Hi Tim, RE: "If this is seen as an argument that maybe a better solution to the bandwidth problem is satellite, then, yes, I would agree. But that's for another post.)"
You piqued my curiosity.
RE: "Other examples abound." This was very refreshing to read. A good read. Thanks.
RE: "selling out"
The VCs must have been completely different back then, because it's the VCs and their hand-chosen Board that define when sell out time is, unless you have controlling interest.
RE: "When interest rates are low, horizons can be longer."
That was a good read.
RE: "The point of this aside is that if *I* can survive a 48K dial up"
Mabye time has more value with each generation. Maybe the drive for speed is no longer driven by analytical minds (like it used to be), but by creative minds and communications. (Our marcom manager can bring her machine down to its knees, to say the least.) The way people communicate is different.
RE: "so that little Johnny can have a T1-grade line"
A co-founder of a large network company once told me he had a T1 going into his house. This was several years ago, so I pretty much had the same reaction you did. It sounded like a luxury. But, he was actually way ahead on the usability curve.
RE: "But it hasn't substantially crimped my style"
It actually sounds like it has
RE: "Even if such a "National Information Infrastructure Superhighway" is pork barrelled into existence, probably if and when the Dems take back the White House"
The Republican controlled White House recently announced something along these lines the other day.
RE: "So what will happen is that the corporations will get their subsidies...and these are precisely the folks able to justify laying their own lines...as indeed they have been!"
That's a good point. Maybe they should only give a tax break for doing the rural areas.
RE: "Fiber cables are in fact being laid, belying the notion that some kind of national effort is needed"
How come Palo Alto can't get fiber, even though some high-tech communication innovators are scratching their heads on this?
RE: "Having government subsidize or control a fiber buildout is a way to freeze innovation."
Project out the speed changes over ten years. Fiber holds a lot more data than cable and wire, and maybe in ten years too?
RE: "they had a crumbling or nonexistent telephone pole system, so they could justify leapfrogging to wireless."
Maybe it's our turn then to have grumbling fiber for ten years. Then we can leapfrog to wireless - maybe wireless would be ready by then.
RE: "Back to me. I have downloaded and printed about 5 reams' worth of technical papers...The claim that the U.S. will somehow lose its competitive advantage if...doesn't have fiber...is just plain nonsense."
Actually, what you described sounds just a tad less than competitive, because it's individualistic and point to point. Those trends are going down, not up.
RE: "Broadband will happen when it happens."
Meanwhile, other countries leapfrog the USA in communications?
Regards,
Amy J |
