Comments on: Broadband Done Right

By: Rabbit

Rabbit — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:18:13 +0000

I live in Patrick County about 30 miles from Stuart and we have no high speed internet either. No cable, no dsl, nothing, just dial up. And our phone lines are so decrepit that we can’t get anywhere near the highest dial up speed!
We need help here too!! Do you know what it’s like trying to be on the internet at 28.8Kbps or less????

By: Paul Evans

Paul Evans — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 11:37:06 +0000

Yes, I agree whole-heartedly with the previous writer! I too live in Gore, VA (the forgotten) and work 3 miles from the Pentagon. It sure would be nice to work from home a few days a week when the gas prices go back to $4/gl but for now the best we can hope for is to use an air card when the wind is blowing the right way. Like Horton, please let someone know “We are here, We are here!”.

By: Mark Dellinger

Mark Dellinger — Sun, 16 Nov 2008 08:15:42 +0000

If Virignia has a high speed internet plan, Gore Virginia must have been kept off the list.

We have no DSL, no cable, and all we can get is unreliable satellite, so if Virginia has this so called “plan” why is all of upper Gore left in the dark with our slow dial up?

With today’s technology of talking robots and cars that run on solar power, why is it too much to ask to get a simple co axle cable ran up Route 50 for hundreds of customers to use?

Please…help us.

By: Nancy Scola

Nancy Scola — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 17:53:07 +0000

Good question, Hannah. I’d really love to have others jump into the mix here, but I’ll offer a few thoughts the meantime. After digging into this story, it seems to me important to keep in mind that the building blocks of broadband in VA are business models, first and foremost. I heard again and again that the guiding idea is to “make the math work,” making it smart for providers to take on these networks and customers. ‘Cause let’s be honest — these firms are looking to make solid business decisions.

Ways of making those numbers work include lowering start-up costs by sharing public infrastructure like water towers, insisting that competitors can share the backbones of the network, prepping a solid base of customers by highlighting how local governments can use broadband, and using neat technologies like wireless advances that actually lower the cost of networking across the board. The goal in VA is to create win-win-win situations, where citizens, governments, and providers all do well in the end.

Now, when it comes to a place with King George County, I heard from them that they had to accept the possibility that this project means that they could end up in the broadband business, should something go south with the folks with whom they’ve arranged for service. They say that they *could* handle that role, but don’t really want to. But they’ve calculated that it’s a risk worth taking.

By: Hannah Sassaman

Hannah Sassaman — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 17:09:51 +0000

Great job, Nancy. How do you think that this model — a windfall from tobacco money plus loands and private development to wire rural Virginia — could apply to those cities that are now balking from community wireless projects?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/us/22wireless.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin

Sascha Meinrath of the New America Foundation makes a good point here — that cities are not seeing the results they want because they are building networks on a for-profit model. Your article makes clear that the benefits of investing in infrastructure don’t just allow underserved communities to get online, but build a platform for future profitable businesses and industries to go. How can we make this pitch to cities, so they don’t give up on serving their communities now, because the lustre is off of the current model of community wifi?