|
Welcome, Guest. Please Login.
|
||||
|
||||
| 1 | Discussion / Political Discussions / Cable v muni broadband in NC on: Jun 24th, 2010, 5:24pm |
| Started by Annie Collins | Post by Annie Collins | |
| http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/06/22/1516500/cable-industry-fighting-muni
cipal.html (courtesy of Jim Baller's list 6/24/10) Well, here is a complete shocker!!! Anyone knowing a thing about muni broadband knows these OLD arguments backwards and forwards. Here's hoping THAT state has any sense and doesn't pass that legislation. |
|
 Reply  Quote  Notify of replies
|
|
| 2 | Discussion / Political Discussions / NC Bill HB1252 on: May 7th, 2010, 1:01pm |
| Started by Annie Collins | Post by Annie Collins | |
| http://www.muninetworks.org/content/time-warner-reverses-direction-nc-fights-com
petition-new-strategy A wonderful article by Christopher Mitchell discussing a bill in NC (HB1252) set in motion by incumbents to squash the rights of communities to provide broadband services and to build networks. Sound familiar? The interesting twist one will immediately see in this bill is that the incumbents want to REQUIRE munis to use taxpayer dollars to fund their broadband networks. How interesting. As you'll remember the incumbents here and Lafayette claimed our cities would be using taxpayer dollars to fund the building of the network and if the builds "failed" this would all come back on the taxpayers and cost them a zillion dollars. As Mitchell points out no tax dollars are used in most publicly owned broadband networks (and none would've been used here either). Read the article. It's facinating. |
|
|
Reply Quote Notify of replies
|
|
| 3 | Discussion / Political Discussions / New DEREGULATION BILL hitting IL on: Apr 13th, 2010, 10:51pm |
| Started by Annie Collins | Post by Annie Collins | |
| http://callcenterinfo.tmcnet.com/news/2010/04/12/4723982.htm MAADD Urges Illinois Lawmakers to Update Telecom Laws This is nothing but an AT&T (incumbent) deregulation bill in IL. MAADD apparently (and foolishly) thinks by supporting this bill that by allowing AT&T to deregulate there will be job creation and poor areas will finally be served - bridging the digital divide. WHAT?! Are you kidding me? These message boards are full of examples where AT&T/SBC have broken promises/contracts made with legislatures, PEG channels, cities, etc... to get their legislation passed. I don't make this stuff up. Call your Rep. and Senators today to let them know this bill is the worst this you've ever heard of, and a telecommunications deregulation bill will only serve the incumbents, not the poor. |
|
|
Reply Quote Notify of replies
|
|
| 4 | Discussion / General Discussion / Internet connections fastest in S Korea on: Mar 31st, 2010, 11:40pm |
| Started by Annie Collins | Post by Annie Collins | |
| Why are internet connections fastest in S. Korea? Why is the U.S. listed as 17th in speed in the world? This article gives 5 possible reasons why the U.S. may be so far down on the list. Readers of the TCBB message boards, past and present, already know the answer to why the U.S. is 17th. Frankly, I am shocked the U.S. isn't much lower! There is no competition. No TRUE competition. Many markets are served by a monopoly. If not, a duopoly exists with a cable co. and a telecommunications co. who do not truly "compete" and lower their prices to fight for customers. It's like McDonald's and Burger King. Better yet...the Airline industry. Until someone like "Southwest" or "Jet Blue" can come into the market and drive prices lower than the duopolistic incumbents we will always be behind everyone else in the world. Perhaps that "Southwest" is a muni who wants to provide services via FTTH? Our system isn't working now. And our present incumbents don't want to build out to everyone to serve them. It isn't profitable for them. So why not let others serve their communities without huge battles and lawsuits? http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/03/31/broadband.south.korea/?hpt=C1 |
|
|
Reply Quote Notify of replies
|
|
| 5 | Discussion / Political Discussions / Lessons for Seattle from Lafayette on: Mar 5th, 2010, 11:51am |
| Started by Annie Collins | Post by Annie Collins | |
| http://www.publicola.net/2010/03/01/lessons-for-seattle-from-lafayette/<http ://www.publicola.net/2010/03/01/lessons-for-seattle-from-lafayette/> (from the Baller Herbst list 3-3-10) Great article about munis building fiber networks and the incumbent pushback they will inevitably encounter. The first of any battles such as this to be documented and used as a guide for future builds or referendums can be found at www.tricitybroadband.com . The Tri-Cities in IL and their battle to build a FTTH network garnered national attention in 2003 and 2004 because of the huge battle the incumbents waged against Fiber For Our Future (the citizen's group created to push the referendum and disseminate CORRECT information to residents about bonds, economic dev. opportunities, telemedical opportunities, etc...). FFOF helped the cities push their referendum ideas in 2003 and put their own referendum and financing model on the ballots in 2004 - neither passing. Information and articles in USA Today, Mother Jones Magazine, The Independent (in Lafayette, LA), and many more resources can be found on the message board and in some other areas on the www.tricitybroadband.com site. See examples of what type of tactics the incumbents will use against munis, as well as actual flyers, mailers, yard signs, push polls conducted, and a Batavia City Council speech made by a Regional Network V.P from SBC on our home page about fiber being an "unproven technology", etc.... It is important to note that in Lafayette's case (their referendum came after ours) the political will was there to stand behind a FTTH offering for all residents. Durel had his heels dug in for a battle, not to mention the fabulous citizen's group Lafayette Pro Fiber (www.lafayetteprofiber.com) that was created to push the referendum there by John St. Julien and Mike Stagg. Had there been more political will to build a network in the Tri-Cities then the referendums would've passed. In fact, St Charles, IL (because they are a home rule community) could've built their own network without the support of voters. The Tri-Cities also own all their own electric utilities and poles, had their own fiber networks in place, and could've used such a network (built out) for their own meter reading, not to mention several other things. Unfortunately many incumbents have also passed self-serving legislation in several states forbidding munis to build their own networks and provide services to all of their residents who want to chose such a service offering. Such a shame that House Reps. and State Senators are barraged with zillions of lobbyists from Cable Cos. and Telecommunications giants spewing misinformation who want such legislation passed. Many states who have passed such legislation pass other legislation requiring statewide franchising agreements to provide cable, internet and phone services instead of negotiating individual agreements with munis to provide their services in a community (in IL this legislation was pushed/sponsored/lobbied on behalf of AT&T). Entire legislatures seem to drink the incumbent Kool-Aid and buy the arguments made by incumbents that statewide franchises will help "create competition". Have they in IL? Of course not. PEG is now arguing that AT&T is not providing them with services (delivering services the way they were agreed upon) they said they would in their statewide franchise agreement in IL. There is a shocker. Had PEG listened to others trying to tell them that promises would not be met, or done research and seen incumbents in other states had defaulted on their promises on how services would be delivered to PEG, then perhaps they would not have given their blessing to pass such legislation in IL. There were many who fought against such legislation who just didn't have a big enough voice to be heard over all of those lobbyists. Once again we see how powerful lobbyists from the Telecommunications industry can be and how much they can spend on their lobbying efforts to get what they want when they want it. When will we learn that corporations do not care about anything other than their bottom lines - paying for golden parachutes, paying CEO's huge amounts of money for services, and being beholden to their shareholders? Do you really think incumbents "care" about the individual residents in your community and are just "looking out" for your best interests? Have we not seen enough examples of this in recent history to know better by now? Corporations should not be allowed to tell communities what services they can and can't provide to all of their residents. But that is exactly what they have been allowed to do in several states - including IL. Annie Collins Fiber For Our Future |
|
|
Reply Quote Notify of replies
|
|
| 6 | Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Google Fiber-to-the-Home experiment on: Feb 17th, 2010, 9:53am |
| Started by bigdog99 | Post by TJF | |
| The one difference this time is that we can and should have the full support of the Tri-City city councils. They officially had to remain neutral for the referendum. Now we need their full-throated support because Google is looking for locations that will not throw up a lot of red tape for the test. We need the municipalities to issue whatever permits are necessary and we need the cities's full cooperation with Google to get this project done correctly. The fact that we have a citizen group that helped promote the broadband project is a plus, but we need the backing of the city councils and we need them to file a joint application to Google as well. There are numerous questions on the municipal applications that need to be addressed. Hopefully, we can get the support of the cities. Otherwise, I don't think we'll get anywhere with Google. It might be helpful to send email to your city council reps and your city administrators. It doesn't hurt for them to authorize an application. Whether or not the cities actually participate will be up to a council vote and ultimately Google's decision. But we need them to at least apply to show there is some intent on their part. | |
|
Reply Quote Notify of replies
|
|
| 7 | Discussion / Political Discussions / Baller Herbst List Special 2/16/10 on: Feb 16th, 2010, 12:03pm |
| Started by Annie Collins | Post by Annie Collins | |
| Special from Jim Baller's Baller Herbst's List 2/16/10 From FCC Chairman Genachowski’s speech at NARUC today: “To meet the imperatives of global competitiveness and enduring job creation, we must have broadband networks of such unsurpassed excellence that they will empower American entrepreneurs and innovators to build and expand businesses here in the United States.” “Our [National Broadband Plan] will set goals for the U.S. to have the world’s largest market of very high-speed broadband users [by 2020]. A “100 Squared” initiative -- 100 million households at 100 megabits per second -- to unleash American ingenuity and ensure that businesses, large and small, are created here, move here, and stay here.” “And we should stretch beyond 100 megabits. The U.S. should lead the world in ultra-high-speed broadband testbeds as fast, or faster, than anywhere in the world. In the global race to the top, this will help ensure that America has the infrastructure to host the boldest innovations that can be imagined. Google announced a one gigabit testbed initiative just a few days ago -- and we need others to drive competition to invent the future.” |
|
|
Reply Quote Notify of replies
|
|
| 8 | Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Google Fiber-to-the-Home experiment on: Feb 12th, 2010, 1:15pm |
| Started by bigdog99 | Post by Annie Collins | |
| Gentlemen, Wonderful to hear your comments, and thank you for sending nominations in to Google.  I wanted to let you know that I have also submitted an application in to Google. I second everything you have said here and know all about what a fiber network could mean for the Tri-Cities. The arguments for why we should have Google build a network here are sound ones. We used many of these same arguments at the time of the referendum as well if you remember waaaaay back when. I believe all three cities should be nominated together. IMO, we have a much better chance of winning any bid as three cities who own their own electric utilities and are essentially right next to each other. The population we have together is better for testing than a smaller town. We (Fiber For Our Future) have always presented all three cities as a one-package deal in the past. No one should be ashamed of what we tried to do in the past. We would've been on the cutting edge back then. The incumbents just terrified the residents too much, and there was not enough money on our side to fight them. There also was not enough political will. Past referendums were not passed because of the FUD campaigns launched by the incumbents. Fiber For Our Future was the FIRST organization in the country to fully document and create a website (www.tricitybroadband.com) dedicated to showing the nation and those around the world what lengths incumbents will go through, and how much they will spend, to squash competition. Newpapers have been written about our plight. Magazines have printed our story. Lectures have been given at conferences about what to do and not do when citizen groups or munis put referendums on ballots in hopes of building fiber networks, and the list goes on and on. The money and time spent to defeat our referendums was enormous!! We give advice and tips to others around the country - free of charge. We want citizens and munis to "be prepared" to fight for the right to provide services to their communities. I'm extremely proud of the work we have done. We did this together. Thank you all. Let's show Google our fighting spirit. Let's show them we mean business. We fought hard for a fiber network back then and we are willing to fight for one now. |
|
|
Reply Quote Notify of replies
|
|
| 9 | Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Google Fiber-to-the-Home experiment on: Feb 11th, 2010, 1:03am |
| Started by bigdog99 | Post by TJF | |
| We've had some people asking about a smart power grid in Geneva. A smart grid allows the power company to power cycle customer equipment during peak power usage and in some cases sell excess power back to the power company. Customers participate in these energy saving proograms voluntarily and get a refund from the power company for being part of the program. Typically, power companies attach devices to equipment such as air conditioners. The devices receive radio signals to power cycle the equipment. These smart switches could be even smarter using IP connections to not only precisely control attached devices, but also to monitor thermostats to keep temperatures in an acceptable range. Customers would be able to set parameters and opt out on occasion. For example, if you were having a lot of guests for a party, you might not want the power company to cycle down your air conditioning. Any monitoring and control would have to be voluntary and flexible. You might choose to have the temperature in your home monitored along with your smoke alarms so that the fire department could dispatch equipment to your house if the temperature rises to an abnormal level and/or the smoke alarms detect smoke. That way you don't return to find your home burned to the ground. The OnStar system used in many automobiles is a perfect example of a monitoring system that can save lives. Any monitoring systems used for public safety would have to be intalled on a voluntary basis and most likely at the homeowner's expense and we would have to make the system as unobtrusive as possible. I think the life-saving potential of these systems may outweigh privacy concerns, at least for some people. We can make our homes smarter and safer and that's part of the promise of high-speed Internet. | |
|
Reply Quote Notify of replies
|
|
| 10 | Discussion / General Discussion / Re: Google Fiber-to-the-Home experiment on: Feb 10th, 2010, 4:39pm |
| Started by bigdog99 | Post by psennett | |
| Quote from TJF on Feb 10th, 2010, 4:31pm: Google is also looking at new uses and applications that these kinds of speeds will allow. Whoever submits an application should maybe note that this kind of bandwidth opens up the possibilty of telemetry applications that can be used for pulic safety. For example, we can monitor homes for explosive gases, carbon monoxide, dangerously low temperatures, water in basements, etc. We can have intelligent electric, gas, and water meters that allow remote reading. We can monitor plants for chemical leaks (think Burgess-Norton). We can do noise level monitoring for those sensitive types who are always complaining about noise. We could have smart IP controlled switches for automatic cycling of power during peak usage periods, which would allow much more precise access than radio controlled switches used by many power companies today. Google has even introduced it's own smart meter that you can use to monitor electricity usage in your home. The possibilities are endless. Well, to be honest, some of the things you mentioned are reasons I wouldn't like to have the government involved (Big Bro monitoring my thermostat), but those things would certainly appeal to the folks at Google, so I agree they should be put into any official proposal. |
|
|
Reply Quote Notify of replies
|
|
Fiber For Our Future - Due to bots, send an email to info @ tricitybroadband.com to register a new user account. We hope to have this issue resolved soon. » Powered by YaBB 2.1!
YaBB © 2000-2005. All Rights Reserved.
