6 ms·
A quarter of Alabamians live in homes without internet access
- JustSomeNobody 7y agoGiven that the majority of the people they’re talking about are poor or in poverty and most services they need, if not require it, at least are easier to obtain with internet access, this is tragic. This is a very wealthy nation. We must do better.
- huffmsa 7y agoOkay, as part of we, what are you going to do to help get these people internet? Are you starting a charity or an LLC to build the infrastructure? Are you going to invest in a company working to expand access? Or so you just mean that someone else in the "we" collective needs to do something?
- uzzgx 7y agoIn first world countries, the government ("we") takes care of this by paying telcos to deploy access to remote (i.e., unprofitable) areas.
- huffmsa 7y agoNot sustainable. "Government money" (money taken from it's citizenry) eventually runs out. Plus granting a firm a government monopoly on a region is always a bad idea that ultimately hinders the development and deployment of new solutions. Cab medallions in NYC. Fixed price airline tickets. Exclusive right to trade spices west of the prime meridian.
- uzzgx 7y ago>Not sustainable. "Government money" (money taken from it's citizenry) eventually runs out. Okay? That doesn't seem to be happening in Europe for example. Everything runs fine. There's internet access in rural areas. The world didn't collapse. >Plus granting a firm a government monopoly on a region is always a bad idea that ultimately hinders the development and deployment of new solutions. It's an auction. And others can choose to deploy afterwards. >Cab medallions in NYC. Fixed price airline tickets. Exclusive right to trade spices west of the prime meridian. Yes, the free market seems to work fine in this case. That's why these Alabamians have 1 Gbps fibre... oh no wait they have no access to the Internet at all. Dammit. Call Ayn Rand
- huffmsa 7y ago> Everything runs fine Ask the Germans about how they feel about underwriting the rest of the EUs poor decisions to make sure that everything is running smoothly.
- uzzgx 7y agoFrom the fact that you are a libertarian I had already assumed you had no idea about economy, but thanks for confirming it.
- dhdixncjd 7y agoThe Germans owe tens billions of dollars to the Greeks due when a final WW2 peace treaty is signed. The billions of dollars are loans the Germans forced the Greeks to grant then during the war and at the end of it were to be paid by de-industrializing Germany by moving the capital goods to Greece. The Germans, not wanting to pay or default, asked the four powers not to grant them a peace treaty when they reunified. The Germans are quite touchy about this, but the fact is, they’re deadbeats. Uzzgx: when lacking arguments launch the ad hominem attacks.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- formercoder 7y agoNot always. Certain services, electricity for example, are “natural monopolies”. Once someone is in there, it makes no economic sense for others to compete, this is where government regulated monopolies are the optimal solution.
- huffmsa 7y agoOh? How's PG&Es monopoly working for California? I'm of the opinion that much smaller grids with high volume solar would do a lot better of a job. Sure the monopoly made sense when it was issued, but once tech catches up to the point of making it obsolete, the incumbent rarely goes down without a fight, delaying the deployment of new technologies, ultimately hurting consumers.
- thebooktocome 7y agoPG&E's problems are due to a change in liability laws combined with decades of poor maintenance. A non-profit government-run utility wouldn't have a profit incentive to skimp on equipment maintenance for decades. It would have other, more interesting problems.
- huffmsa 7y agoThe US military skips on maintenance all the damn time. They were running bootleg copies of Windows as recently as 2015 because they don't have the resources or incentives to upgrade. Every office of the executive executive branch is in theory non/not-for-profit but they still manage to waste as much money if not more than a comparable private sector firm. Federal light and power would not go well.
- ldoughty 7y agoFor-profit government granted monopolies are a terrible idea. They should be government-run, or watched, and should not choose between providing a service to customers or money to shareholders. I'm not in California, but sounds to me like PG&E maximized profits by reducing maintenance, then when they were really far behind and running into issues, they begged for more money from taxpayers because they could not afford to make up for years of maximizing shareholder and senior management profits... I.e. corporate welfare.. they made lots of profit knowing this would bite them in the rear end, and then want the government to bail them out. It's nearly always win-win when you're that large of a company to pull these shenanigans
- scarface74 7y agoHow does money “run out”? Are we not collecting more of it every year?
- yowlingcat 7y agoNice touch on the last one. What do you think of a blend of the two? That is, government investments funding private companies?
- huffmsa 7y agoI like to flex my supposedly useless history degree from time to time. How else would I take shots at Julius II? I don't think the government is particularly good at actively promoting things. Too easy to incorrectly optimize. So to best promote investment in private firms, they should find something that currently disincentives it and stop doing that.
- yowlingcat 7y agoAre you sure about that? Even accounting for the historical contribution of the US DOD and public sector to the genesis of the Silicon Valley in the first place?
- shiftless 7y ago"In other news, the military-industrial complex--like all government programs--just grows and grows and grows, while the taxpayers are continuously sucked dry to fund all these marvelous ideas and brilliant schemes concocted by the Really Smart People. More at 11."
- jessaustin 7y agoNot sustainable. "Government money" The "lifeline" program [0] has existed since 1985. Granted, it's not perfect. It has often been used by ILECs to harass CLECs. Still, it seems to work. It has already been extended from landline POTS to mobile, mobile "broadband", and fixed "broadband". It may be worth investigating why more Alabamians aren't using this program. [0] https://www.fcc.gov/general/lifeline-program-low-income-consumers https://www.fcc.gov/general/lifeline-program-low-income-cons...
- dpau 7y agoChina disproves your theory. Over 90% have access to broadband fiber at affordable rates. Sure it's heavily censored and a tool for state propaganda. But the US looks like a third world country in comparison. I agree with the original post, we as Americans should do better.
- huffmsa 7y agoCheap in terms of dollars. But add in the totalitarianism, censorship, 60m+ dead in the last 50 years, and I don't think you'll find the price to be particularly cheap. I'll take my slower but steadier progress.
- dpau 7y agoYou're conflating issues. The question was whether or not government investment in internet infrastructure was possible or sustainable. China proves that it is, even over a huge country with a huge rural population. And they did it within the past decade! The US could do the same, presumably without killing millions of people. And I do mean cheap in terms of local standard of living. 1 year of high speed broadband fiber costs less than $100USD.
- shiftless 7y agoWell then go right ahead and get right on that for us, please. Wait, what? You want to rob ME in order to pay for it? No thanks. If you think your idea is so great, come up with the money to fund it yourself. Stop robbing the world.
- smileysteve 7y ago> Plus granting a firm a government monopoly on a region is always a bad idea that ultimately hinders the development and deployment of new solutions. I'd be surprised if these areas weren't already under at&t and charter monopoly.
- JustSomeNobody 7y agoWe should hold companies like AT&T accountable for the billions they have given to investors that was supposed to supply internet to rural areas for a start. And why are you attacking me? I vote for candidates who I think will help. I am a foster parent so I have opened my home to the children displaced. Sure I could do more. But some don’t do anything. At all.
- huffmsa 7y agoYour anecdotes don't mean much to me other than that you can take action on things you care about. Which is good. I simply dislike vacuous "someone, somewhere should do something" statements. Be they from you or anyone else. And yes, we should hold at&t and other who were granted monopoly power and government mandates accountable for their failures. No disagreement
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- shiftless 7y ago"We should hold companies like AT&T accountable" Yeah, I'll get right on that. "I vote for candidates who I think will help." Hint: try prayer instead. It's likely to be more effective. "But some don’t do anything. At all." Like voters, for instance.
- emodendroket 7y agoPresumably he means that taxes ought to be used to pay for it, but why does the sentiment need a detailed policy proposal?
- huffmsa 7y agoIt doesn't, but being explicit about whether the vacuous "we" is the big G Government or we the private company forming classes would have saved quite a few bits on PGs server.
- somebadguy 7y agoGo fuck yourself
- pjc50 7y agoAlabama is effectively a third world country, with all the resource extraction, corruption and post-colonial racial inequality that implies. It just happens to be inside the United States.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- shiftless 7y agoOh look, another bigot who hasn't even visited Alabama and knows nothing about this state, yet feels entitled to make such comments exposing his ignorance and bigotry. What a surprise to see. I've lived all over the USA. The entire nation is a banana republic. Some of the worst parts are: Illinois, New York, Michigan, California, New Jersey, Washington State. Alabama isn't even in the top 25 of worst states in the third world nation that is the USA.
- offshore4432 7y agoThis is such an unbelievably ignorant comment. Yes, Alabama is poor by American standards but it is far richer than any third world country (have you been to any?). Its GDP per capita is $38,000 which is compares favorably to almost all first world European countries.
- uzzgx 7y agoWhy is exactly Internet access a "human right" (whatever that term means) more than television or going to a football match?
- Broken_Hippo 7y agoBecause watching television or going to a football match is clearly entertainment. But you get a discount on electric installation if you sign up for your new service online. Internet service isn't just entertainment: It is communication, banking, and lots of very basic things folks need in life. It just happens to be multi-purpose, so you get the entertainment value as well. Many jobs require internet access to apply: Fewer and fewer take any sort of paper applications and not everywhere has kiosks to apply and test at (low paying jobs, at least). Heck, game disks are getting rarer, so you sometimes need to be online to use a PC game. Lots of research for school papers is done online. Also, communication. Few folks send snail mail letters anymore due to email. Chat programs work well too. If you aren't connected to the internet, you are at a disadvantage. I cannot say that about television in general or a football match - going without those sometimes means you don't have as much to talk about with folks that consume those.
- uzzgx 7y ago>But you get a discount on electric installation if you sign up for your new service online. That should be illegal. It's discrimination for a basic service. >Internet service isn't just entertainment: It is communication, banking, and lots of very basic things folks need in life. You can still walk into the bank. Checking your account from home is cool, but hardly a vital thing. >Many jobs require internet access to apply: Fewer and fewer take any sort of paper applications and not everywhere has kiosks to apply and test at (low paying jobs, at least). Heck, game disks are getting rarer, so you sometimes need to be online to use a PC game. Lots of research for school papers is done online. I doubt they can pull this shit off in a place where 25% of people have no access to the Internet. Otherwise they wouldn't find applicants. >Also, communication. Few folks send snail mail letters anymore due to email. Chat programs work well too. A bummer. Hardly a "human rights" issue.
- sokoloff 7y agoCtrl-F phone. 0 results. I suspect most of those 25% who lack wired broadband internet have smartphones, most of which support tethering, but even without it, your smartphone is an internet-connected computer, fairly suitable for most consumption related activities. I suspect the omission of phone stats was not an innocent oversight.
- astura 7y agoThese two lines: >The majority of households in four rural counties - Perry, Monroe, Conecuh and Greene - don’t have any sort of internet access > Mississippi has the worst mark in the country. Thirty percent of households there don’t have any access to the World Wide Web. make it clear they are talking about "ability to access the internet from their house by any means" not just a dedicated broadband connection at home. So that would also include people who don't own smartphones and/or tablets and people who have no cell phone service at home.
- sokoloff 7y agoThat’s the clear implication of the words in the article. I’m not convinced it’s accurate, given that over 81% of adult Americans (not households) own a smartphone and if they had data which included they were considering smartphones as excluded, I’d expect them to specify that for clarity. I find many instances where a journalist reads a finding of “no internet” and interprets it for readers to say “no access to World Wide Web” and in the process making it wrong. In a Census survey format, people who don’t have wired internet but do have a smartphone are very much liable to answer that they “don’t have internet at home”. I’m 95% sure my quite well educated parents would answer that way in that circumstance. A possible control question on the survey would be “how many smartphones are owned by your household?” The finding is based on data from 2017 and reported on (in headline form at least) as “news”. I’m not disputing what the text says. If it’s 100% accurate, that’s appalling, of course.
- rubidium 7y agoThe article is unclear about mobile phone internet use. Most poor people I know have (at most times) cell phones with a data plan. This is sufficient for most basic internet needs (eg billing, applying for jobs, gov’t assistance). Whether or not a wire goes to the house is less important.
- brudgers 7y agoIn the Alabama Black Belt, there's usually cell signal along major roads and in its towns. On the numbered county roads, you might get a bar or two in some lucky spot. But mostly not. Usually there's just a lonesome line of small power poles out to the last homestead. Then nothing until the other side of the tree farm. The rural poverty of the Black Belt isn't an equitable thing with easy pay bills, computer using jobs, and government assistance. All those things are hard to do by design. The Black Belt was 1/2 shares share cropping when slavery was banned. And the cropping was cotton. You can't eat cotton. To get food you got to sell it to the only buyer around. And the buyers were the people who figured half of all your family produced was fair exchange for a tar paper shack and a loaned mule to make you more productive. Or rather you and your family. Mom pop and the little ones working the field year round.
- kageneko 7y agoI wouldn't bet on the availability of a data plan. I regularly drive through Alabama on the way to Florida (from Atlanta). One time, I took a wrong turn and ended up in a small town with absolutely no cell signal and closed roads everywhere. We stopped and asked a local for directions. This was SE of Dothan, AL, I think. And several times, Google Maps has routed me through areas where I no longer have a signal (south-central AL). Once when this happened, the road it wanted me to go on was closed and it couldn't download an update. I handled this one by just driving northish, knowing that I'd hit Montgomery eventually.
- emodendroket 7y agoThe wording of the article suggests that these people have no internet access of any kind.