Oh how people forget how hated ATT was back in the day. On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 17:55, Harry Singh <[email protected]> wrote: > Putting the myriad of issues related to government control, net > neutrality, increase and dissemination of crapware, botnets, etc I actually > look forward to the increase of speeds across the nation. I live in NYC, one > of the outer boroughs specifically, and it's purely and absurdly ridiculous > that I have to succumb to Time warner's Joke of "High-Speed": 10 Mbps Down > and 512K up. It's laughable that I truly have no other choice and if nothing > else, the plan will provide and mandate Big telco, small telco, to deliver > much higher speeds across the board. Even as we speak there are services > such as Boxee, Vonage, iTunes, bitTorrent, Xbox Live that just keep becoming > more and more prevelant and chewing up bandwidth. And i don't need to tell > you folks how in the world is a 512K line suppose to cope? It's only a > matter of time where Internet truly becomes a utility and it isn't a stretch > that the following makes sense: > Chief among its goals, the F.C.C. wants future broadband investment to be > targeted to the areas where gaps in service remain. It will direct this > investment in part through the Universal Service Fund, an $8 billion-a-year > program for telephone and Internet access paid through a phone-bill > surcharge. Over time, the subsidies for Internet will increase and those for > phone will dissipate, with the knowledge that people can make calls over the > Internet. > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 8:18 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The question was limited, so I answered as asked. >> >> Point noted and respectfully disagreed with, except to note that the >> Constitution is well conceived but poorly written, though it was the >> best that could be done at the time - perhaps that's where our >> agreement might lay. >> >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 16:42, Jonathan Link <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Your set is too limited. >> > All administrations are about more government, where we can have a >> > discussion is the degree to which the administration in question >> > expanded >> > government. Even going back to Washington. No disrespect to the >> > founding >> > fathers intended, it's the nature of the beast. >> > >> > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Kurt Buff <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Yup. >> >> >> >> Both Bush and Obama are all about more government. >> >> >> >> Didn't like either one, and still don't. >> >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 12:06, Ray <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > And were you equally unhappy during the last administration? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > From: Bill Lambert [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> > Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 12:47 PM >> >> > To: NT System Admin Issues >> >> > Subject: RE: National broadband >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Another huge spending project by our leadership…and government >> >> > intervention >> >> > into our private lives. This, like the healthcare bill, is the start >> >> > of >> >> > centralized control over our lives. If you think that this is just >> >> > a >> >> > method to give poor folks access, think again. This to me is the >> >> > start >> >> > of >> >> > the American version of socialism. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > I detest what our current leadership is doing to this country. But, >> >> > hey, >> >> > it’s just me…sorry if I offended or took it too far off topic but I >> >> > am >> >> > angry >> >> > with it all…. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Bill Lambert >> >> > >> >> > Concuity >> >> > >> >> > Phone 847-941-9206 >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > The information contained in this e-mail message, including any >> >> > attached >> >> > files, is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the >> >> > recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient (or >> >> > authorized to receive information for the recipient) you are hereby >> >> > notified >> >> > that you have received this communication in error and that any >> >> > review, >> >> > dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly >> >> > prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please >> >> > contact >> >> > the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message. >> >> > Thank >> >> > you. >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > From: David Lum [mailto:[email protected]] >> >> > Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2010 1:39 PM >> >> > To: NT System Admin Issues >> >> > Subject: National broadband >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > Thoughts, comments? >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > http://www.broadband.gov/ >> >> > >> >> > David Lum // SYSTEMS ENGINEER >> >> > NORTHWEST EVALUATION ASSOCIATION >> >> > (Desk) 971.222.1025 // (Cell) 503.267.9764 >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ >> >> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ >> ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ >> > > > >
~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
