[daniel-cussen]

This is too true. It's more regulatory moats than regulatory capture. At any rate, it's not profitable after, probably, the first time.

It's strange how cities force companies to wire this way. It's as if they forced a luxury brand, Hermès, say, to open a store in the most shit-hole, criminal part of town in order to gain the right to open a store in the yuppie part of town.

[jpatokal]

Access to the Internet is increasingly viewed as a right and/or an essential service. Access to overpriced handbags, not so much.

Providing health care to the destitute isn't profitable either; doesn't mean we shouldn't be doing it.

[JumpCrisscross]

> Access to the Internet is increasingly viewed as a right and/or an essential service. Access to overpriced handbags, not so much.

Clothes are seen as essentials in Western society. Luxury brands, not so much. Yet access to internet and access to cutting-edge broadband are treated similarly by regulators in the U.S. That's the asymmetry.

[nitrogen]

...access to internet and access to cutting-edge broadband...

At the pace technology advances, there's not so much difference between the two. Since companies are still constantly pushing the limits of technology, the majority of the benefits of connectivity come at the higher end of the bandwidth spectrum.

[rayiner]

I disagree. Almost all of the "internet as a human right" uses of technology are at the lower end of the bandwidth spectrum: e-mail, job applications, Wikipedia, etc. 95% of what's socially valuable on the internet can be done with HTML 2.0.

[nitrogen]

95% of what's socially valuable is feeling like an equal -- that means edX videos, Khan Academy, Coursera, YouTube, live streaming, backup software, immersive games, etc.

[rayiner]

Since when is "feeling like an equal" a basic right? Everyone in my high-school had a car and designer clothing. Should the public subsidize that stuff for poor kids? Note that clothes are a much bigger part of "feeling like an equal" to a typical kid than anything to do with computers.

Games are not socially valuable, they're a diversion. Backup software--it's much cheaper to give everyone a USB drive than build fiber out to them. Finally, the failure of rich media in the educational setting has been profound. Text (and static diagrams) is the most efficient and precise way to convey information.[1] In the 1990's, it was about getting "multimedia" into classrooms, and it was a colossal waste of time and money. The value of online courseware is the lecture notes and exams, which have limited bandwidth demands.

[1] I'll note that HN is about as plain text as you can get, and is a place for serious discussion.