quote:

---

Canada has slipped from its early broadband leadership position to barely ranking in the OECD's Top 10. (Associated Press)

---

It is important to understand the government's current position in relation "to business" and the effect it could have to allow an "air wave" that was recently put under auction( would call for an open source initiative?)may undermine business, by allowing an access to a free internet under that broadband system.

I currently see that libraries should be such "free zones" under the auspice of "knowledge open to the public." Secondly, no discrimination to rural Canadians and access to this knowledge, and access to Universities and institutes that supply information openly on their databases and archives.

quote:

---

One should take note on the developing context of "Full Democracy"
based on the preceding post. Control of media has past to companies who control access to the internet and subsequent market capitalization to
control and become a one world government media?

---

Broadband in a Full Democracy Friday, October 24, 2008

On relaunch

There were some difficulties interpreting the new tool selection choices that one could use on beta. That would have been my fault for not studying it better. It still leaves the question of editing.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: admin ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
I'm paying an arm and a leg for TV, internet and telephone from Bell. I guess I'll just have to start writing bad cheques again.

---

Again? I'm surprised you still have it

Well, if worst comes to worst, you can always use the library, and lets say you do have a laptop.

Can you get this service free? Is there a difference between the libraries in rural towns versus large cities? Why would there be this difference? Why, if a centre for knowledge would you be limited or not at all access when you are allowed books to read?

quote:

---

Is there a difference between the libraries in rural towns versus large cities? Why would there be this difference? Why, if a centre for knowledge would you be limited or not at all access when you are allowed books to read?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by It's Me D:

There has always been a difference in access to information and education resources between rural and urban communities. In Canada we expect communities to effectively fend for themselves (similarly to in the USA);

---

I guess this is where my naiveté comes in terms of our "public institutions" that seek to give us as much knowledge to it's citizens regardless of where they live, and who they are. What programs are in place to ensure that besides offering grants to go beyond this "bit and parcel of" portraying itself as truly representing the people of this country?

Why, if I am in a rural community, access to experience less then what someone who has access to the archive of colleges with speed[ a reformation in terms of how information is being displayed( Youtube, video uplinks, downloads and class recordings, to Skype telecommunications, )] to not have the same benefits under this means of communication as those that are supported in the infrastructure of those same populated centres.

Government is then allowing compartmentalization of a service that is "out there" and like the sun being taxed, while we see the benefit in our plants and things, do not see the same growth out of the technologies that are as much public as they are to benefit to companies having recreated opportunities under the auspice of this compartmentalization. Further "tax dollars" to provide incentive for business yet announcing it's okay not to push this live feed of communication or satellite into the most remote corners of our globe.

So on having sold the air waves, what can be done now? What areas in that broadband are reserved for public institutions?

quote:

---

The head of the U.S. telecommunications regulator is in favour of opening up unused portions of the country's wireless airwaves, known as "white spaces" for new broadband services, and will bring the issue to a vote in November.

Kevin Martin, chairman of the Federal Communications Commission, on Wednesday said he supports the use of white spaces, which sit between television broadcast frequencies in the 150 megahertz and 700 megahertz bands, for delivering wireless internet services.

Those white spaces are unlicensed and could therefore be used for free by anyone, unlike the licensed frequencies such as 700 megahertz that were recently auctioned off in the United States to cellphone carriers.

Companies including Google Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Motorola Inc. have been lobbying the FCC for the past year to make those airwaves available so that they could offer wireless broadband without paying billions of dollars for licences.

Such services would compete with cellular offerings from the likes of AT&T Inc., Verizon Communications Inc., Sprint Nextel Corp. and T-Mobile.

The cellular providers and television broadcasters had raised concerns that devices operating in the white space frequencies could interfere with their signals. The FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology on Wednesday refuted those concerns after testing a number of devices. The report stated that devices equipped with geo-location and sensing capabilities would not cause interference.

"At this juncture, we believe that the burden of 'proof of concept' has been met," the report said.

Martin, a Republican, told reporters he would bring the issue of opening up white space to a vote when the FCC next meets, on Nov. 4.

Google, among others, cheered the news from Martin.

"This news should be greatly encouraging for American consumers," wrote Google's Washington telecom and media counsel on the company's blog. "The FCC now has more than enough information to develop appropriate rules that protect TV stations and wireless microphone users from harmful interference, while at the same time allowing innovators and entrepreneurs to develop technology that productively uses these airwaves."

Industry Canada, which is responsible for managing spectrum, has not yet addressed the issue of whether access to white spaces could be freed up here. Industry Canada does, however, licence some of the same white space frequencies being looked at by the FCC to internet service providers in rural and remote communities.

---

Those "white spaces" belong to the Canadian people. Those "White Spaces" belong to "Free people of Full Democracies?"

[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: admin ]

An open source initiative to provide free access to information and the utilities of this communication, while recognizing the developing technologies under regulation, as if, Microsoft and Netscape are being confronted under the idea of "who controls the Airwaves."

It should not pass anybodies attention that if Google can attain this access that under the idea of remote places, it will extend it's market capabilities to the 80% of this population under ad banners that would incite consumerism to a new level in trade and purchased?

So what use these new, "I phones, Blackberries that attach themself to google or Yahoo or Shaw, that it could monopolize these white spaces?

Consumerism is always a powerful force in that such regulation could be sought to develop technologies apart from the current structure to attain those white spaces? "If they are free" then why should we not have access to them?

Just thinking out loud.

Best,

[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: admin ]

Nova Scotia Broadband Initiative

quote:

---

The Broadband for Rural Nova Scotia initiative will deliver high speed access to the Internet to 100 per cent of Nova Scotians. When the initiative is completed at the end of 2009, the entire province will have high-speed Internet access, making Nova Scotia one of the most connected jurisdictions in North America. This will give our schools, businesses and families the opportunity to connect and compete worldwide.

---

Of course it is Nova Scotia, so this is a PPP project:

quote:

---

The $74-million broadband initiative is being cost shared by the provincial and federal governments and the successful service providers. The provincial contribution is $19.6 million. The federal contribution is a maximum of $14.5 million under the Building Canada infrastructure plan. The shared cost to the companies will be $40.4 million.

---