On 07/01/2010 02:04 PM, Gadi Evron wrote:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?hpt=...
Interesting...
Finland isn't first. http://www.comcom.admin.ch/aktuell/00429/00457/00560/index.html?lang=en&msg-id=13239
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org> wrote:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?hpt=...
In the US, the Communications Act of 1934 brought about the creation of the "Universal Service Fund." The idea, more or less, was that every phone line customer contributed to the fund (you'll find it itemized on your phone bill) and the phone companies had to charge the same for every phone line regardless of where delivered in their territory but when initially installing an unusually difficult (expensive) phone line the phone company was entitled to reimburse its cost from the fund. In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate" program) instead of improving rural communications... -- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
On 1 July 2010 23:17, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate" program) instead of improving rural communications...
As someone who's always been in the "tech" field, the amount spent on ICT in schools has always shocked and appalled me. Bring back the Acorn Archimedes and ECONET! M
On 7/1/2010 18:14, Matthew Walster wrote:
On 1 July 2010 23:17, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate" program) instead of improving rural communications...
As someone who's always been in the "tech" field, the amount spent on ICT in schools has always shocked and appalled me.
Bring back the Acorn Archimedes and ECONET!
Does anybody know how much the Big Sky Telegraph cost, and who paid for it? -- Somebody should have said: A democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Freedom under a constitutional republic is a well armed lamb contesting the vote. Requiescas in pace o email Ex turpi causa non oritur actio Eppure si rinfresca ICBM Targeting Information: http://tinyurl.com/4sqczs http://tinyurl.com/7tp8ml
On Fri, Jul 02, 2010 at 12:14:42AM +0100, Matthew Walster wrote:
On 1 July 2010 23:17, William Herrin <bill@herrin.us> wrote:
In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate" program) instead of improving rural communications...
As someone who's always been in the "tech" field, the amount spent on ICT in schools has always shocked and appalled me.
Don't get me started on ICT in schools. Please. - Matt -- <Igloo> I remember going to my first tutorial in room 404. I was most upset when I found it.
Around 1991 I offered (dial-up) internet to the school district offices in Boston for $1/month/office, 10 districts, $10/month, $120/year, shareable accounts. The person from the board of ed I was talking to said free would be a problem as it might be seen as some sort of graft etc. and might be complicated to "clean up". I figured it might let them play around with it and "inject" it into the culture and we could go from there. The person I was speaking to knew what the internet was etc. and was appreciative of the offer. It seemed like a start. A couple of weeks later she calls me and says the response from her powers that be was: If we have $120/year to waste on internet connections ``we'' can think of other uses for that $120!!!" so thanks but no thanks. The Boston education budget is about $800M today, so maybe it was $500M back then? Whatever, hundreds of millions. But they fight over the crumbs! -b
On Jul 1, 2010, at 6:17 PM, William Herrin wrote:
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org> wrote:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?hpt=...
In the US, the Communications Act of 1934 brought about the creation of the "Universal Service Fund." The idea, more or less, was that every phone line customer contributed to the fund (you'll find it itemized on your phone bill) and the phone companies had to charge the same for every phone line regardless of where delivered in their territory but when initially installing an unusually difficult (expensive) phone line the phone company was entitled to reimburse its cost from the fund.
In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate" program) instead of improving rural communications...
Sen. Larry Pressler (R-S.D.) invented the Internet ? Regards Marshall
-- William D. Herrin ................ herrin@dirtside.com bill@herrin.us 3005 Crane Dr. ...................... Web: <http://bill.herrin.us/> Falls Church, VA 22042-3004
On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, William Herrin wrote:
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org> wrote:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html?hpt=...
In the US, the Communications Act of 1934 brought about the creation of the "Universal Service Fund." The idea, more or less, was that
The Universal Service Fund was created as a result of the Bell divesture in 1984; and extended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It didn't exist before then. There was the Kingsbury Agreement in 1913 (One System, One Policy, Universal Service), but universal service didn't mean the same thing. Universal service meant if you had a phone, it could call any other phone; but there wasn't a goal of a phone in every house until the 1960s.
every phone line customer contributed to the fund (you'll find it itemized on your phone bill) and the phone companies had to charge the same for every phone line regardless of where delivered in their territory but when initially installing an unusually difficult (expensive) phone line the phone company was entitled to reimburse its cost from the fund.
As part of the natural monopoly, there was a system of rate averaging and settlements. But there was often radically different prices based on public policy goals, for example business phone users paid more and residential phone users paid less. Long distance prices were kept high in order to keep monthly residential bills low. Its very difficult to maintain public policy price differentials in a competitive environment; but it was also difficult to maintain those prices even in a monopoly environment. The early ARPANET/Internet indirectly benefited from some of those public policy pricing decisions in the US.
In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate" program) instead of improving rural communications...
The 1996 Universal Service Fund also expanded who paid into the fund. If the Universal Service Fund is expanded again to pay for "broadband," the biggest question is how will the "contribution base" be expanded to pay for it?
Does a "... certain inventor of the Internet ..." refer to the High Performance and Communications Act of 1991, also known as the "Gore Act"? The 1991 Act, based on a study by Dr. Leonard Kleinrock ("Towards a National Research Network") created the commercial Internet that we know and work with today. -----Original Message----- From: Sean Donelan [mailto:sean@donelan.com] Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 7:22 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, William Herrin wrote:
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org> wrote:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html? hpt=T2
In the US, the Communications Act of 1934 brought about the creation of the "Universal Service Fund." The idea, more or less, was that
The Universal Service Fund was created as a result of the Bell divesture in 1984; and extended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It didn't exist before then. There was the Kingsbury Agreement in 1913 (One System, One Policy, Universal Service), but universal service didn't mean the same thing. Universal service meant if you had a phone, it could call any other phone; but there wasn't a goal of a phone in every house until the 1960s.
every phone line customer contributed to the fund (you'll find it itemized on your phone bill) and the phone companies had to charge the same for every phone line regardless of where delivered in their territory but when initially installing an unusually difficult (expensive) phone line the phone company was entitled to reimburse its cost from the fund.
As part of the natural monopoly, there was a system of rate averaging and settlements. But there was often radically different prices based on public policy goals, for example business phone users paid more and residential phone users paid less. Long distance prices were kept high in order to keep monthly residential bills low. Its very difficult to maintain public policy price differentials in a competitive environment; but it was also difficult to maintain those prices even in a monopoly environment. The early ARPANET/Internet indirectly benefited from some of those public policy pricing decisions in the US.
In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate" program) instead of improving rural communications...
The 1996 Universal Service Fund also expanded who paid into the fund. If the Universal Service Fund is expanded again to pay for "broadband," the biggest question is how will the "contribution base" be expanded to pay for it?
On Jul 2, 2010, at 10:33 AM, Holmes,David A wrote:
Does a "... certain inventor of the Internet ..." refer to the High Performance and Communications Act of 1991, also known as the "Gore Act"? The 1991 Act, based on a study by Dr. Leonard Kleinrock ("Towards a National Research Network") created the commercial Internet that we know and work with today.
I don't know, but I do know that Larry Pressler was the sole sponsor of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which is where E-rate came from. This was when the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, and as far as I know Senator Gore had nothing to do with this bill; he didn't even offer any amendments. None of this is helping me configure any routers, so I am going to shut up about this now. Regards Marshall
-----Original Message----- From: Sean Donelan [mailto:sean@donelan.com] Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 7:22 AM To: nanog@nanog.org Subject: Re: Finland makes broadband access a legal right
On Thu, 1 Jul 2010, William Herrin wrote:
On Thu, Jul 1, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Gadi Evron <ge@linuxbox.org> wrote:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/TECH/web/07/01/finland.broadband/index.html? hpt=T2
In the US, the Communications Act of 1934 brought about the creation of the "Universal Service Fund." The idea, more or less, was that
The Universal Service Fund was created as a result of the Bell divesture
in 1984; and extended by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. It didn't exist before then. There was the Kingsbury Agreement in 1913 (One System, One Policy, Universal Service), but universal service didn't mean the same thing. Universal service meant if you had a phone, it could call any other phone; but there wasn't a goal of a phone in every house until the 1960s.
every phone line customer contributed to the fund (you'll find it itemized on your phone bill) and the phone companies had to charge the same for every phone line regardless of where delivered in their territory but when initially installing an unusually difficult (expensive) phone line the phone company was entitled to reimburse its cost from the fund.
As part of the natural monopoly, there was a system of rate averaging and settlements. But there was often radically different prices based on public policy goals, for example business phone users paid more and residential phone users paid less. Long distance prices were kept high in order to keep monthly residential bills low. Its very difficult to maintain public policy price differentials in a competitive environment;
but it was also difficult to maintain those prices even in a monopoly environment.
The early ARPANET/Internet indirectly benefited from some of those public policy pricing decisions in the US.
In 1996 a certain inventor of the Internet decided that the universal service fund needed to pay for PCs in rural schools (the "E-Rate" program) instead of improving rural communications...
The 1996 Universal Service Fund also expanded who paid into the fund. If the Universal Service Fund is expanded again to pay for "broadband," the
biggest question is how will the "contribution base" be expanded to pay for it?
On Jul 2, 2010, at 10:51 13AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Jul 2, 2010, at 10:33 AM, Holmes,David A wrote:
Does a "... certain inventor of the Internet ..." refer to the High Performance and Communications Act of 1991, also known as the "Gore Act"? The 1991 Act, based on a study by Dr. Leonard Kleinrock ("Towards a National Research Network") created the commercial Internet that we know and work with today.
I don't know, but I do know that Larry Pressler was the sole sponsor of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which is where E-rate came from. This was when the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, and as far as I know Senator Gore had nothing to do with this bill; he didn't even offer any amendments.
And while Gore was president of the Senate in 1996, he wasn't Senator Gore then... --Steve Bellovin, http://www.cs.columbia.edu/~smb
On Fri, 2 Jul 2010, Steven Bellovin wrote:
On Jul 2, 2010, at 10:51 13AM, Marshall Eubanks wrote:
On Jul 2, 2010, at 10:33 AM, Holmes,David A wrote:
Does a "... certain inventor of the Internet ..." refer to the High Performance and Communications Act of 1991, also known as the "Gore Act"? The 1991 Act, based on a study by Dr. Leonard Kleinrock ("Towards a National Research Network") created the commercial Internet that we know and work with today. I don't know, but I do know that Larry Pressler was the sole sponsor of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which is where E-rate came from. This was when the Republicans controlled both houses of Congress, and as far as I know Senator Gore had nothing to do with this bill; he didn't even offer any amendments. And while Gore was president of the Senate in 1996, he wasn't Senator Gore then...
Snopes covers urban legends http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp Phil Agre traces the story back to a source at the time http://web.archive.org/web/20040603092645/commons.somewhere.com/rre/2000/RRE... While you can't configure your router with politics, politics sometimes wants to tell you how to configure your routers.
participants (12)
-
Barry Shein -
Gadi Evron -
Holmes,David A -
Lamar Owen -
Larry Sheldon -
Marshall Eubanks -
Matthew Palmer -
Matthew Walster -
Sean Donelan -
Stefan Spühler -
Steven Bellovin -
William Herrin