FCC Moves To Fund Rural Broadband

50

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

ryansh

Let me see. We are taking money away from phone companies that make it cost effective to supply rural areas with phone service to put a 300K+ fiber fed node in an area that supplies 10 houses with DSL?

If someone buys a plot of land a mile away from the nearest phone cable all he has to do is supply a service wire to the edge of his property. This money helps pay for the (depends) $10k dollar to extend the phone cable to his property. At $25 per month phone service this line of cable is paid for in roughly 33 years. Wait there are other expenses on that mile of cable and the 10 miles before it. Due to gun shot, bird, rodent, farm equipment, weather/lightning and drunk driver damage that takes place over time you've just tacked on another 10k easy (Less if we can find the farmer or drunk driver and make them pay). I forgot the tweakers like to steal that cable also.  Prices for service will have to go up.

The only way i can see All Rural people getting high speed internet is through WIMAX and/or cell sites. Even then they are not even close to putting out the bandwidth to signal range that was proposed in the specs. Wireless companies are trying hard to increase badwidth and speed of their broadband. At 30-45 dollars a month A 2 Gig limit is pretty crappy and that's where the FCC should do something.

For those of you who have wireless broadband and can't game STFU. At least you can do you homework and surf at decent speed which is all the goverment really wants.

I live and work in rural California and every town in my area has ipdsl and soon will have iptv. Unfornunately the dsl only goes 3 miles out of town and iptv will only be available to people within 3k feet from the central office. Some of these towns have a population of 200-800 with half living in town and the other half living in 30 square mile area around them.

I know these companies are far behind where they should be in dsl footprint but that's another Goverment regulation story I can tell you if you ask (I hope you know it already).

avatar

bling581

The FCC should start kicking butt and making the broadband companies do what they should be doing and expanding their infrastructure instead of using our tax dollars to do it. When there's little reasons for the ISP's to spend extra money on stuff like this what do you think they're going to do?

avatar

Markitzero

Ya, as of now they don't want to touch Rural Area which leave those areas in 80-90s because there are some areas that can only get 28Kbps Sync Speed for Dial-up in the USA. So areas like were I live and others are being Left in the dust when it comes to Technology. For example Apple made it to were there is NO DVD Media for OSX and you have to have broadband to Install the OS. Then Games alone that have the DRM that has to talk over the web and 1 burb it quits you out of a Game even on Single player. Then with PSPs they are trying to do away with UMDs with the PSP and you have to download the game from the web so PSP owners like me are stuck alot of times with PSP-1000 and PSP-2000 that both take UMDs 

 

I try to play Battlefield BC2 and my connection is Wireless and so as Wireless can be unstable so like I can go up to knife someone to get there tags and oh Disconnected from EA Server unknown if it registers locally on the Client or not.

avatar

aldenf

Come on people.  The telecommunications companies are in it solely to make a buck.  There is little to no public service component to their business model...  My only choices used to be dial-up, satellite or one-way cable (still need the dial-up).  In March of 2006 Verizon started offering DSL @ 1.5 Mb.  To this day, these are still the only residential choices I have.  While better than no broadband, it is slim pickings.  I realize I live in somewhat of a rural area (for the Mid-Atlantic region).  But I’m still only 65 miles from Manhattan and 68 miles from Center City Philadelphia.  Capped cellular service is really not the answer either.  It’s time the telecommunication companies were forced (with small subsidies) to expand the infrastructure to cover 99.9% of Americans affordably.  Until broadband is ubiquitous, it’s of limited value beyond simple entertainment.

avatar

schwit

For the people who live in rural areas I sympathize, but you chose to live there. Along with cleaner air, less light pollution and quieter nights comes less access to urban amenities such as high speed internet, diverse restaurant choices and cultural events.

It's a tradeoff that's easy to remedy ... decide what is important to you and then move to a location that meets your needs.

avatar

goodtime

What about the people who have lived in rural areas long before having internet was important? What about farmers who would have to give up their jobs to move? Idiot.

avatar

Markitzero

Also about the Situation I am in is that when I had to move to the Rural Area is that before I moved there was DSL so I thought it had what I needed but from the time that I moved and got Settled I called Verizon and they said "Sorry the Central Office is Full and all we can offer you is Dial-up". Verizon is doing when people Cancel there DSL because they are moving they are not reopening the Slots and were I am it is a Monopoly for Landline Based internet which is WAY Stable when Wireless.

avatar

Holly Golightly

Great, more of our tax dollars going to remote areas. What the FCC should do is regulate broadband providers by banning data caps all together. That is something that will benefit the 90% of American voters. Most people who reside in rural areas are farmers. With all that nature around their homes, they can have fun doing other things like taking a hike over the mountains. Why should they waste their time on the internet? I live in a city and I have no choice. It is either go to the internet, or go to the bar. Although with a life like this, you can't help but to drink booze.

avatar

stinkypeepers

This has to be one of the stupidest fuckin things I have ever read.  "They can have fun doing other things like taking a hike over the mountains.  Why should they waste their time on the internet?"  What the fuck?  Are you stupid?  You make it seem like living in the middle of nowhere all they have to do is climb mountains and do shit outside all. the. time.  Uh, my parents run a machine shop.  Ya know, a business?  So climbing mountains and getting to know oneself through nature aint exactly a priority of theirs.  Running a business on dial-up is difficult.  "Hey you guys get those plans I e-mailed you?"  Nope, were still downloading that shit lolz.  As for living in the city.  Really?  All you have to do is "go to the internet, or go to the bar"?  You must live in the shittiest city ever built, or are 40 and live in your mum's basement because, damn son.  There is ALWAYS something to do in the city, you just need to get off your ass and look.

avatar

Holly Golightly

I happen to live in "The Greatest City of the World" which happens to be the city so nice they named it twice. New... York... City... And believe me, there is not much to do but pay $20 for the same museums, Pay $20 for nightclubs, or pay $20 for the movie theaters. Which I am sure they have out there in rural areas as well. Fact is, there are more free things to do in rural areas like go fishing, hiking, or even hunting. You can't do any of these free things out in the concrete jungle. If I lived in rural areas, I would not be on the internet talking to you. I would be having fun doing free things in nature, instead of sitting down typing out of pure boredom. Also I am not a 40 year old man living in my mother's basement. I am a 27 year old woman who is in college and does not have time to go out much because I have to study, which is what I got to do now. "Cheerio Pip Pip"

avatar

stinkypeepers

If the city is so great then why are you having a hard time finding something to do that requires payment?  They have a park in NY.  I think its called Central Park?  Do you have to pay $20 to get in?  I doubt it.  There are free shows, free music events and all kinds of other free shit going on all the time.  But because you go to college I guess you don't have time to really look, even though its not too difficult.  I guarantee that if you lived in a rural area with dial-up, or no internet at all that you'd die of boredom.  You can only climb the same "mountains" (realistically they're just 'big' hills) and climb the same trails so many times.

avatar

Holly Golightly

Umm, Central Park is in Manhattan. I have been there many times and access to the Wollman rink is not free. Central Park is very small actually. I have walked from West to East and from South to North. There are plenty of baseball fields, but not much nature or wildlife to observe. When I went to Wisconsin and Puerto Rico, I had so much fun out in their rural parts. Nature hikes, camping, and spend a lot of late nights with friends getting lost in the woods. To me, that is fun. Although we did watch out for bears in Wisconsin. This is why living in rural areas is more fun then sitting on your ass typing to strangers you will never see.

avatar

goodtime

Yeah, because every rural area is a friggn tourst destination with all those things to do isn't it??? Most of it, including where I live, is farmland, or a beat up old woods; which get boring once your about 12. In the city, I'm pretty sure it's easy to meet up with friends and do something fun, while out here, you have have to plane everything and spend half your time driving around. I can't just 'walk to a friends house' like people in a city can.

avatar

Holly Golightly

Sure... You could walk around the city. I mean, if you are in the good parts, because cities are legendary for their slumlords and violent ghettos. Of course, every city has a downtown section strictly for the rich. There is not much to do in the city because you need a lot of money. What if you want to hang out with your friends? Sure, there is the corner... There is the pump... And heck, there is even small parks like Central Park which are free to visit... But everything else cost money, and camping in the city is impossible. The rural areas I was at I could walk. Granted, the walks were a little long and boring, but that can easily change once you got a bike. You can really get to know your community better in rural places. In big cities where the population is anywhere from 500,000 to 7,000,000 people... That is waaay too many people to get to know. Not only that, when you live in a big apartment building, you are not going to want to stop on every floor to get to know them. Chances are they are at work and when they arrive home, they do not wish to be bothered because they are so tired and very stress from working at the jobs they hate. So the best thing to do when you are in a big city, is to go on the internet. Therefore, broadband speed is a must. There is nothing else better to do in the city.  

avatar

stinkypeepers

Then whats holding you back from doing what you love?

avatar

Holly Golightly

College... Mama... Money... Boyfriend... Many outside influences stop my "nutty" ideas, believe it or not.

avatar

callum0001

Rural internat isnt important? There are so many benefits to having it, if anything they can make much better use of them than all the city slickers. Online delivery- instead of driving into town. Paying bills and not having to wait 3 days for the rural post. Facebook- City people can just go around the block to see their mates wheras in rural communities they can be 20km+ away. Those are just a few examples!

avatar

Holly Golightly

But why would you want to see your mates, or go to FaceBook at that. In a rural area, you got tons of nature. If I lived in a rural area, my best friend would be nature and all of the animals. Of course I would know all of my neighbors first and last names, and the community would be like an extended family. This can not be achieved in big cities because there are too much people to "get to know" and often is not, they are too busy on FaceBook. Believe it or not, people in small villages are living the life. To truly go out and have fun. Why waste all that time sitting on a computer when you can become more connected with the forest? As for online delivery... I do not know if this would really benefit businesses like FreshDirect or whatever. They would have to spend a ton of money on gas, and those prices are insane! No regular business would want to privately deliver goods to them. Cheaper to go with the rural post. But then again, why waste your time online when you have all of those animals, trees, and neighbors to have fun with. I am envious of that kind of life style, believe it or not.

avatar

callum0001

AMERICA- where country people like to look at mountains and have fun with trees and stuff, and where city people know too many people and cant like totally catch up with them all AT THE SAME TIME. What a hard life you live holly. Ill make sure to send you a picture of a leaf sometime but I imagine my dial up connection will timeout before I get to upload it SORRY!

avatar

Holly Golightly

Umm, if you need to go to someone's house in the city... There must be an emergency. Because this is not really accepted here. You have to consider other people's schedules too. This is why you email them with a fast connection and plan to meet them the next week. Not right now. Come on, you should know better about American culture.

avatar

Markitzero

Ok i know someone would make a comment like this on this news item. 

 

I am a Techy and have to live in a Rural Area because I have no other choice. Verizon were I live for internet is still Dial-up which goes 33.6Kbps - 46.6Kbps with HIGH packet loss. The Wireless ISP I am on I am paying $56 US for 5Mbps and 75GB Cap so no netflix still and there is no Cable TV or internet were I am it is eaither over the air TV or satellite TV.

For internet FIXED: Dial-up MOBILE:3G WIRELESS: Satellite , WISP

They are VERY Pricey and Very Low caps. Satellite internet caps can go from 250MB-17GB depending on the provider. 

I live in Phelan, California, Also a PC Gamer having to live in Rural area. I have bee there for 2 years and there is no DSL at all only Dial-up for landline internet and I was paying $80 US for a 2-5KB/s connection then I was on 3G but I could never get a reliable connection and couldn't get above ISDN Speed on 3G and recently started lowering to 16-33.6Kbps. The person that lives next to me has DSL and he will not share it even is I pay for half of the bill. Also I live right along a Verizon Level 3 Communication Backbone Fiber and can't use any of it because I am not zoned for it. And also were i live when there was VERY limited DSL before I moved there you had to have Voice Service to get DSL you can't get Dry DSL so for a DSL line you can end up paying $100US+ just for DSL, with no Voice you get no DSL.

 

For over the air TV there are only 4 and all 4 are still analog KTTV, KTLA, CBS, NBC they are not DTV yet for those repeaters.

avatar

Holly Golightly

You should not be paying half then, if he wont let you play. It is not fair that you can not access a fiber optic network despite the fact it goes over your own home. But why waste your time on a computer then? You have way more advantages despite having a slower connection. Clean air, friendly people, lower crime rates, and loads of nature. Go out and have fun.

avatar

goodtime

Another thing is that kids in rural areas can have a hard time in school with dial up nowadays.....My school does a ton of stuff with google docs and that's not easy with a 28.8k connection. I'm lucky to have an isp that provides unlimited 3g (still not as good as dsl though, lol) but we still had dial up for quite a while.....kinda hard to watch that documentary that goes along with your assignment then.

avatar

Holly Golightly

Hmm, well I guess I can not argue with that. It is hard to imagine a school would require Google Docs. Although not all schools are alike. My school uses MS Office 2007, which is good, and does not require online connectivity. Does the school actually use dial-up on their computer labs? Again... It is hard to imagine, but I guess anything goes.

avatar

goodtime

the school has broadband (its in town) but it's not practical to stay after school every single day to do homework. (Also, I wouldn't be passing math if it wasn't for help videos on youtube) Futhurmore, nature gets boring after a while the same way the city would get boring. Anything does when you live right by it.

Also, you made a comment about how you would know all your neighbors if you lived in the country....do you think we're all homely and friendly just because we live in the country? Lots of people live in the country because they HATE people. That same logic would suggest everyone in an apartment complex is friends with eachother, and I'm pretty sure they are not.

avatar

Holly Golightly

Oh, I don't know. The places I stood at, all the people were friendly to me. Although maybe they could tell I am an outsider? Either way, you can buy expensive property out there for cheap. Work work so hard being successful in a city when all a New Yorker can get is a tiny three million dollar 15'x15' studio condo? I heard some houses out in the midwest sell for $15,000... If I can get over 200 acres, may just ditch the city after I save up enough money to live off my land. That, is living the life. Hopefully I can find a place where people are family friendly, and I can ditch the old broadband and finally go outside and breath fresh air. But yes, everybody knows that New Yorkers are mean. The stereotype is true for all cities. Where does most of the crime happen at? Eitherway, you will get your fast broadband when 4G is available everywhere. I mean, 3G already is, so it is only a matter of time 4G will come out to the rural areas. 4G can do a theoretical 120mbps, which is incredible compared to FiOS and cable's DOCSYS 3.0... Just wait it out, you will get plenty of clean air, and fast broadband. 

avatar

peteyj222

We first got internet in 1995 and kept the same crappy dialup until we got fed up enough a couple years ago to get Hughesnet sattellite service.  It's okay, but its expensive and has a tone of drawbacks.  We barely get cell service out here so a cell modem is out of the question.  for years before we got the sattellite out dial up provider would announce that dsl was either coming or already here.  we would call to see if we could get it and find out that we were in fact not getting it.  I say it's about damn time we got descent internet service out here.

avatar

chop_slap

We've had this in the province of Saskatchewan, as well. The HS has been here for like 7-8 years now I think. $40/m for unlimited 5meg unlimited connection. Not bad.

avatar

Asterixx

The Govenrment of Nova Scotia did this a few years ago, and I was happy as a pig in shit because I live in a rural area. And here's the thing: ISP's don't need to run wires anymore. My broadband connection is wireless. I have an antenna on my house that talks to an antenna placed on an already existing cell tower about 15 miles away. The gov't subsidized the antenna on the cell tower, the ISP paid the rest. And they make me pay for it - the service is $60/month. The only caveat the government had was that every single dwelling in the province had to have a signal, which meant some smaller "repeater" towers in hard-to-get-at locations (also gov't subsidized). The speeds aren't record breaking at 1.5Mbps down and 256kbps up, and latency, though far better than satellite, is still higher than a wired connection, but it is a hell of a lot better than dialup. I can watch Youtube videos quite adequately with no buffering. Netflix goes to the lowest quality setting but is still quite watchable. And because every dwelling has to have coverage I'm sitting at my remote deer hunting camp at this very moment, the day before deer season starts, and enjoying broadband here...

avatar

xs0u1x

how long till we have an episode in north carolina where the telco's came in and literally wrote legislation to break this sort of thing up?

avatar

Morete

First there needs to be a breakup of the ISP duopolies that we currently have and allow true competition that capitalism is supposd to promote.  ISPs can't afford to lay coaxial in the ground or string it along telephone poles? The phone companies did it, so can internet service providors.  Ulitimatum: either ISPs pay for the initial cost without increasing rates or forced breakup. The choice is theirs.

avatar

stinkypeepers

Good.  My parents still have DIAL-UP.  Ever heard of it?  Yeah it still exists.  5kb download speed.  You're living in a paradise if it goes above that, so I for one am glad to hear this news.  Fairpoint is as usefull as a diaper full of shit.  They bought all of Verizon lines for a shit-ton of money and made empty promises.  That was quite a while ago.  Yeah my parents can pay out the ass for satellite internet, but if a mosquito takes a dump on the satellite, the signal gets destroyed. 

avatar

resdime321

I live in such a little town in Maine that some people who have lived in the state for there whole lives don't even know where it is. The only ISP's I can get is a single local telco (which I currently have) or hughesnet satellite broadband internet and thats just way to expensive for my budget, so when this happens and my telco starts carrying broadband service I am going to be in my glories haha

avatar

vpitcher07

Gov't funded internet. This is proper socialist reform! (hahah)

avatar

jtrpop

This means your & my tax dollars will pay for internet in places that is not economically feasable, otherwise companies would have already built there.

avatar

warptek2010

Oh great. More things we can't afford and can't pay for. Quick, tax more rich. 

 

The FCC needs to be defunded back down to what it originally was intended for... the oversight of radio frequencies and nothing more. This so called regulatory agency is becoming a monster and needs to be reminded that IT is not mandated by the constitution.  

avatar

dgrmouse

Your anger is misplaced because you can't see the big picture.  Along with the power to divvy up the EM Spectrum for licensing comes the responsibility to attach stipulations.  If all the radio spectrum that could be used for providing excellent data services to remote locations is snatched up by cell phone carriers with massive lobbying interests, where does that leave the average rural citizen?  It leaves them with two overvalued and under-regulated wireless providers.

Cable and telephone services are heavily regulated by virtue of the complexity of initial wiring and clever legislation at the onset.  Wireless services, which tend to be the most common offering for rural customers, are monopolizing prime spectrum with government blessing without any compromise offered to the consumer at all.  The argument shouldn't be about whether or not it is the job of government to provide internet to rural locations as much as it is about the duty of the government to regulate service providers and to mandate minimum standard requirements as an obligate duty for those who win spectrum licenses.

avatar

Carlidan

I just stop replying to warptek long ago. He seems not to read the articles but just like making anti goverment comments. If he read this section.

"The new rules will expand broadband by shifting the $4.5 billion dollar fund from subsidizing phone service to pay for the deployment and service costs associated with rural broadband. The FCC has also mandated changes to the way the newly renamed America Connect Fund will be collected, meaning a savings of over $2 billion that will hopefully be passed on to consumers by way of lower bills."

First he would know that the money was already given to the FCC to use. They could use the money to still subsidize phone service, which is kind of wasteful, or use it to expand broadband to rural areas. Which would you think is a wiser investment of the money? Basically expanding the broadband infrasture. And secondly it will save use $2 billion dollars in the long run. 

avatar

warptek2010

Anti-government or pro-government? At a time when the Fed is spending itself into bankruptcy and spiraling out of control I think a little fiscal conservatism is actually good for government, that is if you're really interested in saving your country for future generations. Yet people nowadays only see what they can get out of it for themselves. Let's talk about cutting spending, lowering taxes and doing away with regulations that are keeping this economy from moving forward and keeping people employed. Do you want a properly funded government and people working again? Simple economics 101, lower taxes, remove burdensome regulations and most important - get the fuck out of the way.

avatar

Carlidan

Same ass playbook. Same ass line. Don't you ever get any other new lines? Just tired of agruing with you, it's doesn't matter if evidence and data show your postition is flawed, you'll just make insults to deflect with the issue at hand. And you do that ALOT of times in this website.  

avatar

warptek2010

Flawed, huh? Okay, tough guy let me put it to you this way...

You know that money you set aside for your kids college education? You may have to send em to a cheaper school. The government needs the money.

Howabout that vacation you saved for to take your family on? Take em to Denny's instead, the government needs the money.

Wanted to buy that $25,000 new car? Too bad. Buy a cheaper used car instead. The government needs it.

I could go on if you'd like. When it affects YOU personally you will suddenly see my flawed arguments as not so flawed.

 

avatar

Carlidan

Huh? What the hell you're talking about? How did it affect you? So how do you think FEMA, police, teacher, etc...... get paid? Or other goverment agencies. It's called TAXES. Everyone pays them. It AFFECTS everyone. And your point is what?

Again you're ARGUEMENT doesn't make anysense. I'm just guessing what you mean. Maybe someone in this site gets it. And if so, please explain what he means with his examples.

avatar

mseyf

"The new rules will expand broadband by shifting the $4.5 billion dollar fund from subsidizing phone service to pay for the deployment and service costs associated with rural broadband."

So does this mean the TelCos will be jacking up rates claiming they've lost the $4.5 billion subsidy and will be passing that cost on to the customers?

avatar

Archangel1976

Oooooo. I wouldn't want to bet against that one. Good point.

avatar

Archangel1976

I grew up in rural Ohio and can vouch for. I currently reside in SoCal and every time I go home to visit family, I feel like I just time-warped back to the 80's..... or am visiting a 3rd world county. And honestly, some of those I've visited .... are doing better.

My only concern? Well, aren't these the same people who are generally whining about gov't subsidies? Again, my family whines about how the gov't is always "wasting money" with handouts. My urban area simply has so many people in it that there's a large "bang for the buck." Providing broadband to one city block here provides service to something on the order of 100 households. It makes economic sense. Where my family lives? Maybe 10 households over 9 square miles?

I want them cared for, but .... culturally... could they please stfu and stop whining?

avatar

cigar3tte

Please bring competition to my area.  Comcast is the ONE AND ONLY broadband choice where I live.

avatar

warptek2010

Well this FCC crap surely ain't gonna do it. The ISP's have already determined that the cost to profit ratio of rolling out service in these area doesn't make mathematical sense so of course the good ol government is gonna do it cause it surely knows how to make a buck... sorry, waste a buck. They don't actually make anything. 

I just have a question for the FCC. Since they're subsidizing all this with our tax dollars do we get to choose the tier level of service they get or do we just STFU and lump it?

avatar

jako800

This is good news!

avatar

Vausch

I've lived in a rural area for years and moving hasn't been much of an option. Many thanks, I've been stuck with internet that barely gets over 256kbps and we pay through the nose for it.

avatar

grieserl

If this plan works, then it will be a great thing for people like me who live in very rural areas (not by choice, I'm 17 living in nowheresville, Ohio), and wish for better, faster internet. Right now the fastest avialable is wireless service at 512kbps and thats at peak, becuase for the most part, it slows way down to what I believe to be network strain because their the only provider in the area. I can't believe I'm the only one who is happy to hear this.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.