Comments on: Getting beyond the magic broadband bullet theory

By: Leon

Leon — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 01:33:39 +0000

What about indirect benefits of new technologies that work better with broadband? e.g. if broadband powers internet TV, or smart fridges/door locks, then there would be more jobs in these areas. It’s like saying, if we’re still stuck in 2G or if touchscreen tech didn’t exist, there would be no jobs for all involved in modern smartphones.

By: Ken Demlow

Ken Demlow — Sat, 03 Nov 2012 16:34:17 +0000

Hi Craig!
Good article and thanks for continuing the good work!
Hopefully our paths will cross soon.
Ken Demlow
NewCom Technologies

By: dcred

dcred — Wed, 31 Oct 2012 17:32:51 +0000

Lifeline, like many programs, isn’t supposed to lift people out of poverty. It’s to provide a valuable service to people who can’t afford what most people take for granted. There is nothing wrong with making low-income lives somewhat more bearable.

By: Craig Settles

Craig Settles — Tue, 30 Oct 2012 16:59:23 +0000

Well, there are two ways to look at the survey. 1) It doesn’t present quantifiable proof, which is what people lose a lot of time debating about when they’re trying to make a decision whether or not to move forward. However, the technology as applied to the task of economic development is too new a practice. There is work being done to put metrics in place, but its time consuming and we won’t have results on a national scale for a while.

2) At the community level, there are ways to target needs and predict to some extent certain economic outcomes. The broadband project team can then go on to say “if we achieve these goals, there will be some quantitative or qualitative value that makes the investment worthwhile. In this context, my survey gives communities a framework for creating an “if, then” set of exercises that is likely more applicable and more accurate for them than any research (or guestimating) that’s been done on a national scale.

By: Marc Canter

Marc Canter — Mon, 29 Oct 2012 18:19:48 +0000

So what you’re saying is that there still is no real proof – and that this survey is a collection of opinions and conjecture. I guess that’s a good thing – but still has to be taken with the proverbial grain of salt.

You points are well said – clearly it’s about what you DO with the bandwidth, not the bandwidth itself.

Preparing normal people for on-line jobs is our goal and hopefully others – as well. There’s plenty of programmer training on-line plays. But where’s the training for “non-programming jobs?”

Here’s a start: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8095E64ED4F65A88

By: markleiser.phd.law

markleiser.phd.law — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 14:29:29 +0000

Reblogged this on #Hashtag - Thoughts on Law, Technology, the Internet, and Social Media and commented: Getting beyond the magic broadband bullet theory Too many national discussions about broadband’s impact on economic development get caught up in wonky mumble jumble and blue-sky numbers. Meanwhile, at the community level, many a discussion regresses to “why should my tax dollars help teenagers surf YouTube?” No wonder U.S. broadband speeds languish behind Iceland and Slovenia. Policymakers (many well-intentioned), government agencies, and elected officials, as well as big telecos’ lobbyists conning their way into more government subsidies for empty broadband promises, seem to fall into two camps hindering progress.

By: Chris Conder

Chris Conder — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 13:06:15 +0000

I think the main reason for investing in a fit for purpose infrastructure is to save money. I saved £211 yesterday in half an hour searching for the best value washing machine.
Governments can save money when citizens can use eGovernment online.
Health authorities can save vast amounts of money with remote monitoring and consultations not requiring physical examinations.
Education can be available to all, at any time, and be much cheaper to deliver online.
Quality of life? How can you measure that in monetary terms? Keeping in touch with distant friends and relatives is priceless.