 
Duramax08
Oy, Pass It on.
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX
 ·Juno Express
| Progress.... Well im glad atleast some state in the USA is finally doing something to give everyone broadband. Can Texas do the same thing and join the bandwagon? Time Warner and AT&T is too damn cheap.
--
»live.xbox.com/member/Duramax08 | |
|  | 
swhitney2003
I can't drive 55.
Premium
join:2003-06-13
NH
clubs:  | Re: Progress.... Agreed. Maybe this kind of motivation to get work done will spread to other states. | |
| | |
Duramax08
Oy, Pass It on.
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX
·Juno Express
| Re: Progress.... We're the USA FFS, I think we should have something better then dial up. Theres alot of people still using dial up because all the companies want profits, If they dont think you are profitable, they pretty much tell you "the hell with you". Ive been told something like that from Time Warner AND AT&T. Look at all these other countries, They have faster internet then we do, I think thats pretty sad that we are behind. I think faster internet will boost our economy here since its pretty bad right now. Why doesn't the government stop bailing out companies say "oh noes, we is gona go bankrupt, help us pl0x or we is gona take u down 2". I think those companies just want a free ride from the government. "Free Money!", Thats what they think when the government bails them out. And if they need help, Why not get the CEO's to help? They make so much money too you know. Too much I say for them just going to meetings and saying "very well then". DAMN IT THIS IS AMERICA, I SAY THE GOVERNMENT STOP WASTING MONEY ON DAMN COMPANIES CRYING ABOUT HOW MUCH MONEY THEY ARE LOSING, USE IT ON THE AMERICANS. IF WE GO IN RECESSION, IT MIGHT JUST GET US A FRESH START! We need help but stop wasting out tax money on HUGE CORPORATIONS. Fast internets should boost the economy by new jobs and new possibilities for us americans who can't get a reasonable internet. LOL AT SATELLITE INTERNET. | |
| | | | cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA
| Re: Progress.... wtf are you talking about? not much money goes from the government to corporations freely (no contracts for goods or services in return) except the mess in the financial industry right now.
remember that a bankrupt company helps pretty much no one. try getting a bankrupt Verizon, ATT, Charter, Cox, or whatever telecommunication giant to upgrade their networks. atleast when they are not bankrupt, there is the hope and in some cases active work to upgrade the network. also do you have any idea how many billions of dollars and years it'll take to string fiber (or copper that is capable of supporting ~100Mbps per customer, you'd be surprised how much can be shoved through copper) to all in the US?
i hope your post was all sarcasm..... | |
| | | | |
Duramax08
Oy, Pass It on.
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX
·Juno Express
| Re: Progress.... Its called researching in better technology for a cheaper alternative. And also, They have used more then 700 billion dollars in just a few companies. THATS ALOT. I think if americans had a budget, We wouldnt be here. We are in here because people cant pay there bills. I hope they know they need a good well stable job. You might say "well alot of people dont have jobs because of the economy". Thats true but we wouldn't be here if people payed there bills. If you dont pay your bills, Of course companies will have to lay off people. | |
| | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
 ·Mediacom
| I strongly urge you to read a few financial and economics books. First, why should a for profit company invest in non-profitable markets? Second, the government's action to save Fanni, Freddie, and AIG was necessary. Had it not been done, you would have seen economies around the world implode. The US Government nationalized those companies and can eventually, should it choose, sell them back to the market, maybe even for a profit. As for the bailout, I assume you are discussing the $700B purchase of bad debt from several of the investment banks. While the purchase of the bad debt will cost taxpayers, it will help correct the credit market and ultimately the economy. Once again, should the US Government choose to do so, it can turn around, insure the debt, and sell it off to the market once the economy rebounds. | |
| | | | |
Duramax08
Oy, Pass It on.
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX
·Juno Express
| Re: Progress.... And why are we in all of this? Because people can't pay there mortgages and there credit cards. People need to learn to do a budget ffs. We are in this because ALOT of people cant pay. They should know what they are getting into when they get a loan from the bank. If they dont pay, of course they are getting the short end of the stick. The bank would then foreclose there house or take away property like boats, vehicles, etc, Then those people are gona get another loan from somewhere else. Well of course the bank wants to loan money to earn Profits, Then they lend to those people that cant pay and then the bank gets the short end of the stick. I bet alot of peoples credit are bad. If people learned how to manage a budget, We wouldn't be in this economic slump. Either way, some one is gona get the government money and make huge profits. Will we see a difference? yea, its gona be some time though. | |
| | | | | 
idiots
@direcpc.com
| said by openbox9  :I strongly urge you to read a few financial and economics books. First, why should a for profit company invest in non-profitable markets? Second, the government's action to save Fanni, Freddie, and AIG was necessary. Had it not been done, you would have seen economies around the world implode. The US Government nationalized those companies and can eventually, should it choose, sell them back to the market, maybe even for a profit. As for the bailout, I assume you are discussing the $700B purchase of bad debt from several of the investment banks. While the purchase of the bad debt will cost taxpayers, it will help correct the credit market and ultimately the economy. Once again, should the US Government choose to do so, it can turn around, insure the debt, and sell it off to the market once the economy rebounds. bullshit these company's knew they were taking a risk when they were giving these loans out to people that they knew were one bad thing away from not being able to pay their mortgage,and they just kept own giving them out like candy to whoever.they took the chance and they need to pay the consequence not the government,with our tax dollars | |
| | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom
| Re: Progress.... I'm not disputing past practices. But letting the major investment banks "pay the consequences" would be far worse than buying the bad debt from them. Think worse than The Great Depression. Think numerous additional personal and business bankruptcies. Think about how you wouldn't be able to get that $10K auto loan because there is no credit available. Letting banks fail because of questionable practices has a much more detrimental impact that showing them a lesson. Believe me, I'm not a big fan of paying the taxes that this will cost, but ultimately, it's a necessity. | |
| | | | | | Goldman
join:2002-06-21
Maumelle, AR
| said by idiots :said by openbox9 : bullshit these company's knew they were taking a risk when they were giving these loans out to people that they knew were one bad thing away from not being able to pay their mortgage,and they just kept own giving them out like candy to whoever.they took the chance and they need to pay the consequence not the government,with our tax dollars Actually, these companies knew that it WASN'T a risk. They knew they were using financial instruments that people didn't understand to help people get into homes they couldn't afford and wouldn't be in a position to pay for in the future. The mortgage brokers and banks just didn't care. They made their short term profits and immediately sold the loan to people that apparently had never read a book on finance.
Wall Street, banks, and consumers are really acting no different from our federal government. It our federal government doesn't get its act together and start reducing debt soon, this current financial crisis will be known in the future as a walk in the park. | |
| | | | | | | | | | 
NetAdmin
join:2008-05-22
| said by openbox9 :Second, the government's action to save Fanni, Freddie, and AIG was necessary. Had it not been done, you would have seen economies around the world implode. From what I've been reading in the news and in financial sites and blogs, that would be a bit of a stretch. This isn't like the SnL crisis of the eighties where government intervention was a must. This is government covering for the poor decisions and outright stupidity of several large companies. If companies were involved in all of the sleazy lending and crazy credit derivative scams (because that's what most of them were, accounting voodoo), then they rightly should be out of business.
The US Government nationalized those companies and can eventually, should it choose, sell them back to the market, maybe even for a profit. Not bloody likely. The government has bought debt that NOBODY wanted. And if it is debt that nobody wanted, the government certainly has zero business touching it.
Sorry, but this bailout as is looks like a losing proposition for the taxpayer and a win for the companies. Meanwhile, the government says it doesn't have the money for all sorts of other necessary projects around the nation - infrastructure improvements, Category 5 protection for New Orleans and SELA, disaster loan forgiveness across the nation and the list goes on - but suddenly it can find the cash to bailout companies that put themselves in their current position? I'm not buying that BS. The government should apply the same standard, if not higher, to corporations as it does individuals - you make bad investments, bad decisions or just spend yourself into the poor house, well tough luck.
--
---
Eleven years of carrying The Clue Bat... | |
| | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom
| Re: Progress.... So what do you think would happen to our economy if Fannie, Freddie, and various investment banks were allowed to fail? How easy do you think you'd be able to purchase that next home, automobile, or anything else requiring a line of credit for that matter? Loose financial regulation, bad lending practices, and ignorant consumption allowed us to get here, but letting everything and everyone fail, would be detrimental. Offloading bad debt onto the taxpayers breathes a sigh of relief into the market. So long as the noose around financial institutions is sufficiently tightened to prevent this in the future, markets and the economy will correct. | |
| | | | | | | Goldman
join:2002-06-21
Maumelle, AR
| Re: Progress.... said by openbox9 :Offloading bad debt onto the taxpayers breathes a sigh of relief into the market. It sure has breathed a sigh of relief. Wall Street has partied for years with the money made off these bad loans, so now they don't have to give any back and their irresponsibility is being paid for by someone else. This short-term fix is a long-term problem. Our country cannot afford these bailouts. We DO NOT HAVE ANY MONEY! The federal spending party will also come to a screeching halt one day and who will bail the U.S. government out? NOBODY. | |
| | | | | | |
NetAdmin
join:2008-05-22
| So what do you think would happen to our economy if Fannie, Freddie, and various investment banks were allowed to fail? Short term damage, but in the long term, it would all work out.
How easy do you think you'd be able to purchase that next home, automobile, or anything else requiring a line of credit for that matter? Maybe it will cause banks and credit companies to actually go back to the old methods of making sure you could afford your credit. Right now, it is WAY too easy for people to get credit.
said by openbox9 :Offloading bad debt onto the taxpayers breathes a sigh of relief into the market. Only to those who hold the debt, not to a person like me who has little debt, is on firm financial ground and is responsible with my money. Now I have to bear debt that isn't even mine by potentially high tax rates at some point in the future to pay for this. It is fiscally irresponsible, potentially disasterous for the government's balance sheet and only serves the interest of business by allowing them to socialize the risk while keep the gains privatized.
--
---
Eleven years of carrying The Clue Bat... | |
| | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom
| Re: Progress.... said by NetAdmin :Short term damage, but in the long term, it would all work out. Short term financial damage can prevent recovery in the long term.said by NetAdmin :Maybe it will cause banks and credit companies to actually go back to the old methods of making sure you could afford your credit. And that's where we're heading. The "easy" money of 3 years ago is gone.said by NetAdmin :Only to those who hold the debt, not to a person like me who has little debt, is on firm financial ground and is responsible with my money. I am well capitalized with little debt as well, so I'm feeling fairly comfortable. I'm not feeling the squeeze that many citizens are complaining about.said by NetAdmin :and only serves the interest of business by allowing them to socialize the risk while keep the gains privatized. I disagree. How does nationalizing a company allow them to keep the gains? Whatever gains that existed are gone, along with the book value of the company. | |
| | | | | | | | |
NetAdmin
join:2008-05-22
| Re: Progress.... said by openbox9 :Short term financial damage can prevent recovery in the long term. Not necessarily, and history backs that stance. This credit crisis doesn't even compare to the Great Despression. The market recession of the 90s came and went and the economy recovered. Enron made HUGE waves in the economy and it bounced back.
This market, frankily, needs to be shaken up a lot more so that the remainder of the companies that thought the credit derivatives games a was a good idea get their due and, if need be, fold up and die.
And that's where we're heading. The "easy" money of 3 years ago is gone. I'm confused... You don't think that is a good thing? Easy credit it what has put the American consumer so far in debt, which has in turn made the credit problem worse, which caused these companies to take stupid risks which put us where we are today. If anything can be done to halt that tide, I'm all for it. People need to live within their means.
I am well capitalized with little debt as well, so I'm feeling fairly comfortable. I'm not feeling the squeeze that many citizens are complaining about. Neither am I, however, I don't particularly look forward to having to foot the bill for this in the form of taxes in five, ten, fifteen years.
I disagree. How does nationalizing a company allow them to keep the gains? Whatever gains that existed are gone, along with the book value of the company. Prior to this crash, billions were made. That money is still in the hands of the people who created this problem, however, they are no longer exposed to the risk.
Google "socializing risk" and "privatizing wealth" or "privatizing gains".
--
---
Eleven years of carrying The Clue Bat... | |
| | | | | | | | | | openbox9
join:2004-01-26
Navarre, FL
·AT&T Southeast
·Mediacom
| Re: Progress.... said by NetAdmin :said by openbox9 :And that's where we're heading. The "easy" money of 3 years ago is gone. I'm confused... You don't think that is a good thing? Easy credit it what has put the American consumer so far in debt, which has in turn made the credit problem worse, which caused these companies to take stupid risks which put us where we are today. I was agreeing with you  said by NetAdmin :Prior to this crash, billions were made. That money is still in the hands of the people who created this problem, however, they are no longer exposed to the risk. Agreed. I would like to see investigation (and possibly criminal proceedings) into the lending practices of some of these firms. The mere fact that some firms don't even know what kind of debt and how much they purchased is disturbing. | |
| | | | 
ninjatutle
You can keep the "change"
join:2006-01-02
San Ramon, CA
 ·AT&T U-Verse
| said by Duramax08 : Fast internets should boost the economy by new jobs and new possibilities for us americans who can't get a reasonable internet. It won't help the economy. If anything, it will waste employee productivity and people will spend more time at home than go out and spend money at their town center. | |
| | | | |
Duramax08
Oy, Pass It on.
join:2008-08-03
San Antonio, TX | Re: Progress.... wait, Wat? Most companies already have T1 and other internet. How will that slow down people from going to there town center lol. It might stop you but it wont stop the rest of us doing regular shopping at stores. | |
| | DemonChicken
join:2006-10-15
Boon, MI | MICHIGAN DEAR CHRIST!
10 mi from City, population of 500, 300 houses. Cable time is NOW! | |
| 
hawk82
join:2001-04-26
Oakland, ME
·Verizon Online DSL
·RoadRunner Cable
| Fiber fed? According to the local newspaper, the plan is to run fiber in currently underserved areas in central and western Maine. The group just got a grant for ~$300,000. That doesn't seem like a lot of funding to install the fiber, even in the small portion of the network they had planned for the pilot, between hospitals and doctor's offices.
For instance, the town I live in got a government grant for a fiber optic network + security cameras at schools, library, and other buildings. This grant was only $190,000 if I recall, running less than 20mi of fiber, plus cameras, and the installation of all equipment. Also the town has to pay an access fee every year to have the fiber on each pole (which turns out in our area that most of the poles are owned by Fairpoint).
Point is, seems to me like the group has vastly misjudged how much money would be needed to put this network in at full scale.
Another question: since a good portion of the bandwidth/network is providing access to hospitals, health centers, etc so they can share data more effectively, how safe is the data there? is the group putting that health data on a physically separated portion of the network, from the private sector businesses?
This whole plan lacks details that would be nice to know. | |
| | 
SlickEnW
Premium
join:2003-01-21
Seattle, WA
clubs: | Re: Fiber fed? Any sophisticated network team worth their salt will have sophisticated setups which throughly separate the external facing machines from the internal infrastructure.
(But I know you know this) | |
| | cornelius785
join:2006-10-26
Worcester, MA
| is it really necessary to put the health care centers on a seperate network? an encrypted network probably would provide enough security. SSL, SSH, and VPN are all fairly well tested over many years and are fairly easy to use and are relatively cheap and easy to setup. depending how that seperationg you are wondering about is realized, it could just as easy or it could provide unnecessary complex solution that has a simpler solution. | |
| | | 
MeanPeepsSuk
mmmMMMeaty
join:2004-11-21
Muddy Field
edit:
September 22nd, @10:59AM
| Re: Fiber fed? said by cornelius785 :is it really necessary to put the health care centers on a seperate network? an encrypted network probably would provide enough security. SSL, SSH, and VPN are all fairly well tested over many years and are fairly easy to use and are relatively cheap and easy to setup. depending how that seperationg you are wondering about is realized, it could just as easy or it could provide unnecessary complex solution that has a simpler solution. In my professional opinion with experience in the Health care industry, YES. Not only should they install a separate network, the entire country should.
While it may seem like a cheaper and easier solution to utilize encryption technologies to secure data over a public network, our health care information (including SS#, etc) is far too important to leave open in hopes each point has done their job in securing it.
In the U.S., HIPPA requirements has stringent rules and stiff penalties for non-compliance. Yet, the requirement to audit it is largely on the facility itself. The "weakest links" are everywhere.
Many doctor's offices (either on or off hospital campus) around the country over the last few years have started installing health care software to interact with the hospital network. Unfortunately, even with the best intentions and a belief they have done everything right, it is falling short.
Rarely is there a full time IT staff for these small(er) private practice offices, but "a guy they hired" to set it up (i.e sometimes it's the neighbor's kid). You know where this is headed, right? The things I've seen would make you cry.
I've seen an office where they were secured, but switched to VOIP and in the process the cable guy took out their router and replaced it with a wide open wireless access point.. and the office had no idea.
Still another was the doctors' office group who hired some cheap labor from another country to design customized APIs for their specific practice. The maintenance consisted of giving these programmers "LogMeIn" to update the software (which actually had access to the entire network 24/7), and also included auto backup services.. which was to these programmers' network (out of the country). Great, open data to who? and to a country where we cannot enforce our laws.
HIPPA, although great, protects your data as much as PCI does for the credit card industry.
Mandates, fines, penalties, and swagging fingers of "There is no excuse!" and "They are responsible...!" isn't going to bring back the data nor recover the costs of damages when it's gone.
/rantonthat
Good question 
edit: fixed words/clarified | |
| 
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-01
IA | Canada? We should just give ME to Canada and let them deal with it...  | |
| |
dumbass
@direcpc.com
| Re: Canada? said by Anonymous :We should just give ME to Canada and let them deal with it... no that's just a real intelligent remark NOT | |
| | |
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-01
IA
| Re: Canada? said by dumbass :said by Anonymous :We should just give ME to Canada and let them deal with it... no that's just a real intelligent remark NOT That was a joke. | |
| | | buzz_4_20
join:2003-09-20
Presque Isle, ME | It would help with my health insuance | |
| | | |
Anonymous
Premium
join:2004-06-01
IA
| Re: Canada? said by buzz_4_20 :It would help with my health insurance LOL
Sadly it would!
BTW I hope I did not offend anyone | |
| theDUDE
vote with your wallet
join:2008-05-10
Wytheville, VA
 ·HughesNet Satellit..
| do we need this in virginia? From what i am reading VA is supposedly on of the better connected states. I find this hard to believe probably because i live in a embarq area. So if i live in one of the few bad areas while other parts of the state have decent providers will they still form a group like this? | |
| 
rstrandb
Premium
join:2003-04-17
Albany, GA
·AT&T Southeast
| Broadband is not a right...... If you want to pay taxes so governments can give everyone broadband then do it, just don't expect me to pony up for you. The Declaration of Independence did not say we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of internet. Companies do not answer to individuals, they answer to their stockholders, who demand PROFITS. That is how a free market economy works. It sickens me to hear people whine about having dial up and their only neighbors are deer and chipmunks. If you need it that badly, move to an area that has it. The government is not here to coddle you, they are not in business. In fact their isn't a single government program that provides wealth, that is done largely by hard work. Considering the population of Maine is smaller than some large cities, it is not a far reach that 90% penetration is possible, but which percentage if the population gets to pay for this? The percentage that already lives where broadband is available. I'm so tired of the, "where is my stuff" mentality. People with their collective hands out demanding more, with no way to pay for it, than through the sweat of others.
--
Fight the war against secular progressives before the ideals that made this country great are lost forever | |
| 
jmn1207
Premium
join:2000-07-19
Reston, VA
edit:
September 22nd, @10:15AM
| Connect Kentucky I wonder how the penetration is with KY? | |
| | s13
join:2007-12-06
USA | Re: Connect Kentucky They're putting together a slick plan. | |
| theDUDE
vote with your wallet
join:2008-05-10
Wytheville, VA
·HughesNet Satellit..
| dont get me wrong i do live in a rural area and i don't want no hand out or some one else to pay for me to have decent internet. i do feel perfectly whining and complaining to my hearts content because from what i understand these companies were already given the funds by the gov to accomplish this goal in the 90's. supposedly enough money to wire the whole country. where did the money go? | |
| | | |
|
|
Connect ME: 90% Broadband Penetration by 2010
