FTTH Council

[alienc]

2010+ - Exaflood

1996 - Gigaflood

1990 - Megaflood

1980 - Kiloflood

1150s - Floods

Food for thought people, food for thought.

Think of the children.

[longviewtexasfiber]

Great video by Fiber-to-the-Home Council. Google Fiber for Communities is a coming of age technological masterpiece! The applications, devices, and technology that will evolve around Google's 1 gigabit per second fiber-to-the-home experiment blow my mind. Local entrepreneur Shawn Hill has already created a new startup around Google Fiber. He's working on his latest technology startup now. He says, " the only difference in this one and others is it involves bricks, communities, & computers."

[pratt123]

So basically this video is saying that network neutrality is dumb. I guess Big Cable and the telecos are loving this propaganda.

[rosenwannabe]

There's like this huge introductory explanation of what the internet consists of and all it talks about is downloading videos... That's not even its most important use. People shop and communicate over the internet. Is that so unimportant? I had always seen the internet as a revolutionary step in distant communications.

[Freshbott2]

Yeah after all, that's what it was created for.

[dalethomasdewitt]

But the important point is forcing the robber barons' hand. Movies do just that. FTTH is the only way they (the selfish rich humans) can accommodate the demand or be left in the corporate annals of history. Obviously movies and shopping as well as second rate informational sources can detract from serious skill development while studying in school. Now if the car could travel super fast there would be no need for cities and their forging psyche. But that's another story.

[soilworked86]

The net is a series of tubes full of gatorbytes,

[scalar007]

absolutly neccessary investment for our future

[amexnamedluis]

Teleco's need to invest in FTTH like verizon and drop copper already.

[soylentgreenb]

And how exactly is the exa flood more of a concern than the much hyped giga flood of 1996? The very same issues where raised, the very same solutions were raised.

In the end, just adding more capacity was cheaper.

[BoktaiFrog]

Clever and educational. I liked it and it's interesting to learn a little bit about the future of the internet. I guess technology really is taking over.

[Thundercross]

2) What I think they should do is do what the Japanese telcos did, and open their infrastructure to startup companies, but charge them royalties for the usage. If they stop offering service directly and only through these other companies, we'd see an environment where they can profit from upgrading infrastructure and breaches of net neutrality will most certainly result in a loss of business.

[Thundercross]

1) I've heard that Japan forced their telecoms to open up their infrastructure to competition, and this led to an increased level of competition, and massive amounts of upgrades. Maybe the US telecoms do need a third revenue streams, but websites are not acceptable as a revenue stream.

[Gamemako]

Cute, clever, and as "educational" as the Ministry of Love.

[bigislandhawaii]

Interview with Larry Irving at wowtechminute website.

[djfilitico]

The video only mentions large corporations's reasons why this should happen. Innovation has nothing to do with the argument. It's the allocation of resources going to a handful of corporations that I have a problem with. You want to turn the net into what Radio/TV has become: The average person has no input. I do not want another Telecom Act of '96 to happen where everyone loses except billion dollar companies. Net Neutrality is government regulation that curbs a few to protect the many.

[bsteinhauser]

Good video. Finally some information to counter the MoveOn crowd.

[vingle]

I should add that I think this is a very nicely made video. But I think the issue is about control of the media, not costs, otherwise they would simply offer two-tier pricing to consumers for broadband, rather than producers.

[vingle]

Just six companies currently control the distribution of some 90% of films at cinemas in the US. If the makers of the film have their way, the Internet will become much the same - a lucky powerful few who can afford to are able to distribute the films and music and so forth that they like across the web, while independent creators have to deal with second rate services.

[showtime271]

Is the Internet Ready to Break?

By Edward Cone

[showtime271]

Can't say I believe the telecoms need a third revenue stream to increase the speed of the network, they can start by using the 14 billion Verizon had in profits last year and see where we are after that. Regardless, I would rather have a short term setback in speed to keep the level playing field structure of the Internet that has resulted in amazing innovation such as YouTube among many others

[lovevibration]

won't this trend produce a financial windfall for Level 3 Communications ?

[usernamebrogs]

I'm all for the idea of net neutrality. But I think this debate is about trade-offs between innovation at the core level and at the content and internet application level. Not as easy as net neutrality = democracy, opposition = evil telecoms

[EarlCamembert]

Do you want universal broadband at an affordable price? Come back to the beginning, a common carrier open to all. But no free lunch to any..

[mattcarolan]

Nicely done. "Net neutrality" is a euphemism for coercive redistribution of costs.

[jfw2020]

Exremely well done. Brilliant arguments against so-called "net neutrality".

[net2bfree4u]

Very informative, well made video.