Obama touts plan to get wireless Internet to 98% percent of U.S.

• Ithiliel wrote on 2011-02-11 00:58

  Quote from Cynic;329739:

  QQ Ithi don't compare him to Bush.
  Obama has done some good, yes.. but what he is doing right now is just stupid. So I do understand him getting hated on. He doesn't exactly prevent the hate by doing the right things.
  Honestly, I love the guy but come on.. INTERNET before everything else? Dios mio this guy is on crack.
  He's sinking to Bush's level of retardation.

  
  
  I wasn't comparing him to Bush per Se, but rather I was comparing how a majority of people I know thought that Bush did no wrong and yet think Obama is the worst thing ever. Every President is bound to make mistakes, they're only human and yet everyone seems to forget that.
• Osayidan wrote on 2011-02-11 01:06
  Bet they used Meraki access points. Those things are awesome. Build a mesh of MR58's backed by fibre and your whole area is set for the next decade.
• Magenera wrote on 2011-02-11 01:14

  Quote from Cucurbita;329747:

  Yeah. I stand by my opinion that "Presidency" should be split into multiple jobs for multiple people. Its too big a job for one man to handle now.
  
  And its true that a lot of Americans hate on Obama, but its mostly because we're in a tight spot. But he's pretty well respected world wide. When you're not busy being pressured by the economy half the things that seem like a bad investment really makes sense.
  
  Almost everything Obama does is a long term investment that doesn't have immediate effects. Personally I think its excellent that we have a president that can think about results outside of his presidency term. However I think he lacks the initiative and poorly balances his focus on the "now", which is something most human beings choose to focus on.

  
  
  I wish he Obama would grow a pair, because quite frankly democrats are have the stereotype of having good ideas, with no back bone. While Republicans are known for stupid ideas with a steel set.
• BobYoMeowMeow wrote on 2011-02-11 02:42
  Good internet is necessary for universities
  
  but for the general public?
  not really
  
  people won't research until like they're in grad schools
• paladin wrote on 2011-02-11 02:54
  This will either be epic or a massive crash and burn
• Osayidan wrote on 2011-02-11 03:01

  Quote from BobYoMeowMeow;330040:

  Good internet is necessary for universities
  
  but for the general public?
  not really
  
  people won't research until like they're in grad schools

  
  
  Everything is going towards internet, every form of distributable media. If your internet infrastructure and services are poor, your area will be ignored by anyone distributing that media or services due to having no customers.
  
  It's essential that within the next 5 years or so everyone in the developed world has access to excellent internet.
  
  Having bad internet by 2015 is going to be like giving everyone a bunch of fancy cars and drivers licenses, but there's only a few roads and all of them are 1 lane.
• Tatsu wrote on 2011-02-11 03:45

  Quote from Ithiliel;329731:

  Oh but Bush? Oh no to some people he "did the best he could".

  
  
  Isn't that because Bush wrote an autobiography about his days as a president and everybody sympathizes with him? I know that during his second term, a lot of people hated his ass.
  
  I will laugh so hard if a good deal of Obama's ideas pass through and in 100+ years in the future, he would've been considered a very great leader in the 21st century.
• Joker wrote on 2011-02-11 03:51

  Quote from Chinaboy475;329700:

  ok great plan.. If it goes well America would fare welll but if not... then big waste of money for government

  
  
  their already in like 32 trillion dollars of debt.. idk how it could getany worse..
• Cynic wrote on 2011-02-11 03:55

  Quote from Joker;330255:

  their already in like 32 trillion dollars of debt.. idk how it could getany worse..

  
  
  it gets worse bcause instead of trying to fix it, he stands around and wastes more money by putting them into things that nobody needs. internet is important for something, yes, but internet is going to mean nothing when nobody has a job to pay for it because he doesn't do sh-t for the economy or to even try and fix out debt.
  the only things he's does is keep the rich rich, and the poor poor.
  
  (excuse the spelling/grammar/eytc mistakes. i feel like ****.)
• Cucurbita wrote on 2011-02-11 20:16

  Quote from Cynic;330281:

  it gets worse bcause instead of trying to fix it, he stands around and wastes more money by putting them into things that nobody needs. internet is important for something, yes, but internet is going to mean nothing when nobody has a job to pay for it because he doesn't do sh-t for the economy or to even try and fix out debt.
  the only things he's does is keep the rich rich, and the poor poor.
  
  (excuse the spelling/grammar/eytc mistakes. i feel like ****.)

  
  
  Oh how misconstrued you are.
• Magenera wrote on 2011-02-12 02:01
  I blame the 32 trillion dollars debt on the cold war. But might work for the free internet.
• whocares8128 wrote on 2011-02-14 20:29
  @Cynic
  Not to pretend to be an expert on fixing a broken economy, but I sincerely doubt this network expansion is going to build and maintain itself. There will be plenty of jobs created just in that effort.
  
  I think Osayidan said it best. This is an investment. It's not an immediate "cure" for the problems facing America today, but it is a step that will help keep the US from falling behind many other countries. I suppose I see this as a digital similarity to the US interstate system's implementation. Can you imagine what it'd be like today with no interstates? Can you imagine how commerce would be impacted (with so many goods transferred by semi trucks)?
• Yoorah wrote on 2011-02-16 05:35
  To the pro-net people, don't get too carried away with what you hear out there. While net access is important, the focus to connect everyone via "smartphones and tablets" is just silly. It's true that net access is incredibly important, however, 95% of the population already has broadband access. The remaining 5% either don't want the broadband internet, can't afford it, or they can't get it because they live in the middle of nowhere. Having this factual context, when you then see a headline like: "Obama said he would use $18 billion in federal funds to get 98 (up from 95, woot?!) percent of the nation connected to the Internet on smartphones and tablet computers in five years," you really wonder... >_>;
  
  The good part is that they want to free up more wireless spectrum for high speed wireless. This will either allow new wireless companies to form, or it will allow existing companies to expand capacity. Better wireless performance for all, yay!
• whocares8128 wrote on 2011-02-16 16:20
  One thing that isn't entirely clear, is how much of this wireless internet availability is seen as the responsibility of the end-user. For example, I have a wireless router to connect various devices through my cable internet connection, but if I go downtown, wireless "hot spots" are relatively few and far between.
  
  Of course, there is internet connectivity available from the phone companies, but that would only connect my phone (or tablet if I owned one), and they want to charge extra for me to share my own connection with other devices I may have.
  
  I sincerely hope that when Obama said that "we've got to out-innovate, out-educate, out-build and out-hustle the rest of the world," that he wasn't merely referring to building more cell towers. Since the article specifically mentions "smartphones and tablet computers" (which almost always come with mobile data subscription plan), I'm a bit skeptical.
  
  @Yoorah
  It may be that 95% of the nation already has access to broadband, but one thing I'm sure of is that not all "broadband" is the same:
  

  [Image: http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/Images/commentarynews/broadbandspeedchart.jpg]

  
  For that reason, though not explicitly stated in this article, I'm hoping for a speed boost as well (mainly for upload speeds).
• EndlessDreams wrote on 2011-02-16 16:55
  The internet makes business runs more efficiently and effectively. Better infrastructure is good at attracting businesses. Besides, to get these wireless internet all over the place, people are needed to maintain and install such devices, which means more jobs are created.
  
  I don't see how that could be a bad thing at all.