators (0+ / 0-)

    or job creators.

  •  They're Innovating Us Downward (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    atana

    On the rec list now: "US ISPs Threaten to Slow Innovation and Network Upgrades if Reclassified Under Title II by FCC".

    Their cartel's lawyers are very innovative. How else do they get away with violating the 4th Amendment over and over on every American for years? Ingenious.

    "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." - HST

    by DocGonzo on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:38:40 PM PDT

  •  This is total baloney (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    livingthedream

    KOS, stick to a topic you might have some expertise in, telecommunications is not your sweet spot. I say this with all due respect but articles and positions like this are as ignorant and reckless as anything you see on right wing sights. If we are going to be taken seriously as a movement, we have to stop this at once and deal with facts.

    Kos says that telcos use the same pipes to bring you services which have been in place for decades or more. This is true for copper but dead wrong for fiber. Copper plant has been in place for a long time but copper plant is not immune to decay. It has to be maintained. The technology that allows you to use it for data has gone from non-existent due to the lack of cheap modems and RAS servers in the CO throughout the 80s and 90s to dial up systems that demanded constant upgrade of RAS's, radius servers, routers, modems and service from the early days of dial up in the mie-90s to the end of dial up with the creation of DSL in the early 2000s. Then DSL went through about 3 generations in the span of 5 years which demanded new DSLAMS, new modems, new services and so on. Outside plant service areas were designed for loops up to 18,000 feet for POTs. DSL does not like that distance so Telcos had to put DSLAMs closer to clients to get the speeds up. That meant new right of ways, new cabinets (at 30 grand a pop) to get loops under 10,000 feet. Then FTTH came along and the whole thing was swapped out at thousands of dollars per home and millions of dollars of new construction. All along, new softswitches were bought, new powerful routers, new DWDM gear, new accounting software, new CPE and so on and so on. So don't give me this nonsense that it was cheap, it ain't cheap. Add to this the nightmare of paying for content, the loss of voice to mobile operators and the only thing that is profitable is data which demands bigger and faster pipes constantly.

    Before you open your yap, get the facts. And no, I am not some right wing nut. I have been a liberal since before you were born and remain even more liberal than 99% of the folks that come to this board. Hell, I am a socialist which is exactly what this industry needs. Socialism.

    Do facts matter anymore?

    by Sinan on Wed May 14, 2014 at 02:53:11 PM PDT

    •  Sinan (0+ / 0-)
      Before you open your yap, get the facts. And no, I am not some right wing nut. I have been a liberal since before you were born
      Yeah , a liberal like Bill O'Reilly , now get off my lawn punk!!!!

      Beer Drinkers & Hell Raisers

      by Patango on Wed May 14, 2014 at 03:36:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Right. (0+ / 0-)

        Sir, I was a liberal when it meant something real. Try growing up with a draft card that says you might get your ass blown off in Nam and then having to make a decision to leave your nation. Like I said, Kos does a lot of good but this piece is pure crap.

        Do facts matter anymore?

        by Sinan on Thu May 15, 2014 at 07:26:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks for posting this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sinan

      I don't think ISPs should get paid by the content providers to deliver content from Google, Amazon or Netflix, however it's not fair to say ISPs are delivering current content to customers on just new wires leveraged on plant installed decades ago.   Don't trivialize the delivery structure. That physical layer and/or wireless layer that transports data costs a lot of money to develop technologically and to implement. It's not just about putting a few more high quality wires in the ground.  The technology at every delivery point has to be enhanced as well.  Higher bandwidth products are available to customers because of that investment and companies delivering HD on demand video like Netflix, Amazon and Google wouldn't be able to offer those products at all if higher BW rates weren't available products from ISPs.  

      Last I checked Amazon, Facebook, Netflix don't run national or metro networks, they have server farms and they pay middlemen to transport their content to ISPs for delivery to customers.  

  •  Hang on. Those "pipes"? We paid for them. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    livingthedream, Patango

    I recall an extra little tax/fee on my phone bill "to make certain people in rural Iowa" could connect to the internet or whatever.  Taxes I paid from Clinton until now.  (I don't know there are so many fees, but I am pretty sure I am still paying for "pipes".)  Just like we paid for the roads and the telephone wires ...WE paid for those "pipes", and I like my pipes like I like my government - democratic.

    These telcos need to recognize that the American People subsidized the build-out for the internet.  From it's inception at DARPA to the building of the internet superhighway.  It was those little fees from millions of phone bills month in and month out for nearly 2 decades that funded it.  I would like to know how much these cables cost and what percentage did we invest through these fees and tax breaks.  I bet we paid for all it.  And now that there's a way to squeeze out more money WITHOUT making good on their promises at the beginning of this deal, we're suppose to roll over and pay more for our own internet.  The telcos do not own that infrastructure.  We do.

  •  Exhibit 1 - smart phones (0+ / 0-)

    When the cellphone companies were in charge of phones we got phones from Motorola (USA), Nokia (Finland), Sony Ericsson (Sweden) and they could just about link to a limited walled garden of services, hand picked by the Cell companies. Back then Windows phones seemed like the leading edge G*d help us.

    It took Apple and Google to kick the cell phone to the next level with full internet access. Yes it also needed faster networks but it is no coincidence that as soon as Phone operating systems from Apple and Google became available everyone switched as soon as they could.

  •  Yeah. If it had been up to the telcos we would (0+ / 0-)

    still have dial phones, no internet and no cell phones.

    All this was done by innovators over the whining and whimpering of the telcos.

    And I am Kilrain of the 20th Maine. And I damn all gentlemen. Whose only worth is their father's name And the sweat of a workin' man Steve Earle - Dixieland

    by shigeru on Wed May 14, 2014 at 03:32:29 PM PDT

  •  Comcast innovates daily..at screwing customers n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Patango, 420 forever, Brown Thrasher
    •  10 bucks a month for an "HD Technology Fee" (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Brown Thrasher

      That has innovation written all over it.

      Also, 5 bucks/ month to rent a cable modem that can be purchased for 60 bucks (at least that's what I used to pay before I smartened up and purchased my own - I'm sure it's gone up since then)

      “In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.” Terry Pratchett

      by 420 forever on Wed May 14, 2014 at 04:07:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Wingnuts are never prouder (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Redfire

    Than when they can spew their wingnuttery in barely comprehensible English. Seriously, the most proud-to-be-ignorants were also, coincidentally, those most likely to engage in the strangest forms of grammatical English -- whether that be the runandonandonandon sentence, Random Capitalization of Words, or just plain overuse of "SCAREQUOTES" with parenthetical (bullshit).

    "When facts are reported, they deny the value of evidence; when the evidence is produced, they declare it inconclusive." -- Augustine, in The City of God.

    by Zek J Evets on Wed May 14, 2014 at 03:55:52 PM PDT

  •  The good news is... (0+ / 0-)

    Apparently Obama is no longer a Muslim.

    Now he's just:

    "Muslim Sympathizing"

    They've finally figured out what Obama's religion isn't.

    So...

    Progress!

    Or like, something... I dunno...

    /facepalm at bigotry replacing bigotry in order to correct bigotry.

    OMG, like, gag them with a multi-colored spoon. Like, ya know.

    by Jyotai on Wed May 14, 2014 at 04:29:09 PM PDT

  •  #SaveOurNet twitterbomb starts in 31 minutes (0+ / 0-)

    Twitterbomb Tonight at 8pm Eastern!

    From:     JR Gaillot, UniteBlue.org
    Date:     Today, 04:01:55 PM MDT

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Tomorrow the FCC could either kill or save Net Neutrality.

    Make no mistake, the recent push to end net neutrality is about privatizing and
    profiteering off a platform whose democratizing power rests in open access. Without
    it, Comcast and Verizon could singlehandedly slow down your access to websites from
    individuals, nonprofits and small businesses unless they pay higher fees that few
    can afford. Only big companies who can pay the tolls will be able to afford a fast
    lane, leaving the rest of us behind.

    Our internet is under attack by corporate greed. Please join UniteBlue tonight and
    help protect Net Neutrality. Lets call on the @FCC to ensure companies large and
     small have equal access to the Internet.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    #SaveOurNet

    Join us tonight at 8pm Eastern and help trend #SaveOurNet.

    Share only by direct messages until 8pm ET, then Tweet and retweet others heavily.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    A free internet unfettered by corporate control is vital to building an economy
    where everyone gets a fair shot and everyone plays by the same rules. Weakening
    net neutrality would undoubtedly damage smaller organizations and nonprofits like
    UniteBlue while benefitting corporate interests with big money. It will increase
     utility costs to have a faster access fee, decreasing small business revenues badly
    needed for hiring workers. A "slow lane" will prove frustrating to small businesses.

    Todd Park, the U.S. Chief Technology Officer and Assistant to the President, says
    "preserving an open Internet is vital not just to the free flow of information,
    but also to promoting innovation and economic productivity. Because of its openness,
    the Internet has allowed entrepreneurs -- with just a small amount of seed money
     or a modest grant -- to take their innovative ideas from the garage or the dorm
     room to every corner of the Earth, building companies, creating jobs, improving
     vital services, and fostering even more innovation along the way."

    We must come to terms with the ever increasing monopoly of telecom utilities and
     their avaricious usurping of "our commons" for large multinational corporations
     such as Verizon.

    We have all felt the loss of a free media in corporate sponsored content on mainstream
    media cable television programs. Now is not the time to allow competing telecom
    services to influence what you can see on the internet. We can put a voice to our
    outrage by working together to #SaveOurNet.

    Join us on Twitter tonight and make your voice heard.

    JR Gaillot
    Advisor
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Stronger Together
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Donations to UniteBlue are not tax-deductible.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Forward this email

    #3: ensure network neutrality; #2: ensure electoral integrity; #1: ensure ecosystemic sustainability.

    by ivote2004 on Wed May 14, 2014 at 04:30:33 PM PDT

  •  Telcom over reach in AT&T Yahoo email. (0+ / 0-)

    On May 15th I discovered I was now getting a "New" AT&T/Yahoo email. It has more colors and some options that I have yet to explore but I didn't get far before I was angered to no end. The very first line of my inbox now is spam directly from AT&T, it is spam that can not be removed. The place that would normally be a box that you can check or uncheck for the purpose of deleting is now a "$" (how fitting) that you can do nothing with. Where the time stamp would normally be there is the word "sponsored". It is not enough that AT&T is petitioning the FCC to fast lane their friends. They are now sponsoring spam to your inbox that you can not remove. I am assuming they are getting funds for pushing this spam.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site