2/3 of Americans Without Broadband Don't Want It 538
Ant writes in with news that won't be welcomed by the incoming US administration as it tries to expand the availability of broadband Internet service. A recent report from the Pew Internet & American Life Project indicates, as noted by Ars Technica, that two-thirds of Americans without broadband don't want it. "...when we look at the overall reasons why Americans don't have broadband, availability isn't the biggest barrier. Neither is price. Those two, combined, only account for one-third of Americans without broadband. Two-thirds simply don't want it. The bigger issue is a lack of perceived value."
Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course they want it. They just don't want to pay scary fees for it.
It's Old Century Ignorance talking. By 2013 this topic won't exist.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
especially the elderly, have no need or desire for the internet.
I suspect that when I am in my eighties, I will have
much less desire to communicate with the world or check the news on a minute by minute basis.
Just because some of us use the internet on a regular basis, that
doesn't mean that everyone would be better off for it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
ust because some of us use the internet on a regular basis, that doesn't mean that everyone would be better off for it.
Some of us?
Have you tried to apply for a job without the internet lately?
Even my home repair contractor carries around an iPhone.
Of course if you are retired or have guaranteed income, you probably won't need to worry so much though. Just saying...
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
>>>Some of us need broadband? Have you tried to apply for a job without the internet lately?
You can't apply for a job using 50k dialup? Huh. I guess I'm just using magic then. (Waves hands over the resume - "transmit!")
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well then.. when broadband costs the same as dialup.. you should be just fine sticking to your guns and using dialup.
Due to scales of economy, you might be given a broadband modem tuned down to 50K. But that will be OK with you.
I'm looking at generic very high speed bandwidth as a general purpose utility. Would be nice to actually CHOOSE between cable companies (video providers), for once. Anyone remember how we were supposed to get cable competition? I do.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In the UK (but I expect this applies quite generally) a cheap broadband service can cost less than dial-up services. But, there are pay-per-minute dial-up services. If all you do is check your email every few days then that's quite sufficient, and you might only be paying a couple of pounds a month for the calls.
(The cheapest unlimited dial-up service is £7.99/month, the cheapest broadband is £9.99 a month. Some of the larger ISPs have cheaper broadband than dial-up, e.g. AOL, Tiscali. Pay-per-m
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
IMO, Computer skills, in general, are becoming what literacy was a century ago. Sure, it is a skill that some don't have, and those that don't often are not constrained by money, or availability of the requisite materials.
And in some cases, such the case of the elderly, or a factory worker living in a trailer park, somewhere, the skill may not be needed. But those who choose to do without are limiting themselves and their potential.
As for their children and neighbors, well, they are part of that other 1/3, and the fact that they are outnumbered does not make computer literacy any less useful for them.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Funny)
Well said! We should provide a translation for the kids, though, due to the drop in literacy - I'll do my best:
IMO, l337 5ki11z = literaSy yestrdae, d00d. We haz 5ki11z lam3rs haz no 5ki11z. Lam3rs haz no 'puter, no $, and no stuff.
Oldies and trash haz no 5ki11z and iz lam3rs. Lam3rs never 1337.
Kiddies n wifi l33ches R other 1/3 n b33ten by R l33tness.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Insightful)
I consider myself moderately young (or young minded) and I steer clear of facebook or other social networking crap. My friends my age have it, but, I'm too concerned about privacy issues, etc to mess with that. I'm still of the mindset I got from the earlier days of the internet...try to stay anonymous as you can within reason. At the very least, don't go posting pics of yourself half nekkid with friends, sucking a skull bong.
It could come back to haunt you later for a job interview...especially if it is security related.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Informative)
Do your friends post your pictures on Facebook? Last I checked, the only way to prevent people from explicitly searching for you in pictures was to have an account and disable it.
Also, with an account, you can untag your pictures.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Funny)
At the very least, don't go posting pics of yourself half nekkid with friends, sucking a skull bong.
I'm a bit dyslexic, but when I read that, at first I thought you wrote, "sucking a bull dong." I thought, wow, no wonder cayenne8 wants some privacy. I wouldn't that showing up during a job interview, either.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
OK, good start ...
It's alright, we can let bygones be bygones.
D'oh, you fail it. Employers of the world, don't let cayenne8 near your secretaries.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
It could come back to haunt you later for a job interview...especially if it is security related.
I think it's going to go the other way once people begin to realize that most people are human and have a life outside of the office. In other words, people will loosen up a bit and realize that having pictures of yourself doing the stuff that everybody else is doing anyway isn't a bad thing, the increased transparency will force standards to relax. Sort of like how Clinton didn't inhale, Bush snorted coke, and Obama smoked pot, yet they were all able to be elected. 50 years ago that likely wouldn't have been the case.
Perhaps we'll finally lighten up a bit about nudity now that porn, and all sorts of weird stuff at that, is so readily available online and viewed in such massive numbers.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
More likely, increased transparency will make businesses more likely to only hire those with spotless records, given that there are so many people out there, and you likely don't need to hire someone who has an imperfect record when there are already so many applicants.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And it will backfire. The kind of people that you want to hire are those that are generally happy and socially well adjusted, because they're better able to work with others effectively. A facebook profile that shows them regularly socializing with friends would support that.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Ironically more people seem to get kicked off Facebook for posting breastfeeding photos [facebook.com] of themselves than for posting lewd sexual photos.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Informative)
Um, mark your profile as private so that only your friends can see it ; )
You can even set up groups of friends and limit the content they see based on the group they are in.
If you have incriminating stuff just mark it for the group of superclose friends and the rest will never see it.
-Viz
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Insightful)
I find the example of your grandmother and the microwave oven a little funny. Only because I grew up using microwaves and over the last year or two, as I've learned to cook, I've gradually stopped using it. I don't think I've used our microwave at all in the past year.
I admit there's convenience and I don't blame or condemn people for using them. But everything you can do with a microwave you can do better (albeit slower) with traditional methods. The results are soooo much tastier if you put your hot sandwich in the oven, melt your butter in a small sauce pan or defrost your meat slowly in the fridge etc.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've always thought it was a shame that so many of the older generation aren't computer literate. My grandparents were/are in assisted living facilities with attached nursing homes, so I have plenty of opportunity to see what it's like.
These kind of people have *tons* of time on their hands, but they usually can't get out and interact with people other than the people living there with them. If they were able to communicate via computer, it would remove a lot of those limitations. (I always thought this wou
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
When I was a kid my maternal grandparents' house had no indoor plumbing. My mom grew up without electricity as well, but the house was wired before I was born.
I remember my grandfather fought my uncle's installing a bathroom in his house tooth and nail, and a few years after they had a bath he'd use the bathtub, but he still went out and used the outhouse, even in cold weather.
Now my dad reminds me if his late former father in law when it comes to cell phones and computers. "I lived 77 years without one and
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah your dad only downloads! ( 56k connection is much more symmetric)
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Insightful)
I always find this argument interesting. How many anecdotes does it take to become a truth or near truth. I could talk about stories I've hear about people getting hit by cars because they didn't look both ways before crossing the street. Enough anecdotes like that and a truth emerges that if you don't pay attention in traffic, you can be killed, especially if you are a pedestrian. So how many is enough? Or do we now need some sort of scientist to gather them up and publish the anecdotes and his or her conclusion before the general public should pay heed to it. Common sense is indeed, not so common. Please, no more dogmatic arguments. Hitler. There I said it. Now you can invoke Godwin's stupid law too.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
>>>The older generation doesn't know they want it.
You (and some others) sound like the TV preacher I recently heard. "Many people don't know they need GAWD in their lives. They don't know it, but they DO need him, because he will make their lives better!" (crowd cheers). "We must give them gawd as soon as possible even if they claim they don't want it. It's for their own good!"
Replace "gawd" with "broadband" and you have a politician and/or slashdotter.
(ducks spitball)
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Informative)
Broadband has obvious, quantifiable benefits that are apparent basically as soon as you have it.
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Insightful)
Okay, explain the benefits of broadband for a person who does nothing but email with her computer.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I didn't say that. I implied that those benefits are not "obviously quantifiable and immediately apparent". Which they're not. Most of the benefits of believing in God don't become apparent until you die. And the ones that happen before that are pretty damn hard to quantify at times.
With broadband internet, it's easy. Pages now load in 2-5 seconds instead of 20-50. Pictures now send in 5-30 seconds instead of 30-300. You can use the internet while you're using your old-school phone, without paying for an ex
Re:Gawd! (Score:3, Funny)
Nope.
I am with the people of the theory that the internet became the last piece of proof that YHVH doesn't literally exist in the classical sense.
Ever notice that if you pray nothing still happens? With Alan Turing and Norbert Wiener on tap to manage His IT, you'd at least get a Prayer Received message in your ear. Log in to view MyMiracles, compare Manger Construction ideas, etc.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
>>>The older generation doesn't know they want it.
You (and some others) sound like the TV preacher I recently heard. "Many people don't know they need GAWD in their lives. They don't know it, but they DO need him, because he will make their lives better!" (crowd cheers). "We must give them gawd as soon as possible even if they claim they don't want it. It's for their own good!"
You're failing to see the difference between "make available" and "required to have." In the US, religion is definitely available to everyone who wants it, and our Constitution explicitly protects that availability. Broadband is not available to everyone who wants it, and in part due to that lack of availability, some people who would want it if they had the opportunity believe they do not want it.
In Communist China, there may be people who *would* want religion if it was available to them, but believe th
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:4, Interesting)
If I had mod points, I'd mod you -1, Insulting.
Older people are generally smarter about what they need and don't need, and able to decide for themselves. They've lived a lot longer than youngsters, seen a lot more, and figured out what's important and what isn't. They don't need flash animations or bittorrent feeds of last night's TV program to entertain themselves, and can actually read the newspaper when it is printed on paper.
I can fully believe that 2/3 of the people who don't have broadband don't want it. I can also believe that Obama thinks he knows better about what they want than they do, and will act on that belief using taxpayer dollars.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Actually...not just 'old' people.
I have a friend of mine...he works in the somewhat tech industry. He works with computer applications (CRM stuff, Crystal reports, etc). But, when away from work, he is such a luddite. He still has a broadband connection at home (a leftover from some indie work) BUT, he never uses or checks it for email or whatever. If it were not t
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Don't want to pay (Score:5, Insightful)
Of course they want it. They just don't want to pay scary fees for it.
Yeah. The key problem with US broad band is the people providing the broadband and not the customers.
I would almost suspect this kind of report would be used by the providers as an excuse not to roll out to rural areas.
Of course, these same companies will quash any rural municipality attempt to create their own network.
No its not. (Score:5, Insightful)
People use the "they are deprived of it" "they deserve it" "its a right" more often than not because they want something themselves.
It is far easier to decry we don't have enough availability when you reference others - you can assuage your guilt that way.
Look, relatives of mine live on a farm. They care about the weather and look up current prices on feed and end products they sell. They have no need of anything but dial up and its done at the dark of the night because that is when they are done outside. To them its a tool. The problem with too many people is they can't tell a tool from entertainment anymore... they cannot tell work from addiction
Honestly I could live just fine without the net and cell phones, I grew up in the age when they weren't being rammed down our throats by everyone who wants to make a buck and that is what this availability is really about - businesses need to get into our wallets and someone decided that this will be the new means of doing so, trouble is we aren't playing along hence we must be ignorant.
yeah, whatever. I have high speed internet, my relatives do not, we are both happy and I would not change them and they would not change me. No ignorance, just acceptance that other people enjoy their lives just the way they are and aren't missing out on anything
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Too True. Some anecdotal evidence for you:
(1) My father refused to switch over to broadband until 2000, despite the pleas of his children. When he switched over, and suddenly didn't have to suffer the painful slowness of 56k, his comment was, said aloud, "Why the hell did I object to this?" (2) My mother-in-law has refused to switch over to broadband until this past year, even though the dial-up internet for her was so slow, cumbersome, and time-consuming, she almost never even used it anyhow. She'd pull
Re: Willing to pay ... small amounts (Score:5, Insightful)
Suppose it were only some $12 a month like Dialup is now. They'd like it. For example there's a huge knitting club that meets in our local bookstore. I have heard them talk about downloading knitting patterns. It would take them 12 seconds instead of 38 minutes each.
It's a P-word thing. (Paradigm).
Re: Willing to pay ... small amounts (Score:5, Funny)
First off I looked at the patterns, and they can be download over dialup in just 1-2 minutes. Hardly a long time.
Second: Can someone knit this for my wife? Va-va-voom!
http://knitty.com/ISSUEsummer04/images/allusionDET2.jpg [knitty.com]
Don't want the bundle (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not opposed to paying but the problem I have is the bundle.
I get comcast interent but I don't get comcast cable tv. So they CHARGE Me $19 extra. I Could almost get cable tv for close to "free" (just $10 more for both).
Likewise for my mom whose on a fixed income but needs the comforts of phone, TV and the uncomplicated reliability of non-dailup internet, I can't find a scheme that lets me use skype.
for example, if I want to use sky I still need to have a DSL connection which means paying for basic phone service from Qwest (even though with skype we don't need that).
I want her to have a basic pay-as-you go cell phone for safety in her car, but there's no point in paying for that when, give that I'm paying Qwest for a land line, I might was well get their bundled Wireless.
And so it goes.
How come I can't just get ala carte DSL. How come I can't just get cable internet.
that is without the extra fees for not buying the bundle.
anyone know how to just buy DSL without a phone?
Re: (Score:2)
Well obviously they wouldn't object to getting it for free
Technically they probably wouldn't object to getting it for free, but that doesn't mean they would use it, even if it was free. Remember there are plenty of people in this country who do not have computers, and do not want computers. You could give them the fastest connection possible and it would not be used because they do not want it anyways.
In short there are people for whom a connection to the internet has no value.
Not surprising (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Not surprising (Score:5, Insightful)
and even if you gave them broadband for free they still wouldn't be interested.
Until they find the porn.
I find it hard to believe (Score:2, Interesting)
I know I wanted broadband when I didn't have it. Now I live across town where I have it.
Those who don't want it probably have no clue what the difference is, or don't have internet anyway and simply don't care about it.
THEY dont want it. and also, they dont want it YET (Score:3, Informative)
first, it is sure that their children will want it. leave that aside, in every country governments and corporations are moving most of the services online. even news, media too. there will come a time when broadband internet connectivity will be a necessity for many things. better to make preparations for the day to come than sit back and relax.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Me: We need to get internet mom!
Parents: No. What good is it?
Me: Uhh you can send emails and read news and informational sites online.
Parents: I don't see it being worth it.
* fast forward a year *
Parents: The internet is out call the ISP and ask them how long it'll be down.
--
Me: We should get broadband.
Parents: We don't see any reason for faster internet. This seems perfectly fine to us.
* fast forward a year *
Mom: The internet is really slow! What's wrong with it?
*runs speed test*..... 800kbps.
Me: It's sti
Who doesn't want broadband? (Score:3, Insightful)
Who doesn't want broadband? Old people, that's who.
They don't want the Internet. They want to knit and watch the Price is Right. Who are we to condemn them for that?
Some people on this site make an awful lot of noise about not watching TV. What's wrong with that? It's all about personal choice.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, you don't want to get rid of it either. You probably want broadband enabled context info in a private earphone like the bluetooth cell guys use. It just isn't here yet.
Go observe nature. Then let it warn you of the cliff ahead.
The country needs broadband. (Score:2)
Old people cannot be allowed to stand in the way of progress just because they don't like the new ideas. We need to cut costs, and doing things over a network is a great way to cut costs.
Once broadband becomes a requirement for the free hand-out health car the oldsters get, you'll see them demanding it.
I didn't want the war foisted upon us by lying politicians and the gullible and cowardly older generation, but here it is. Guess what, 'greatest generation', now we want to spend tax money on something that
Re:The country needs broadband. (Score:5, Informative)
Guess what, 'greatest generation', now we want to spend tax money on something that is GOOD for the nation.
Like rampant botnets? These are people who have said, out loud and with conviction, that they wouldn't use broadband if they had it. If you make it some kind of mandatory, they'll use it... but they won't take care of it. To use a /.-mandatory car analogy, make automobiles mandatory to go the the doctor's office, and you'll find unmaintained cars breaking down in the middle of the road all over, because the car hasn't been made that doesn't need tire replacement, oil-and-filter changes, and other periodic maintenance. If the driver can't be convinced they're responsible for that, the rest of us are boned.
Give every non-enthusiasts any network-connected computing device and you've just multiplied the attack space for worms and trojans by perhaps an order of magnitude. Are you volunteering to be tech support for those folks?
And, so help me $DIETY, if you Mactards and Linux zealots* start smugging on about how the whole maintenance and vulnerability issue vanishes if you just give Ma and Pa Kettle Macs or Ubuntu boxen, I swear I'll reach through the internet and smack you. Again, I'll say it: the car hasn't been built yet (and never will) that doesn't need periodic maintenace, and the same is even more true of computing boxes. Period. Given a large enough target zone, blackhats will find and exploit vulnerabilities. And Grandpa and Grandma won't know or care. "Educate 'em!", you say? Feh. To quote Calvin: "You can present the material, but you can't make me care".
I didn't want the war foisted upon us by lying politicians and the gullible and cowardly older generation, but here it is.
Non-sequitur. Strawman. Absolutely irrelevant. You don't want the war foisted on you, but at least no one is putting a gun in your hand and making you responsible for fighting it. "Mandatory" broadband in the hands of the untrained, unwilling, and uninterested is the functional equivalent.
But hey, don't let me stand in the way of your emo-angst irrationality. I'm sure the purported GWOT and the necessity of universal broadband are intimately connected somehow in your mind.
*Full disclosure: I am, after a fashion, a Linux zealot. I'm also a realist. Linux is not the answer to all life's problems. Linux is not Superman. Linux is not invulnerable. Linux is just far less evil than most of the alternatives. And speaking of evil, I am not a Mac enthusiast, because Apple's corporate and IP policies disgust me.
Re: (Score:3)
Not true. Vehicles don't need any maintenance for years. Most leased vehicles will satisfy your requirement. Bold use of the word never considering an electric car is absent every thing that gets maintained in a modern car before about 100k miles. Besides, why are you using such a inappropriate analogy? Mechanical wear in no way resembles broadband, computer hardware, or software.
Broadband connec
Re: (Score:2)
Seem my post above. Mentioned to you for convenience so you see it in tracking. The knitters are online now too.
Re: (Score:2)
Skies alive Yes.
Families with a Tradition of Detail "dominate the channel". It's tough to listen to. Let them type it and email the first round.
I got my mother to start doing this and I love getting 2 page emails. I was exhausted listening for 38 minute stretches.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Count me out of text services. All I get there is "where ru" and spam.
My father... (Score:5, Interesting)
...was in the "Two-thirds simply don't want it. The bigger issue is a lack of perceived value" camp until he started receiving many rather large pictures and short home movies (usually taken from a digital camera) of his grand kids. He was also attempting to upload pictures he'd taken to the family Gallery (it runs Gallery [menalto.com]), but it took so long to do (he has a 7+ MP camera, so the pictures were rather large). After finally biting the bullet and getting *the cheapest* "broadband" he could find (I think it was 128k down / 64k up), within a couple weeks he had upgraded to a mid-level broadband package (somewhere around 1.5mb down/256(or more) up) and was finding himself doing so much more with it. I personally believe the final straw that made him actually upgrade his package was the ability to see/talk to his middle son (one of my two younger brothers) while he was/is deployed in Iraq (on his third tour now, I believe).
There are some people that just aren't going to want it, no matter what you show them can be done with it, but I think a large percentage of those 2/3 that "don't perceive the value" simply haven't had anyone explain/show them what value they could be getting.
"Paw.... (Score:2, Funny)
broadband's back. Want I should fetch the shotgun?"
Availability Still an Issue (Score:2)
My grandparents in Nebraska live in another small town, they have high speed internet available in their area via WiFi with REALLY big antennas.
Obviously something's weird... (Score:2)
The bigger issue is a lack of perceived value. 19 percent of dial-up users, for example, say that "nothing" would get them to upgrade, not even lower prices.
So you can have a worse product that costs more, or a cheaper product that works better. And you want the crap?
There's something strange going on. Either 19% of dial-up users are morons, or... well, I don't know. What might be a reasonable argument for not wanting better-and-cheaper?
Porn (Score:2)
Logical. (Score:3, Insightful)
I remember back when we had lie 8 channels on TV and that was with Cable. If you had all three networks and PBS what else did you need?
Then I heard about people in NY that had like 100 channels. A lot of people just don't see why they need broadband.
Netflix? They watch Movies on TV they don't watch them on their computer.
Download music? Adults just don't buy that much music. I bought my step dad an MP3 player. It was too hard for him to rip the CDs. He uses the internet to send email. He still uses the weather channel for weather and he has a minor in meteorology. I want internet everywhere and always and super fast.
I think that it will just take time and devices that are not PC to get everybody on line.
Who's precieved value? (Score:2)
It's not a rational decision (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How is that "not rational?" What if they're happy the way they are? It is more irrational to pretend that you or I know what they "need" in their lives. Maybe we know what we "need" (doubtful, most of the time) but we don't know what they "need."
If they're happy without technological woes, computer trouble, viruses, spam, facebook, myspace, arguing about Linux vs. Windows vs. Apple, and other easy wastes of time, who is to say they are leading inferior lifestyles or "missing out?"
I've cancelled broadband (Score:2, Interesting)
I now just make do with my iPhone and a fat connection at work. I first canceled Comcast because their prices are simply too high. They were charging me $180/mo for HD television and Internet. To cut out the television would have still been almost $70/mo.
RCN, a competitor in my town, offered Internet service only for $35/mo, so I tried them. They simply made up stuff to charge me with. No television? Well, you have television service now! Pay up. Call them and have it turned off? Sure ... only to have it tu
a problem of credibility (Score:2, Funny)
1975 just called (Score:5, Funny)
And they don't really want any personal computers, they just don't see what good they are.
Right after that, 2030 sent an e-mail, which read "rofl no broadband? can u still even watch tv without it in ur time?"
The good news is that 55% are now on Broadband (Score:2)
Here's the report on broadband [pewinternet.org]. %55 percent are on broadband, and 10% are on dial-up. Also noted:
So for many,it's not an disdain for a fast connection, but just a lack of internet in general for the internet.
demographic versus coverage (Score:4, Insightful)
Bad article (Score:5, Insightful)
You're always going to have people who don't adopt a new technology. These people shouldn't be used to not improve the technology for the rest of us.
Well (Score:3, Insightful)
We will all be, eventually, old people. And we wont want to pay for, nor we will be interested in, that crappy holistic multiversic quantinet our kids will happily plug in their brains.
I say leave the elders alone and let them buy their paper and sit at the diner and chat amongst friends over a cup of joe.
The net, contrary to all that idiocy, does not automatically make you or anyone smarter, better or more productive. Hey, Ive seen pretty good arguments -Giovanni Sartori- that point in the other direction for some cases, and what I see being done to language in SMS messages by youngsters makes me want to send them all to linguistic concentration camps.
Why this strange neurosis on trying to get everyone to facebook their ass?
I dont really get social networks actually, I think they are the worst to ever happen to privacy and will eventually cost us individual freedom.
Now youtube is another story. I like that one and their pr0n equivalents (better).
So there: people that dont want broadband perhaps like real life better and im not sure thats bad at all.
An Anecdote (Score:2)
However, 1/3 do want it (Score:5, Interesting)
and what percentage of the other 2/3 simply don't know what they are missing? It's like asking the population of 1930s America if they wanted highways - many probably wouldn't have seen the need for it. Many didn't have one in their area (PA turnpike and a few others around). Eisenhower, as a young officer, took part of a cross country convoy, to assess national roads, around the early 1920s IIRC, and it took them nearly 50 days to get coast to coast, that with seeing the German Autobahn in action up close is what lead him to spearhead the interstate system as President.
Infrastructure is almost always good and pays off, like the Hoover Dam + others Depression era projects are still serving us well today. But it's really tough for people with little experience with it to imagine the uses for it. They've been confined to stuff like dial-up for so long, that the concept of the internet as a medium for only text emails, sprinkled with a few static pictures and the like is hard to break for good reason.
Well, infrastructure does screw some people. (Score:5, Interesting)
While a lot of people did well with national infrastructure projects of the past, lets remember that some people did get screwed. There is always someone screwed when the government builds something, and that's why some people hate the government. This grievances are not illegitimate and you need to take the effects of them into account.
For example, let's look at how highways and hoover dam screwed some people.
First off, highways screwed cities. If you can drive anywhere, you don't need the concentration of goods that a city offers, and more so, you allow people to get to work without having to live near it. Essentially this has turned American cities into corporate islands surrounded by ghettos because nobody wants to live in cities but everyone will take the high paying jobs.
Secondly, highways screwed local stores. No national brand could exist without highways to truck goods all over the place. Everyone that bitches about the likes of Walmart, McDonalds and every other chain and laments the death of the local foods in the local store need only look at the highway to see why this took place.
Third, the highways really screwed blacks in America, because usually, in cities, all the overpasses and bridges and what not were all built in black neighborhoods, pretty much destroying the asset base of an already fragile population. New York City is a perfect example of this, and there are many black leaders that curse the name of Moses to this day - and no, not the biblical Moses.
Hoover dam screwed everyone that had local water, or needed the flow from the river downstream of the dam. You go to all this expense to get a good spot downstream and the government shuts you off. Or you go to all this expense to get your own water supply, and the government goes and doles it out to everyone else on the cheap, making your investment worthless.
Bad infrastructure screws people (Score:3, Insightful)
Let me rebut a few of the things you mentioned:
First off, highways screwed cities. If you can drive anywhere, you don't need the concentration of goods that a city offers, and more so, you allow people to get to work without having to live near it. Essentially this has turned American cities into corporate islands surrounded by ghettos because nobody wants to live in cities but everyone will take the high paying
This is not the case in Europe. That's because along with highways, Europe developed their publi
Re:However, 1/3 do want it (Score:4, Insightful)
They're sort of "trying to speak your language". When I'm talking to someone who thinks that only communists see value in infrastructure, I use the interstate highway system as an example, and they usually end up begrudgingly agreeing that infrastructure isn't all bad. And it works partially because it's sometimes the same people who LOVE cars because they believe that the alternatives (e.g. trains) are communist too.
And yes, I'd prefer to talk about something like trains, and the benefit it would have for our country to have a decent railway system, but that's kind of a step too far for some people. Besides, I can't exactly point to our existing train system as a rousing success, since it's been so poorly maintained.
Oh, and in case you're wondering, no, I'm not a communist or socialist. I'm just interested in having our be economically prosperous and generally efficiently run. I don't like the idea of the federal government doing very much, but building/maintaining/regulating large-scale infrastructure is one of a couple things the federal government should actually be doing.
That is a sad statistic (Score:4, Insightful)
and lower prices, so if the majority of the people living in the US without
broadband don't want cheaper/better performing internet then something must
be really really wrong.
I would be guessing the lack of competition, throttling, being treated like dirt
and then spending a (comparatively) huge amount of money for the privilege
has probably scared those people off.
I'm thinking of getting rid of mine. (Score:2, Interesting)
It can be a great communications tool - when you filter out the trillions of shit messages.
It a great source for news without having to listen to the overpaid talking heads - after you filter out the millions of lies, half-truths, agendas, and propaganda.
And the internet a is a great way to suck away valuable time on shit. For example, online message boards. This thread will offer me absolutely nothing t
My father didn't want it. (Score:5, Informative)
My father is in his 60s, and lives on a farm in rural PA. When I was growing up he had zero interest in computers. He didn't even want one until he found out, maybe 5 years ago now, that he could contact his old army buddies on it. At the time, broadband wasn't available in his area, but I set him up with a computer with a modem, and he messed with it and tinkered with it, and, indeed, completely screwed it up a few time, but he did learn how to use it moderately well.
Maybe 2 years ago they finally get DSL in his area. He didn't want it. Zero interest. He already had his modem and could contact his army buddies, and that was fine. But whenever he needed to download Windows patches it took literally overnight. He had sort of set into using the internet in certain ways, and he was satisfied.
That was until he stayed with me in the city, where I have Comcast, and he got to use the internet in completely new ways. THEN he wanted, and now uses, DSL. He looks at Youtube. He uses Utorrent. He is glad he made the switch.
tldr; People don't want to switch because they don't actually know what they are missing.
My Parents are Frugal (Score:4, Insightful)
They both grew up with post-war shortages, and as a result they're naturally frugal. My dad uses the internet for email, forums and light web surfing, all on dial-up. Why? Because it's cheaper.
Here in Vancouver, dial up is about $10 per month, broadband is about $30 per month. To my dad's thinking, that's an extra $240 per year that he'd rather have in his pocket. If he needs broadband for something like Google earth he just strolls down to the library and surfs for free. He's retired, after all.
Perceived value is a proxy for price (Score:4, Interesting)
I have broadband (of sorts). My city provides free WiFi. Its good enough for my uses (downloading/uploading large documents and VoIP for long distance). I have a POTS line with the lowest price possible. No long distance (that's what VoIP and/or my cell phone are for). The phone line is for emergencies and as a back-up to the WiFi. I have rabbit ears for my TV sets The digital reception is great and the quality much better than what cable or satellite offers. Besides, I don't need more than a dozen channels.
Both my cable company (Comcast) and my phone company (Verizon FiOS) offer '3 in one' packages of TV/phone/broadband. But the added value just doesn't compute. The additional broadband speeds would be nice, but I don't need TV with 500 channels and phone with big feature packages. So, I figure the broadband would be economical at a price point of about $25/month. But that's not available from either provider. Worse yet, you can't get FiOS broadband only and keep your basic phone service. Verizon insists on moving its FiOS customers to the unregulated system.
So, I'm one of those 'statistics'. Its a lack of value, but if there was a suitable price, I'd buy it.
I dunno... (Score:5, Insightful)
It took us forever to get mother-in-law on broadband. Her computer is a cast-off donated by one of her sons which I've upgraded a couple of times. Thing is, she only uses it for email. Why would you need broadband for that? She finally converted when the local cable company offered her a package that essentially included it for free compared to the combined cost of phone/tv/dialup.
Parenthetically, I think this is the only way you're going to convert casual users -- by bundling broadband in with services considered more important.
Having broadband at her house helps me when our family visits, because I can work from there if necessary (I'm on call essentially 24/7) instead of driving down to the local coffee shop to use their wifi. But for her, the value is that her Outlook Express mailbox fills up in 2 seconds instead of 12. Given her computer takes 4 1/2 minutes to boot, the speed of fetching her email is down in the noise.
I think most of the unwashed public just can't see any value. (other than looking at pr0n...) This seems odd to us geeks, but it's demonstrably true -- demonstrable if you know any non-geeks. Unless you're streaming video, the higher bandwidth is barely perceptible. Who cares if a page loads in 1/8 of a second instead of 1/2 of a second? Well, I do, (and there seems to be unnecessary latency on my 20/5 FIOS line) but I observe (without completely understanding) that normal people do not.
If you want broadband saturation, you need a Killer App. Until very recently, there wasn't any legitimate non-geek use for it. Now you can catch up on TV episodes and watch old programs as streaming video. This is a good start, but it isn't as cool to the rank and file as you might think. Fred and Ethyl are used to watching TV on their TV, and having to crouch over a 17 inch monitor and poke webpage buttons with a mouse is not part of their paradigm. (There are solutions for all of this, but they're not well integrated -- forget it unless you know a geek.)
The Netflix box, Apple TV, are a good start -- they're actually *more* convenient than driving to Blockbuster, rather than *less* convenient. (I tried to explain torrents to my mom once. Yeah, right...) But the hard fact is, Fred and Ethyl are still more likely to watch whatever is on cable at the time their butts happen to be on the couch. It's just the way it is.
In this response, I've completely ignored the huge amount of non-entertainment information available on the internet, because I think the great majority largely ignores it also. If an online news service has a million unique hits, that's not much in a country of 300+M people. I suspect that the great majority still wants someone attractive-looking to tell them what's important in 43 minutes minus commercials. This concerns me, because it tends to further stratify the country, but making someone buy a product they don't want and don't think they need is always going to be problematic.
I can relate (Score:4, Interesting)
I only got a cell phone 3 years ago and use it less than 30 min a month, it doesn't have a camera, and the only text messages I've sent is "Wrong number" replies. I'm not signed up with myspace/facebook/twitter/whateverelseisthefadthisyear, and abandoned my blog after a few months since I had nothing interesting to say. I don't have satellite/digital cable or and do not own a single HDTV set. I still use a VCR - no TIVO/DVR. I'm satisfied with a $15/month 768kb DSL connection since anything faster would cost at least twice as much in my area. I'm a software engineer, yet by today's standards I would be considered a Luddite.
Re:I can relate (Score:4, Insightful)
You abandoned your blog because you had nothing interesting to say? ... I wish more people would do that.
DSL/Cable is $29.99, as is most dial-up (Score:3, Insightful)
You'd think that we'd do anything to save time, but there are all kinds of folks (particularly older and/or uneducated) that are willing to do things the tedious, long, hard way rather than be troubled to learn anything new. Everytime I've been in a job in IT and watched employees waste company time doing things inefficently (e.g. doing labels one-at-a-time), I've tried to teach them and if they were completely unwilling to even listen or try it, I go to their supervisor and say "I can make a lot more efficent for your department but he/she is completely unwilling to consider it" and usually they come around or are disciplined if they continue to waste time. Half of the battle is knowing.
Something to consider... (Score:3, Insightful)
Every new PC with a fast internet connection is another potential spambot. Knowledgeable people, or people who know knowledgeable people, can take steps to avoid getting pwn3d. The rank and file are at the mercy of, well, everyone, and the ISPs are not helping.
When I heard that mother-in-law had finally gotten cable internet, I asked her how they had set it up... They powered up a vanilla cable modem and connected her Windows PC to the raw internet! I told her to turn off her computer, drove the 3 hours to her house, installed and configured a firewall appliance between her computer and the modem. It was a pain, but scrubbing her computer later would potentially have been a greater pain.
Many ISPs give you a router with some firewall capabilities, but there are many others, especially the cheaper ones, who are just passing out modems without even NAT capability. Imagine another 100 million spambots with broadband. I know, it's your responsibility to keep your own machine secure, but most people will just reboot to catch an IP address and then "hey, look at all the pr0n!".
I would submit that we don't *want* millions of new Joe Sixpacks on the net until we establish that it can be done with reasonable safety.
This is not elitist. It's self-defense.
Let me put on my tinfoil hat for a minute... I have it somewhere. Ah here it is. Consider this: What is our main defense against the pap that talking heads feed us in monolithically owned news services? The internet. What would be a really great way to severely diminish it's usefulness? Cause the creation of the largest botnet in history. Not that I'm paranoid or anything.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I've got to add this: When mom-in-law first called to report problems, I was at work and fourteen-year-old daughter took the call. She took less than 30 seconds to assess the situation. "He fell for a trojan, Grandma. Your computer is infected. Sorry." (Nephew is 19!)
In New York City in 1882... (Score:5, Interesting)
"It (the first central commercial incandescent electric generating station) provided electricity to one square mile in New York City in 1882. The first day it operated only 52 customers wanted electricity."
ref: http://library.thinkquest.org/6064/history.html [thinkquest.org]
convincing vast majority about useful utility for higher quality of life is not alway about supply and demand or availability of technology.
My mom rejects it (Score:4, Funny)
I've tried 1,000 times to get a computer and Internet access for my mom, but she flatly rejects it. She actively doesn't want a computer. It's not because she doesn't know how to use them, but that she put in her years running a mainframe and is utterly burnt out on the subject.
Me: So at work, we have one computer with lots of hard drives and set the other computers to store their users' information on it instead of their own hard drives.
Mom: So your home directories are on NFS?
Me: Are you sure you don't want a computer, maybe a nice Mac?
Mom: No, and quit asking!
...or...
Me: I got a DSL connection.
Mom: Is that fast?
Me: In network terms, it's around 8 megabits.
Mom: So, about 5 T1s?
Me: Not even a little laptop?
Mom: No, and quit asking!
She's not skipping the "Internet revolution" because it's above her head. She's skipping it because she was there when they were building it, she did her time, and now wants to do other stuff.
Ditto for rail and many other things (Score:4, Insightful)
The don't want it because they don't know what it can do. It's the same reason we don't have a good national (or even regional) electric train system. Few people have ever seen one, know that they exist, or have any idea of the benefits.
Re:Ditto for rail and many other things (Score:4, Insightful)
I was just about to post this.
I was going to say that 2/3 of people who didn't have a telephone didn't want one and then 2/3 of people who didn't have a cell phone didn't want one.
It's ignorance. They don't know what it's capable of or even how to use it. It's not that they don't want it, it's that they don't yet know how much they want it.
I wish we had a train system here in miami. A bullet train to orlando would be sweet.
I can see it now... (Score:3, Funny)
Phone rings.
John Doe: Hello
Pew: Hi. I'm calling to ask if you'd like broadband.
John: What? A broad with a band?
Pew: No, sir. Internet access.
John: Enter knits? What are you taking about?
Pew: Broadband internet access.
John: A band made up of broads who knit?
Give 'em a free trial. (Score:3, Interesting)
Seriously. My grandpa was perfectly content with his dialup for years. He knew "broadband" was faster but it cost a lot more money and he could deal with dialup. He had a pattern. He'd start the computer and fire up the email client then go make breakfast or lunch depending on the time of day. By the time he was done, his email attachments were usually downloaded. He'd read his messages, set a few pictures to forward, reply with some new ones of his own, then hit the send/receive button and go do something for a while. Come back in an hour or so and it was done. Then he'd check his weather reports. Each map could take 5+ minutes to download but he could wait.
Then his neighbor got a cablemodem. He and the neighbor got to talking about it and my grandpa went over to check it out. His weather sites loaded in seconds instead of minutes. News sites. Investment sites. Everything was so fast! He called me up. "So I imagine my email will be faster, too? No more waiting half an hour for a few pictures to download? And those updates you install when you visit?"
So, the next time I was there, we took a trip to the cable company's office and picked up a cablemodem. And, maybe a week after that, he had me order him a new computer 'cause the Celery/333 had become the bottleneck. And it's totally worth the extra money to him. He would probably pay a hundred bucks a month now that he knows that going from dialup to cable is like going from peeking through the keyhole of a library to having the doors thrown open.
I just wish cable companies would offer something like 512/128 for $10-15/month. That's all that many people need. Heck, I had 384/128 at a cheap rate for years and it was fine for me.
They got their War, they can have our Broadband :) (Score:2, Insightful)
I think the main issue is people don't want to pay for it. They're happy in their cozy little niches and don't want to look to the wider world and notice the USA is falling behind. Head in the sand, and all that. Why pay to keep up with our economic competitors when that money can be used to raise another child?
Perhaps I'm being cynical.
Re:They got their War, they can have our Broadband (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Watching retarded YouTube videos and other crap isn't an essential part of life.
Nor is reading books, or watching movies. YouTube is, however, part of our culture. Not "essential", but certainly not as useless as you're suggesting.
And that's assuming everything on YouTube is "crap" according to you -- not true, seems whitehouse.gov is using it as well these days.
If your only use for the Internet is email and browsing Wikipedia you can get by just fine with dialup.
Even just Wikipedia is improved by having images load instantly, rather than line by line. Yet the article points to 19 percent of dialup users who would never upgrade, no matter what the price.
Re: (Score:2)
Logging ito Gmail or Yahoo mail faster. The free mail guys like serving ads.