EPTpack your things honey we are moving to Finland!
Broadband soon to be a legal right in Finland - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
RaptorX
Germany646 Posts
pack your things honey we are moving to Finland! | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10939 Posts
At least here in Switzerland the people that want fast broadband already have it (well, at least 99%)... I know no one with ISDN or something old like this and I'm not living in a city... The others that don't want it probably don't need it and wouldn't use it? It's a great thing but unless your country has free money to spend I don't see how this has priority over anything. Countries which don't have wide broadband access probably couldn't pay this anyway... | ||
alffla
Hong Kong20321 Posts
not in a moltke way of coures | ||
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
I don't understand why people complain about the status quo only being "fine." The status quo is at best "fine." That's incentive for some provider to come along and make it better. I doubt that it will ever satisfy everyone. Demand will always stay a bit ahead of infrastructure. It'll never be "excellent." All I can imagine is that people are either complaining about prices or about speeds. A government mandate will never address a problem with speeds since the mandated baseline is probably lower than what people are complaining about. As for price, all it does it hide the costs from the citizens so people don't know what ISPs are charging anymore. That's like sticking the head into the sand and ignoring the possibility that the ISPs could be ripping the entire country off. | ||
|
miseiler
United States1389 Posts
That's 125k/s download, which is roughly DSL speed these days. | ||
|
Too_MuchZerg
Finland2818 Posts
| ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
On October 15 2009 21:41 TanGeng wrote: I just have to wonder if Finland will enforce this right for the few people who live in the unpopulated northern areas of the country. I'll be pretty expensive to lay fiber all the way up north and maintain all that infrastructure. It doesn't matter how much of a necessity it is for someone to have access to internet. People who live in nearly uninhabited areas should take into the account the high cost or the inaccessibility of utilities when choosing a place to live. I don't understand why people complain about the status quo only being "fine." The status quo is at best "fine." That's incentive for some provider to come along and make it better. I doubt that it will ever satisfy everyone. Demand will always stay a bit ahead of infrastructure. It'll never be "excellent." All I can imagine is that people are either complaining about prices or about speeds. A government mandate will never address a problem with speeds since the mandated baseline is probably lower than what people are complaining about. As for price, all it does it hide the costs from the citizens so people don't know what ISPs are charging anymore. That's like sticking the head into the sand and ignoring the possibility that the ISPs could be ripping the entire country off. Sweden, Finland Denmark and Norway as nations are considered highly advanced, what this means is that allot of the functions that is necessary for the citizen to live in society and manage his or hers daily choirs in the city they live in requires have a computer with a broadband connection. If they don't they won't be able to things that is considered a legal right for every citizen. The people that lives at least in Sweden, Denmark, Finland and Norway depends on that they have access to the Internet. | ||
zatic
Zurich15366 Posts
| ||
|
Too_MuchZerg
Finland2818 Posts
On October 15 2009 21:51 zatic wrote: This is one of the threads I feel very strongly about that goes completely in the wrong direction. Please, the important thing here is not "free" internet or tax-paid internet or whether 1mbit or 100mbit is enough. It's that the people have been given a means to enforce their right to internet access, and thus, unhindered participation in today's society. Bigger picture, people. This law basically enforces broadband companies to build more infrastructure for their users. Internet cost are usually still pretty high. Nothing is "free". | ||
|
Sinensis
United States2513 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10939 Posts
This has no relevance to most other people because it never was discussed by their respective goverments and therefore people aren't afraid of it. | ||
|
Integra
Sweden5626 Posts
| ||
|
craz3d
Bulgaria856 Posts
| ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On October 15 2009 21:51 zatic wrote: This is one of the threads I feel very strongly about that goes completely in the wrong direction. Please, the important thing here is not "free" internet or tax-paid internet or whether 1mbit or 100mbit is enough. It's that the people have been given a means to enforce their right to internet access, and thus, unhindered participation in today's society. Bigger picture, people. Wait a second. How hard is it to get internet access? And broadband is more than just basic internet access. I bet people could easily get by with 128kbps. So is this just simply categorizing internet access as part of basic utilities? Yet the problems associated with living on a remote inaccessible locations remains. The cost of utilities should be higher to reflect the fact that people shouldn't be living there if they want to remain connected to society. Yet, I still don't understand the rationale for creating a national mandate. What seems to be the issue? Do ISPs have objections with servicing paying clients? What is this "right to internet access?" | ||
|
zatic
Zurich15366 Posts
On October 15 2009 22:06 TanGeng wrote: What is this "right to internet access?" What exactly don't you understand? The Finnish people made a legal right to get broadband internet access, it's in the title of this thread. | ||
|
LordWeird
United States3411 Posts
On October 15 2009 22:12 zatic wrote: What exactly don't you understand? The Finnish people made a legal right to get broadband internet access, it's in the title of this thread. Hahahahaha. Finland is such a badass country. I've always wanted to go there. Out of everybody I've ever met on the internet I always seem to get along with Finns the most. | ||
|
TanGeng
Sanya12364 Posts
On October 15 2009 22:12 zatic wrote: What exactly don't you understand? The Finnish people made a legal right to get broadband internet access, it's in the title of this thread. So your invocation of "right to internet access" was used in the same sense as how the Finnish government used it. I have to say that the Finnish government's use of "right to internet access" is the most naive and stupid invocation of "right" possible. It's is so indicative of nanny governments around the world to be so arrogant as to set people's priorities on spending money for them. It isn't that people will have the right to choose to get broadband, but rather the government will get broadband for them whether they want it or not. The mandate will either result in a huge giveaway to ISPs or will be a naked power grab in ISPs market. In a few years, Finland will either have an inefficient or an expensive broadband network. Scandinavian countries have always lead the way because their weather and climate favoured internet communications. Now Finland will get an extra level of government bureaucracy to retard its lead over the rest of the world. | ||
|
IceCube
Croatia1403 Posts
On October 15 2009 20:36 kefkalives wrote: Time to move to finland. Yup. Agreed 100 percent. It's just I hate harsh winters | ||
|
Too_MuchZerg
Finland2818 Posts
On October 15 2009 22:48 IceCube wrote: Yup. Agreed 100 percent. It's just I hate harsh winters Thanks to global warming, winter might be less harsh :D | ||
|
RoyW
Ireland270 Posts
What? Why? It's a geographic political area that formed into a country long ago. Why should they have to pay more. It's like charging them extra tax for the fire department or police because they live further away. "I have to say that the Finnish government's use of "right to internet access" is the most naive and stupid invocation of "right" possible. It's is so indicative of nanny governments around the world to be so arrogant as to set people's priorities on spending money for them. It isn't that people will have the right to choose to get broadband, but rather the government will get broadband for them whether they want it or not." Haha, hmm, let's look at scandanavia and it's nanny governments. Hmm, let's look at America and it's poisoned-since-mccarthyism view of socialised policies | ||
| ||
