Comments for Blandin on Broadband

Comment on Comcast Caps: suddenly Xfinity move makes even more sense by Ann Treacy

Ann Treacy — Mon, 21 May 2012 14:36:03 +0000

I think in this case the problem may not be charging the fee based on usage – but the fact that a user doesn’t incur the fee if they use Comcast for video. It means that Comcast controls the transport and content, which can lead to a situation where few folks control access to media.

Comment on Comcast Caps: suddenly Xfinity move makes even more sense by Mike Bushard jr

Mike Bushard jr — Sat, 19 May 2012 23:17:21 +0000

What I do not understand is why people think that internet service should be unlimited or “all you can eat”. You pay for water buy the gallon, power by the kilowatt, natural gas by the therm, liquid propane buy the gallon, and so on. Why should data not be billed per megabyte? The wireless carriers are doing it, why can’t the wire line companies do it? The routers, switches, DSLAMS, OLT’s, fiber, copper, etcetera all cost money to build, maintain and upgrade. Lots of companies have to pay for bandwidth too, it’s not free by any means. Metered billing is coming, get used to it. ISP’s simply cannot support the business model of Netflix, Hulu, and others. Either they need to pay for the data transfer or the customer does. The USF reform is/will not help the matter any.

Comment on Net Neutrality 2.0 by Ann Treacy

Ann Treacy — Tue, 15 May 2012 13:24:46 +0000

That would be nice – but I think this move with Comcast indicates that having some rules in place might motivate folks to work together.

Comment on Net Neutrality 2.0 by Jack Ogden

Jack Ogden — Tue, 15 May 2012 12:30:53 +0000

This issue has me a little bit nervous too to tell the truth. It’s hard to see exactly what companies are going to do in the near future regarding Net Neutrality, however one would hope that people simply start working a bit closer together to give consumers and businesses more choice.

Comment on FirstNet – an interoperable, public safety network. What’s the plan? by Ann Treacy

Ann Treacy — Mon, 14 May 2012 19:50:44 +0000

Thanks for the heads up!!

Comment on FirstNet – an interoperable, public safety network. What’s the plan? by PSA supporter

PSA supporter — Fri, 11 May 2012 19:48:19 +0000

Your State of Minnesota has just completed its own comprehensive public safety broadband study (https://dps.mn.gov/divisions/ecn/programs/armer/Pages/studies-reports.aspx ) with contract support of public safety broadband experts Televate, LLC (www.televate.com/firstnetplanning ), which is fast becoming a national model best practice for other states, locallities, tribes and federal agencies to emulate in preparing for and working with FirstNet. With such a comprehensive, unbiased process, such intiatives will help to assure that FirstNet develops an RFP(s) that reflects, incorporates, responds to, and provides the realistic wants and needs of the user community (as well as a complete and accurate asset inventory). It will be important for the appointed FirstNet Board members to come in without any preconditions on the options to consider, research and evaluate to get to the results necessary in planning, implementing and sustaining a robust and successful nationwide public safety broadband network. That means no bias for or against commerical carriers or other private, public and/or non-profit partners to public safety. Federal public safety agencies must be heavy users that rely on this network as equal partners to their state, local and tribal counterparts, and the network must also include eligibility for utilities, public works, transportation and other government, critical infrastructure and first responder entities and communities whether in the private, non-profit or public sector to provide maximum interoperability during day-to-day emergencies, as well as major incidents, special events and disasters. FirstNet should also include small business entrepreneurs and established subject matter experts, resisting the too often wasteful federally directed spending on the usual crowd of beltway bandit consulting firms that have previously given us the failed FBI Virtual Case File (VCF) debacle, the still not Integrated Wireless Network (IWN) project, and other such non-sense. With such limited funding at up to $7 billion with which to build a nationwide network, FirstNet cannot afford to waste a single dollar in investment padding $350 an hr billables for useless services or to try and train some junior newbie in the job on the government’s dime.

Comment on Cell Phones a Plus in the Classroom by Ann Treacy

Ann Treacy — Tue, 08 May 2012 17:23:45 +0000

I did like the idea of practicing public speaking via cell phone. That coudl probably help me today!

Comment on Cell Phones a Plus in the Classroom by JC

JC — Tue, 08 May 2012 16:57:10 +0000

Sounds like a stretch to me. Not only are cell phones in class a distraction but promoting their use discriminates against low-income students. I could buy it for, say, iPad classrooms, but there’s nothing new here that couldn’t be done with VHS 30 years ago.

Comment on ConnectMN new maps unveiled by Bill Coleman

Bill Coleman — Tue, 24 Apr 2012 18:34:20 +0000

I found the maps quite easy to use. And the ability to zoom into an area is quite good.

I hope that the state broadband task force prints some nice size posters of these areas to keep this lack of connectivity fresh in their minds. Maybe some of those local champions need to send some their area map to the task force to make sure that their voices are heard.

Comment on Bridging the Digital Divide – a gathering in St Paul by newrulesmitchell

newrulesmitchell — Fri, 20 Apr 2012 00:56:58 +0000

While Ann got the main thrust of my comments spot on, I should be more clear that there are some marginal costs in addition to the electricity – including a fund to replace some gear on a regular basis (generally multiple years).