Only One US City Makes "Top Ten Internet Cities Worldwide" List 240
An anonymous reader writes "A new report today has ranked the Top 10 'Internet Cities' around the globe, based on a set of five criteria: connection speed, availability of citywide WiFi, openness to innovation, support of public data, and security/data privacy. One might expect high-tech cities like San Francisco and Tel Aviv to appear on a list of 'Internet Cities,' but they don't. Indeed, no Middle Eastern cities appear here at all, and — due, largely, to the United States' poor Internet speeds — the only US city to make this ranking is Seattle."
American priorities (Score:5, Funny)
Okay, that may be so, but can we get list of highest telco/cableco profit cities? I bet USA totally rocks that list.
Re:American priorities (Score:4, Informative)
Don't worry if your city wasn't included, I'm sure it's on this "Top 100" list:
http://www.symantec.com/about/news/release/article.jsp?prid=20120215_01 [symantec.com]
Heh, marketing.
Re: (Score:2)
Any sufficiently large list of cities remotely dealing with "Internet" that don't include Chattanooga, TN, with it's 1Gig FTTH option for pretty much the entire city is a load of crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Suprised even one made it. THeres a whole lotta places in the world that are so far ahead of the U.S. in many ways...
Re: American priorities (Score:5, Funny)
Of course Seattle made the top 10. We have more coffee shop hot spots per capita then anywhere else on Earth.
Re: (Score:3)
It's amusing to see Amsterdam making the list. I've dealt with their ex-state phone company, KPN, and it's always a world of pain to get them to do anything.
KPN isn't the only telco. Although I'm mystified why the article explicitly mentions T-Mobile's 4G rollout this fall, when KPN and Vodafone already have 4G coverage in Amsterdam.
Amsterdam's inclusion on this list isn't inappropriate at all. There are several glass fiber networks in the city (though not every neighbourhood has been connected yet), one of the most important internet exchanges in Europe, there are a lot of internet companies, and a lot of projects to create a good environment for startups, lik
Re:American priorities (Score:4, Informative)
No, you can fire people right away when they're actively malicious. You can fire them for being grossly incompetent if you've got that incompetence well documented. You can fire them for practically any reason (as long as you dress it up nicely) if you pay them a month's salary for every year they worked for you. And as long as they don't have a permanent contract, you can always decide not to renew the contract.
And I've been in a startup where people got fired, not even for gross incompetence, but simply for having a job that turned out to not really be necessary.
But I think the most important thing for startups is not just the laws, but also the culture. The US definitely has a more entrepreneurial culture. Netherland less so, but it's slowly turning around.
And I'm sorry for misunderstanding what you meant. You're absolutely right that amusing is not the same thing as inappropriate. I admit I was pleasantly surprised to see Amsterdam up there. I want it to be up there. But I'm also very likely biased.
Re: American priorities (Score:4, Informative)
That's bullshit, especially in this case. State-owned monopoly has no reason to compete with anyone. There might be some exceptions, but I live in Prague and the services used to be absolutely terrible until other companies started to offer these services around 2000 - cable, ADSL, wifi etc. It's much better now and most people have multiple choices. Btw the telco is not owned by state anymore, it was sold to Telefonica a few years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not just about speed. It's also about security and privacy. Given the proclivity of Singapore to micro-manage its citizens' lives, I doubt your data is very private. Remember, this is a place where chewing gum is illegal.
Re:American priorities (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, the really important metrics are less "how fast and how easily available", but how controlled, censored, and monitored?
I'll take my 30mbps, home-bound-connection-only service without censorship or monitoring (if it existed) over 200mbps or free city-wide-wifi anywhere that content is heavily filtered or monitored any day.
Re: (Score:2)
Good point, and yet again I have no mod points.
Re: (Score:3)
If you make the list about profit per user, Canada will be number one, far ahead everyone else including the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Because the base level of the USA is so low that growth is necessary/obvious?
Why would a country being decades of the US need/habe a high HDI score?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
No it's not.
From wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:
From the U.N. [undp.org]:
There is no component that reflects current growth rate or expected future
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, about these World Wars where America claims to be the conquering hero. The first one (1914 - 1918) ended in a stalemate. The well dressed and well fed U.S. arrival in 1917 demoralized the Europeans into realizing it was in everyone's best interest to have an armistice: a situation where the warring parties agree to stop fighting. The hostilities remained, it was just a cessation while attempting to negotiate a permanent peace.
Then the U.S. convinced everyone to agree Germany was at fault, requiring th
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously? (Score:4, Insightful)
There are close to 200 countries in the world. The US is mentioned one time in a list of Top Ten and somehow that's not enough? Please. There are at least 190 countries that don't even have ONE city mentioned.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
Those countries aren't the worlds biggest economy. Those countries didn't pioneer the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
Be a pretty boring list if the top ten cities were in two countries.
Just cause something started at one place doesn't mean other places can't make it better. ESPECIALLY smaller places. The infrastructure in the US sucks, and we all know it. I don't see why we're at all surprised.
Re: (Score:2)
Just cause something started at one place doesn't mean other places can't make it better. ESPECIALLY smaller places. The infrastructure in the US sucks, and we all know it. I don't see why we're at all surprised.
Why does it suck? What's going wrong there?
Re: (Score:3)
Short answer: lack of competition in service providers
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
Consider, 4 providers, each putting up their own infrastructure. Not only are efforts duplicated, but the users are split. So each provider will only get about 1/4 of the subscribers in an area. Which means costs will be about 4 times higher. Not a very good system at all. Now, because infrastructure naturally monopolizes anyway, we wind up with a private company having a monopoly on infrastructure and we have what we have.
At least that's my humble view.
Re: (Score:2)
So you are saying that the government of the US, the same government that authorized the NSA to spy on it's own citizens, should be responsible for setting up our internet infrastructure? Am I reading you correctly?
Re:Seriously? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Seriously? (Score:4, Insightful)
Everybody is happy, the shareholders get to keep generational wealth flowing from 'rent' rather than a wasting their profits on constant upgrades (just looking after and expand existing networks).
The cities and local govs have deals with existing providers. The NSA has its "legal" ways in with existing infrastructure. Marketing can sell you on how lucky you are to have hybrid fiber-coaxial/copper/optical areas while keeping business plans safe from their consumer grade offerings. The only hard part is to keep the US public in the past about existing telco infrastructure. The words magic words distance and socialism still seem to have their hold on the minds of many.
Re: (Score:2)
You're half right. Infrastructure should be initially built by the government, but immediately spun off as a nonprofit corporation, a la TVA. This has the advantage of taking the profit motive out of the equation, while at least reducing the specter of government control, censorship, spying, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
GSM is not infrastructure. GSM is architecture. Whenever companies create shell organizations to do the actual buildout, it is almost invariably a colossal failure because:
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So why do we still not have anything faster than 6 Mbps DSL in lots of places right smack in the middle of the Silicon Valley? It has nothing to do with density and everything to do with for-profit companies having no real incentive to improve their infrastructure while they can keep milking the existin
Re: (Score:2)
Because none of that farming country has fast Internet service, either.
Re: (Score:2)
"Population Density" always gets blamed, but it's not the reason for USA's poor service. If it was, New York City would have awesome Internet service.
Re: (Score:2)
1) It's not subsidized by the government via taxes.
2) The US is large and has a low population density, which makes it more expensive to deliver service.
The other thing I've wondered is, what is our cost relative income? We may pay more, but we make more -- but do we normalize based on per capita income?
Re: (Score:3)
The other thing I've wondered is, what is our cost relative income? We may pay more, but we make more -- but do we normalize based on per capita income?
Those kinds of things are very difficult to judge, because you're only looking at the comparative cost of one metric.
I live and work in Hannover, Germany. According to various "how much should I earn" websites, my income (as a senior software developer) is in direct exchange rates similar to the average income for a senior software developer in the US. The US is a big country with quite a lot of variance, so I suspect the average for a software developer in New York City or San Francisco is probably somew
Re:Seriously? (Score:4, Interesting)
The US is no longer the worlds biggest economy. The US hasn't done anything to improve the internet in quiet some time.
Unless you count surveillance and censorship.
Re: (Score:2)
What is your basis for stating that the US is not the world's biggest economy? What divisions constitute an economy in your list? I know on wikipedia, for example, that the only thing bigger than the United States' GDP is the European Union. Comparing the United States to the EU seems a bit apples and oranges. If you are comparing supranational economies, then a more valid comparison would be the EU and the NAFTA countries. Which when combining the GDP of Canada, United States and Mexico, the total is sever
Re: (Score:3)
How is it apples and oranges to compare the EU to the US? Both the US and EU are unions consisting of states. That the states in the EU are also separate countries doesn't seem to have as much a bearing on the comparison as you think it ought to.
Certainly all the lists of ranked economies, e.g. those put out by the IMF and World Bank don't have a problem comparing the EU to the US, China and the like.
Re: (Score:2)
No member state has ever left the EU, although each state has the right to do so.
The remainder of your assertions are also highly suspect.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Interesting)
Those countries aren't the worlds biggest economy. Those countries didn't pioneer the Internet.
Those countries don't have the belief that they are better than everyone else. For example Sweden would not be offended by finding out it didn't rate highest in some arbitrary test.
Re: (Score:2)
Is that really the best you can come up with?
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Interesting)
But those nice guys in Geneva invented the WWW.
Re: (Score:2)
To be somewhat fair, they did base it on HyperCard or a compatible program, which is American (and at the time seemed genuinely amazing).
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Really, when I look at the list, the thing that strikes me is that a good chunk of the cities are from countries that have a small geographic footprint. For instance, to pull their rankings from the list of countries ordered by their geographic area:
Stockholm - Sweden - #57 in terms of countries ranked by geographic area
Tokyo - Japan - #62
Seoul - South Korea - #109
Vienna - Austria - #115
Prague - Czech Republic - #116
Geneva - Switzerland - #133
Amsterdam - Netherlands - #135
In every single one of those, a sin
Re: (Score:2)
Hong Kong is pretty small, and remains quite distinct from the Chinese mainland as regards political system, economy (including banking and currency), infrastructure, language, personal freedoms, educational system, border control, etc., etc. It is essentially a separate entity over which Beijing gets to exercise bragging rights.
Re: (Score:3)
How is the size of the country relevant? This isn't a list of the most connected countries, but cities. And since we're talking cities, shouldn't it be the population size of the conglomeration be the most important factor? Stockholm is tiny compared to most US conglomerations. Why is New York not on the list? Or LA? Surely you should be able to connect people fairly cheaply in metropoles like that?
The problem the US has with connecting its population has nothing to do with its geography. Well, maybe if you
Re: (Score:2)
There are close to 200 countries in the world. The US is mentioned one time in a list of Top Ten and somehow that's not enough? Please. There are at least 190 countries that don't even have ONE city mentioned.
OK, here's another "Top 10 Internet Countries" from earlier this year made just for you:
http://www.bloomberg.com/slideshow/2013-01-23/top-10-countries-with-the-fastest-internet.html#slide1 [bloomberg.com]
Spoiler: US is not on the list; Israel is.
But I've kinda learned from all the BuzzFeed lists spam not to pay attention to any of these lists.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm just saying we shouldn't be all surprised by this list.
Funny thing, when I lived in Israel the fastest "internet" you could get was a 33.6k modem, and even that couldn't stay online for more than a couple of hours, and the absolutely BEST ISP had ONE T1 line to the actual internet...
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly enough this list reads like a list of the biggest capitols on the planet. That makes the entire list far less interesting. The fact that you can get good internet in Stockholm is not nearly as interesting as how that compares to what you might see up in the fiords.
NO country has more than one city on the list, that includes countries that are elevated above the US in these metrics.
Re: (Score:3)
Here's my thing. I live in Minneapolis (more or less) and I can get consistent download speeds of 3 megs per second. Is it the fastest in the world? No. Is it MORE than enough? Yes, it is. So I don't have gigabit fiber to my house. So what? Sure, it'd be nice, and one day it'll get here and be considered slow. I can live with that.
Re: (Score:2)
Interestingly enough this list reads like a list of the biggest capitols [sic] on the planet.
According to Wikipedia, the 10 largest national capitals by population are:
Beijing
Tokyo
Moscow
Seoul
Djakarta
Tehran
Ciudad de México
Lima
Bangkok
London
So, no, it doesn't.
Re:Seriously? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Yea, kinda ruined my point, meant just the fastest bandwidth, drop the average.
Because US love and US hate (Score:4, Insightful)
There are more than a few people out there who seem to think that there are two positions one can be in: #1 and utter crap, at least when it comes to the US. So if the US isn't #1 in something, then it is utter crap, a third world shithole, a loser, etc.
In come cases it is the overly zealous "We're #1" America lovers who really do think the US is the best EVAR at everything. They just can't handle second best at anything, ever.
In more cases it is people who like to hate on the US, for whatever various reasons, and thus see it as a way to say "See! Look at how bad the US is! It isn't the best! It sucks!"
It is very silly, but you see it on Slashdot plenty given that the site has a large number of users with poor world awareness and a dislike for the US (most of them being US citizens).
The same shit went on when there was a story about China having the #1 super computer on the Top 500 list, for the moment. Somehow the fact that the US has the the #2, 3, 5, 6, and 8 (half the top 10, in other words) didn't seem to matter. The US wasn't #1, so clearly they fail.
Re: (Score:2)
That's a much more eloquent way of saying what I was trying to say, yes (:
I think it'd be nice if Americans in general were more OK with NOT being #1, and look at it as an opportunity for improvement.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm an American, and I'm fine with not being #1. I'm even fine with not being #1 overall. Personally, I think we currently have the best overall country in the world, but I'd like to see a better one or two. Nothing brings out the best in the US than competition, or at least it did. Looking around at people here, I'm not so sure anymore, but I'd love to see it. Perhaps it's time for someone else to step up to the plate. There is nothing that says the US has be #1 forever, nor should it. The world is
Re: (Score:2)
The US also isn't your typical country. It's far more comparable to the EU as a whole than to any one EU country. We have
5 cities in europe (four of which are in the EU).
2 cities in north america
3 cities in east asia
Having said that i'm always very dubious of this sort of thing. I don't see anything in the article about how the critera were assessed and weighted. Nor any information on what citiees were assesed and didn't make the cut. I don't think this should be regarded as anything more than one reporter
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Informative)
Because they have no justification or any reason to. The USA is the richest, mightiest, most powerful and influential nation in the world. Nobody else comes close.
You be Trollin' Trollin' Trollin'
Richest - The US is so deep in debt it can't hope to ever pay it off.
Mightiest - Temporary. That will wane just like it waned for every other empire that has ever existed. Many of those previous empires controlled a far greater amount of the civilized world.
Most powerful - See above.
Influential - The US's world influence is already waning. The US moral high ground is shot to hell. The spying and warmongering have destroyed trust from the US's closest allies.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
With a little help from Bush's republican administration and his policies in support of freedom and democracy, such as patriot act and guantanamo bay, the terrorists won. The U.S. has wasted uncountable billions in useless wars, money which could have been spent in infrastructure, education and social programs, and it has lost all credibility as the leader of the free world. For the last 12 years, the U.S. has been busy dismantling its foundations in the name of the war against terror. 12 years not simply wasted, but actively self-destructive, especially on moral authority.
Well, not completely self-destructive. Some corporations and contractors in the business of war and 'security' have been making very happy profits lately, I suppose.
Terrorists are trolls. The U.S. has allowed itself to be trolled to epic proportions. They could never have caused so much damage, cost so many billions, if left to their own devices.
Re:Seriously? (Score:5, Insightful)
God knows I'm not usually one to cite Jesus, but whatever happened to "turn the other cheek"? After 9/11, the World Trade Center should have been rebuilt and the muslim community in the U.S. should have been embraced and integrated. The message to terrorists and the world should have been; while extremists celebrate fear and death, we celebrate our freedom, pluralism and life.
It's amazingly hypocritical that the religious conservatives in the U.S. are often the first to favor a heavy handed, military approach to resolving conflict.
Re: (Score:2)
God knows I'm not usually one to cite Jesus, but whatever happened to "turn the other cheek"? After 9/11, the World Trade Center should have been rebuilt and the muslim community in the U.S. should have been embraced and integrated. The message to terrorists and the world should have been; while extremists celebrate fear and death, we celebrate our freedom, pluralism and life.
Unfortunately, you've only got one more cheek. What do you do after they slap that one too?
It's not like embracing freedom, pluralism and life would make the terrorists stop hating us.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not like embracing freedom, pluralism and life would make the terrorists stop hating us.
But it would have stopped turning thousends other people into terrorists, too.
Re: (Score:3)
It takes a bit more than hugging Muslims. The US would still have a history of screwing over governments in the middle east, and propping up Israel, which no amount of hugging would tempered. Until the US owns up to that - and seriously starts to put things right - people will still find fault. Shock. Horror.
But yes - I agree that should have been the domestic approach. Unfortunately the US government would have screwed it up.
Re: (Score:2)
The U.S's 'International War On Terror' (tm) was financed by the People's Republic of China. If you want to destroy a country, I can think of no better way to do it than to have them fight an endless war on a paticular military tactic, while you build up your country. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but if I were I guess I could think of half a dozen reasons not to believe the official story or pretty much anything else that is reported to me by the media. The media says that Muslim Terrorist took over the plane. Don't know maybe they did, however I find it doubtfull that our media industrial complex would have enough 'investigative skills' to make this determination. I mean that would require the kind of journalistic integrity and competance that hasn't existed in my country in 30 years. You would have to actually sort through the wreckage find passports, look on flight rosters. I can't see my media doing this. I can see them being fooled and mislaid by easy answers though. I have a great deal of faith and trust in my media when it is discussing things like Justin Beiber, or Selema Gomez, but to actually go out and investigate a story, and not just rereport whatever tidbit of news comes over the wire from whatever source happens to have the most influence? Now that I find hard to believe.
The only country that really benifited from 9-11 was China. The proud nations of Iraq and Afganastan (two countries that even by the official accounts had nothing to do with it) were bombed to hell while The USA is bankrupt.
Yea we were trolled pretty bad. I'm not sure by who, but ultimately it is our own dam fault.
-Believe nothing of what you see and only half of what you hear.
-Ernest in 'Ernest Goes to Camp'
The anti-bush tirade is at +4 and this is at -1? Come on mods, you might well think the above is wrong but at least someone is thinking here.
Re: (Score:2)
Obama clearly didn't.
This Republican v Democrat two party system is the problem. Both sides know that no matter what they do they won't lose power for more than 2 election cycles as a significant block of voters vote to keep the most hated party out.
The US needs to vote for third parties or it will never have a credible democratic system.
Re: (Score:2)
Haters gonna hate. It's sad, the inferiority complexes Yuropeans and Canuckleheads have.
That's backwards. My point was that the rest of the world doesn't have a superiority complex. The absence of a superiority complex isn't the same as having an inferiority complex.
Re: (Score:2)
Except that the points originally being touted as positives were the ones that were identified in the response as being temporary.
weird list (Score:5, Informative)
Seattle's connectivity is pretty abysmal, unless you live in the tiny areas of downtown Seattle serviced by CondoInternet.net. Other than that, you're lucky if you can get Comcast (trust me, there are FAR worse ISPs than Comcast).
Re: (Score:2)
Seattle's connectivity is pretty abysmal, unless you live in the tiny areas of downtown Seattle serviced by CondoInternet.net. Other than that, you're lucky if you can get Comcast (trust me, there are FAR worse ISPs than Comcast).
Agreed, lived here for almost 20 years, and I've had ISDN/IDSL and DSL on Qwest or Frontier (sucks) living in major suburbs of Seattle. I'm on comcast now and I dont want to ever go back. Plus the digital cable is better than Frontier anyday.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed, lived here for almost 20 years, and I've had ISDN/IDSL and DSL on Qwest or Frontier (sucks) living in major suburbs of Seattle. I'm on comcast now and I dont want to ever go back. Plus the digital cable is better than Frontier anyday.
I never tried Frontier, but Qwest's speeds are pathetic. DSL speeds worse than cellphone connections! The worst one I've ever used was Broadstripe. Criminally incompetent. *shudder*
Tacoma WA is the "#1 most wired city" (Score:2)
...which is no longer such an awesome claim to make, especially since now Spokane (2nd largest city nowadays) is bragging about its 100 square block public hotspot.
Re: (Score:2)
Seattle? Seriously? (Score:4, Interesting)
I work in Seattle. Here (at UW) our internet is pretty good, as you might expect - but the city as a whole is nothing to write home about. Of course there's a Starbucks on every corner, so perhaps the city scored well based on the availability of that AT&T free wi-fi...
Reading the article, it appears Seattle scored highly based, at least in part, on things they say they plan to do. And I must admit our local guys are very adept at talking a good game. But come on... they just killed the almost stillborn city-wide wifi network! Talking is basically all they're good at!
Re: (Score:3)
I work in Seattle. Here (at UW) our internet is pretty good, as you might expect - but the city as a whole is nothing to write home about. Of course there's a Starbucks on every corner, so perhaps the city scored well based on the availability of that AT&T free wi-fi...
I assumed when I saw Seattle as the only U.S. city on the top ten list that the survey was a proxy for Starbucks density.
Cheers,
Dave
I don't get the rating system (Score:2)
For example why would LTE be in a criteria for free and fast? Tokyo for example has great mobile coverage and speed, but not a lot of free wifi. Being a tourist having free wifi is better than no access because your phone cannot be used on the network or the cost is prohibitive. Maybe a better breakdown than what is in the article is required, because getting internet access in London is easier than Toyko; although the speed is not as fast.
Re: (Score:2)
For example why would LTE be in a criteria for free and fast? Tokyo for example has great mobile coverage and speed, but not a lot of free wifi. Being a tourist having free wifi is better than no access because your phone cannot be used on the network or the cost is prohibitive. Maybe a better breakdown than what is in the article is required, because getting internet access in London is easier than Toyko; although the speed is not as fast.
The ratings are for speeds available to local residents. They were not concerned about accessibility for tourists.
I also noticed the lack of wifi hotspots accessible by non-Japanese in Tokyo regardless of whether they were free or not.
At least you could go to McDonald's or the Apple Store for free wifi.
Re: (Score:2)
That's one thing that truly sucks about Mainland China. In order to use most free wifi hotspots there, you must register with a Chinese mobile number.
Or talk the girl at the counter into letting you have her passcode and phone number. (It helps if she thinks you're exotic and cute.)
A joke of a list (Score:2)
They list Montreal, and their primary reasons are laughable.
They say Montreal does very well in speedtests because of... OVH. Wait, what? That's a dedicated server and cloud services provider, they have nothing at all to do with consumer broadband in Montreal. Maybe this is a positive for businesses, but it has zero bearing on your average Montrealer. The second reason is the Ile Sans Fil people, who install free wifi access points... except their coverage is non-existent. They've got 260 access points. The
There's a lot of that (Score:2)
You find that many places post these amazing Speedtest scores. There was some ISP in Riga (Latvia) that was showing extremely high results... However when you do some more extensive testing it doesn't seem to bear out. So why is that? Well because they run their own Speedtest server and operate their stuff like a big WAN.
It is not so hard to provide a big link internal to your network. It is a lot harder (meaning more expensive) to provide enough backhaul to make it fast to the majority of the world.
I mean
Re: (Score:2)
Right, except OVH in Montreal is a datacenter. They really do have an obscene amount of bandwidth to the rest of the internet. The problem is that the "list" is counting a datacenter as a broadband ISP. They're not, they're a datacenter.
Plunking an enormous datacenter down next to a city doesn't suddenly make it a futuristic super internet city...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All of whom are limited to offering the same services offered by Bell and Videotron. Sometimes they can't even match the incumbent pricing due to the ridiculous CBB rates approved by the CRTC.
of course.. (Score:2)
Socialist countries heavily subsidize infrastructure at taxpayer expense, but either way, the bills have to be paid. I like my freedom and control over my income, so I don't mind paying going market rates. I realize it's not comparable to $10/mo for gigabit like it might be in stockholm because the other $60 is publically funded.
Tat said, I do believe the infrastructure could be improved, but that other things like rollbacks on data monitoring are more important.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I live in Stockholm, and you've obviously no idea what you're talking about.
Article divided up into 11 segments (Score:3)
Really?
>hit print button hoping it gives the whole article
>only first page
tmp;dr
Even Cracked only divides up their "top 10" lists into two pages.
--
BMO
Another top 10 list (Score:3)
Yet another "top 10" list. Can I get a list of the top 10 top 10 lists? Seriously, I'm tired of articles that amount to "someone's list of top 10 X will shock you!"
Re: (Score:2)
Yet another "top 10" list. Can I get a list of the top 10 top 10 lists? Seriously, I'm tired of articles that amount to "someone's list of top 10 X will shock you!"
Slashdot readers in Baltimore are shocked to learn this one weird trick that will get you to read top 10 lists [youtu.be]!
Re: (Score:2)
Criteria? (Score:2)
I find it interesting that support of public data.and security and data privacy are supposed to be part of the criteria they are never mentioned in the ratings.
"only one" isn't bad really. (Score:3)
So no country on the list had more than one city. There's lots of other countries that aren't even on here.
it's OK, really (Score:2)
I really don't care what kind of world-wide lists we're first on. We should stop obsessing about what people in Europe or Asia do or think.
One might expect San Francisco to make the list... (Score:3)
One might expect San Francisco to make the list only if one has never lived there. As a tech Mecca its communication infrastructure has been filled to bursting and expanded by any means necessary time and again...
Re: (Score:2)
Between the bling capital of the planet (Dubai) and the ubergeek capital of the planet (Israel), there should have been at least one middle eastern city on that list.
I live in Seattle. (Score:3)
I'm on Beacon Hill. Our Internet services vary from street to street. It's ludicrous! I'm stuck with a slow provider right now, but a "gigabit" provider is trying to get access one block away.
Why do you think we legalized pot? Your connection might be slow but you cool with it.
Re: (Score:2)
But I can watch TV shows on Hulu while downloading a Linux distro with Bittorrent. Am I missing something?
I can't. Not even close (unless I limit bittorrent to next to nothing for download speed). It depends on where in the US you're located.
Re: (Score:3)
Checks outside. Still raining. Screw it, back to Slashdot.