Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: axial who wrote (30951)	8/12/2009 10:11:24 PM
From: Frank A. Coluccio	Respond to of 46821

Great post, Jim. I'll return to it later after I've had a bit of time to gather my thoughts. If I might make only one point at this time, however, it's this: It was during the late NINETEEN EIGHTIES, not late 2008, when I first read about the Japanese plans to effect a policy for an "all-fiber" nationwide presence some twenty years out. The story line went something like: Japan to Complete National Fiber To The Home Network by Year 2010. The same story was repeated in 1995 when those earlier intentions were solidified into a policy statement, as can be seen in this NY Times article: nytimes.com Similarly, we began posting articles about community fiber builds in Scandinavia, which led to entire city and then regional builds to serve FTTH end points, as early as 1998 on the Last Mile Technologies Thread here in SI, and then here in this forum in 1999 -- a full half-decade before Verizon first dipped its toe into the "last-mile" fiber pond. I make this point NOT to rebuke or criticize those who'd seek to remedy the situation, per se, but to point out that it's not quite fair to be comparing the circumstances surrounding the current stimulus initiatives with the successes of those countries you cited, whose policies were well thought out and allowed to evolve naturally with a specific set of goals in mind for well over a decade (or two, in the case of Japan). I'll grant you this, however, that your argument is only bolstered by the foregoing, when it comes to the need for setting national goals and policies. Not bad for someone who wasn't prepared to reply at this time, eh? FAC ------

To: axial who wrote (30951)	8/13/2009 12:43:33 AM
From: Peter Ecclesine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 46821

Hi Jim, >> If one disagrees with the infrastructure argument (as some do, here) then it's case closed. We get what we get, and that's good enough. What's more, we get it in the same regulatory regime that has perpetuated itself since the time of Alexander Graham Bell. If one disagrees with the regulatorium, we could at least dismantle the existing structure, and erect something more suitable to current realities. In itself, that would be a huge task. If we buy the infrastructure argument, then we must find a way to simultaneously address the regulatory issues, the structural requirements, and the capital requirements for FTTH: massive tasks, each compounding the difficulty of the other.<< Bruce Kushnick makes the point (on GC's list) that today's FCC has no concern about how we got to today's situation, nor if there are any remedies for the regulatorium, only an interest in how to spend what has been allocated. He who controls the present, controls the past. He who controls the past controls the future . . . {some of the talent going into government should never have left their day jobs.} petere