White House plans to win the future by beating Angry Birds (seriously)

By | April 12, 2011, 5:31am PDT

Summary: Congress and the Obama administration are conceding the future of our wireless broadband infrastructure to the carriers and their penny-wise, pound-foolish pricing structures.

“Honey, is that a joke?”

I often work on my articles at home, and tonight, I was watching the YouTube video presented below. My wife, from across the room, was listening out of one ear.

What she heard seemed ridiculous. It seemed like a comedy skit. A thin, balding, large-eared man — who looked very much like the sort of comic you’d see on a late night stand-up comedy show — was talking about broadband in America.

He was very forceful, and the phrase that stood out was (and yes, sadly, I am quoting):

I understand there are two kids in Finland selling games about angry birds. If we are going to win the future, we have to dominate this space.

It sounded, for all the world, like this comedian was saying that America’s strategy was to out-compete on bird anger vs. every other nation.

Sadly, the man is not a comedian. His name is Austan Goolsbee. Dr. Goolsbee is President Obama’s Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. He got his Ph.D. in economics from MIT, was a Sloan Fellow and a Fulbright Scholar, and is on leave from his previous gig as an economics professor at the University of Chicago.

Dr. Goolsbee was named one of six “Gurus of the Future” by the Financial Times, and here he is, appearing to say that to “win the future,” America has to dominate in Angry Birds sales.

I mock, but only because Professor Goolsbee’s presentation is so mockworthy. What you’re actually witnessing is a series called White House White Board and they’re supposed to be fireside chats for the modern era.

Goolsbee’s presentation is of great importance, because what he’s trying to point out is that (a) America is far behind when it comes to the quality of our wireless networks, and (b) the the President’s wireless initiative is supposed to help us “up our game.”

My take

I’m conflicted on how to report this. First, the material is so incomprehensibly mockworthy that I can barely contain myself. I’ve long had a weakness, where I’m willing to give into my sense of humor rather than err on the side of common sense.

Everything about this whiteboard pitch, from the man’s name to his unfortunate conflating of winning the future and Angry Birds, is completely amusing.

The topic, on the other hand, is not. There is a deep and worrisome truth with regard to America’s position when it comes to universal wireless Internet penetration.

We have exceptional technology. Verizon’s 4G performance is breathtaking. Unfortunately, so is the company’s billing strategy. Because America’s leaders have shown an unfortunate willingness to sell net neutrality down the river to the advantage of wireless carriers, useful 4G wireless broadband will be out of reach to most Americans.

Verizon and other wireless carriers are capping the amount of broadband 4G wireless consumers can have. A few movies, a bunch of YouTube videos, a few days of active use and those caps will be blasted through by most users — and the overage charges are so draconian that wireless 4G will effectively become impractical for most of us.

I recently watched a Top Gear episode, where Jeremy Clarkson drove a truly astounding Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren across England. The car, which costs nearly half a million dollars, has the ability to drive at over 200 miles per hour. The gotcha: at that speed, the car can only hold enough gas to drive for 19 minutes.

In that, the McLaren is very much like America’s 4G broadband — it can go very, very fast, is very, very expensive, but can’t last very long without running out of gas.

And it’s also here that Dr. Goolsbee’s presentation ceases to be funny. Because while he’s up there making jokes about Angry Birds, Congress and the Obama administration aren’t winning the future. Instead, they’re conceding the future of our wireless broadband infrastructure to the carriers and their penny-wise, pound-foolish pricing structures.

Unless both the Democrats and the Republicans wise up and take a stand defending net neutrality, we’ll be like those birds, flying high on wireless broadband, only to crash to Earth with little more than an angry squeal.

To add insult to injury, after reading my article, my wife opened up her iPad and happily started another Angry Birds level. I hate that game! What do you think? TalkBack below.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

Topics

David Gewirtz, Distinguished Lecturer at CBS Interactive, is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in The History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets.

Disclosure

David Gewirtz

At various times during his adult life, David has voted for both Democrats and Republicans, and has been disappointed by both. He is deeply disturbed by how partisanship has come before patriotism in America, which gives him the freedom to pick on both sides.

David is a frequent guest on TV and radio stations across America and can usually be heard or seen on-the-air at least once a week. He writes weekly commentary and analysis for CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 and has been interviewed by Fox News, CNN, various ABC and NBC affiliates, and Canada’s Global TV. He has been a featured guest on National Public Radio and has also been featured on Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and Radio Liberty where his commentaries on technology, industry, and emerging nations have been broadcast into 46 countries (all in their own unique translations).

David is the executive director of U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute, a nonprofit research and policy organization. He is the Cyberterrorism Advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism & Security Professionals, a columnist for The Journal of Counterterrorism and Homeland Security and a special contributor to Frontline Security Magazine. He is a member of the FBI’s InfraGard program, the security partnership between the FBI and industry. David is also a member of the U.S. Naval Institute and the National Defense Industrial Association, the leading defense industry association promoting national security.

David is an advisory board member for the Technical Communications and Management Certificate program at the University of California, Berkeley extension. He is also a member of the instructional faculty at the University of California, Berkeley extension.

David’s “day job” is as publisher and editor-in-chief of ZATZ publishing, an online publisher of technical magazines. Other than than his ownership stake in Component Enterprises, Inc. (the parent company of ZATZ), David has no additional industry investments.

ZATZ has many advertisers who do, in part, provide for David’s lush income and extravagant lifestyle. Most of them are IBM and Lotus aftermarket suppliers, some of them make goodies for Microsoft Outlook, and a few make all sorts of strange mobile devices and add-on products. David has been a regular judge of the IBM Awards, but has no formal financial interest in or with IBM.

Because the ZATZ online magazines often review products, David and ZATZ are sent an overwhelming stream of unsolicited, silly, and often useless products to review. Because they’re such a pain to track and ship back, these products often wind up in a dumpster or fill up the corner of a large closet. Although David has no plans to review products in connection to his ZDNet blog, if he does do a product review, he will disclose any relationship completely in that posting.

Both through ZATZ and independently, David derives a small income through various advertising and sales relationships with Amazon.com and Google. These are minor relationships and they will not impede his willingness or ability to chastise either company should they deserve it.

David has many other business relationships, but none of them relate to anything he covers in his ZDNet blog. David does have a bit of the sales-guy bug and if he’s not doing a sales deal with someone at least once a month, he goes through withdrawal. He has a number of consulting clients, but none of them relate to anything he covers for ZDNet (and if they ever do, he will either disclose that fact, or decline to write about them).

Back in the 1980s, David held the unusual title of “Godfather” at Apple. He has written and published 40 incredibly simplistic applications for Apple’s iPhone.

Although David is forbidden to disclose the terms of his iPhone developer agreement, he isn’t drinking the Apple Kool Aid, will never be confused with a metrosexual, and feels free to mock Apple, and Apple users, any time the occasion permits, on alternate Tuesdays, or if he’s bored.

Biography

David Gewirtz

In addition to hosting the ZDNet Government and ZDNet DIY-IT blogs, CBS Interactive's Distinguished Lecturer David Gewirtz is an author, U.S. policy advisor, and computer scientist. He is featured in The History Channel special The President's Book of Secrets, is one of America's foremost cyber-security experts, and is a top expert on saving and creating jobs. He is also director of the U.S. Strategic Perspective Institute as well as the founder of ZATZ Publishing.

David is a member of FBI InfraGard, the Cyberwarfare Advisor for the International Association for Counterterrorism & Security Professionals, a columnist for The Journal of Counterterrorism and Homeland Security, and has been a regular CNN contributor, and a guest commentator for the Nieman Watchdog of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard University. He is the author of Where Have All the Emails Gone?, the definitive study of email in the White House, as well as How To Save Jobs and The Flexible Enterprise, the classic book that served as a foundation for today's agile business movement.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
84
Comments

Join the conversation!

Just In

RE: White House plans to win the future by beating Angry Birds (seriously)
WindowWasher 18th Apr 2011
America's broadband infrastructure (wired, wireless, backbone, et al) will go nowhere as long as the carriers are allowed to continue on the path's they are on. That being greed, nitpicking fees, nickle & dime, caps, non-neutrality, etc.
0 Votes
+ -
So this horse walks in and says...
Robert Hahn Updated - 12th Apr 2011
Sadly, the man is not a comedian. His name is Austan Goolsbee. Dr. Goolsbee is President Obamas Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers. In fairness to Mr. Goolsbee, he actually is a comedian. That's not his day job, but he has some creds as an improv comedian. People like that do tend to wisecrack, even at work.

All seriousness aside, here you are on a tech blog whining that the government is not doing enough to provide everyone with tech stuff. If I click on over to the Happy Vegetables blog, someone there will be on a rant about how the government needs to make people eat their spinach, plus deliver it to their houses. For free. For the children.

Every field of human endeavor has its advocates demanding that the government force the allocation of resources in their direction. Why? Because they are so smart that they know better than everyone else what everyone else needs.

Please stop. The people who pay the taxes cannot afford all the various wonderful things that all the various wonderful bloggers want the government to force everyone to have.

The Russians, who are not stupid and who have excellent mathematicians, tried for fifty years to see if Smart People Wearing Suits could 'decide' an economy to greatness by outperforming the system that steers resources into things that The Stupid People buy when you leave them alone. The stupid people won, the Soviet Union cratered, and you have already forgotten why.
@Robert Hahn
The USSR "cratered" as you put it because it bankrupted itself in the arms race with Reagan. Bush bankrupted the US fighting two wars and running an arms race against the world so as to be the New Roman Empire. We are digging out of the ruins that he made.
The purpose of government regulations are to make everyone follow the same rules when playing the same game. You don't want to play? Then sit out, but don't whine that greedy cheats ought to be free to do their worst and expect us to support your position.
0 Votes
+ -
Visualize whirled peas
Robert Hahn 12th Apr 2011
@1157page Why are you sitting out? If you had started your note saying, "I am furious that greedy cheats are not building enough broadband capacity, so I have started a new broadband company that will..." you'd have some credibility on this subject. Instead you sound like sombody who just emerged from the forest on a turnip truck. "Stop war! Bush did it!" Read the Huffington Post much?
@Robert Hahn

"I have started a new broadband company" would require that the barriers to entry to that market not be high. If you look at the actual facts of the matter, consumer broadband has extremely high barriers to entry because you can't run new fibre or new coax cable-TV cable in most places without extensive government permits, which few municipalities are willing to grant. If you want to make the "free market argument" you need to actually look at what's involved in that space. It would all be well and good to berate someone for not starting their own broadband company if there wasn't a government enforced oligopoly in that sector.
@1157page
...and Obama said: "Let's do Libya." and not even ask congress. What an ***hat Nobel Peace Prize winner he is. If you keep wishing to blame Republicans, how come the Democrats are doing the same thing ?
@1157page

I'm sure that the reason the Soviet Union couldn't keep everyday items in their stores including toilet paper was all the fault of that evil "Reagan".

It's very sad that people who believe that government can provide for them better than they can for themselves fail to learn from hundreds of years of socialist experiments that human nature prevents it from even being possible.

When you go to work in the morning, if you bother to go in at all, and then whether or not you work you make the sam amount of money as everyone else, it is inevitable that at some point in time, you will be drinking Vodka, or worse by 10AM.

That's the grand experiment of the Soviet Union. If that's how you want to live go to Greece, it's the latest example of this culture.

Please don't further socialize the US. Let's have at least one Capitalist system left in the world to feed the rest so that we don't ultimately starve to death under "Governmental Control" no matter how benevolent you believe it is.
@1157page - I agree with you.
@Common Senses - well, Reagan did hype up the goodness of unions on Labor Day 1980... the moment he got elected he started union busting.

History cannot lie.

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2011/03/ronald-reagan-where-free-unions-and-collective-bargaining-are-forbidden-freedom-is-lost/

http://newsmine.org/content.php?ol=cabal-elite/corporate/unions/reagan-era-of-union-busting.txt

Amongst other articles.
@partman1969@...
Obama didn't say "let's do Libya". Did you hear that on Faux News? He got involved in the way we should have THROUGH the UN. NO PRESIDENT IN US HISTORY has gone through congress properly for a conflict. If they did how long would congress take to decide on a counterstrike if nukes were launched? Given this past weeks events...we'd be an afterthought.
0 Votes
+ -
You said ...
mwagner@... 12th Apr 2011
@1157page ... "The USSR "cratered" as you put it because it bankrupted itself in the arms race with Reagan."

But you forget that while the Soviet Union was "bankrupted" in an Arms race with the USA (under Reagan), the the USA THRIVED while in the midst of that arms race with the Societ Union.

The difference was that 90% of the Soviet GDP was directed towards the goals of THE STATE. In the USA, 90% of the nations GDP goes to supporting the goals of individuals. The outcome is quite different.
@1157page - "Bush bankrupted the US not-fighting two theaters of a war"

FIFY
0 Votes
+ -
Bush didn't bankrupt anyone
rock06r 12th Apr 2011
@1157page You need to go back to the good ol' Gipper. If you don't believe me, do a google on "yearly national debt". It started taking off around 1984 under Reagonomics. Gotta set you straight. And that huge spike, that was good ol' Obama with those bailouts, which Bush Jr. caused by sitting on his hands for 8 years and letting Wall Street play with our 401k's like it's monopoly money. It's easy to keep dumping on one guy here and one guy there, but the bottom line is that this is what we get when we vote based on 15 second news blurbs rather than in depth reporting, and when we vote with our pockets rather than with our heads. I would blame this on the roughly 360 million folks that made this happen - and yes, not voting IS part of the problem too.
@Robert Hahn

Have you tried that? In most municipalities AT&T and Verizon sponsored, wrote, and lobbied to get laws passed restricting ISPs. In Texas, you can't start offering service until you've wired up 70% of the people in a 100 mile radius. The two have used the government to make the barriers to entry so artificially high, most people can't do anything about it. Just about any middle income household could raise the capital to enter the ISP market at the neighborhood level, but are restricted from doing so by THE GOVERNMENT.
@1157page In 8 years, Bush spent 1 Trillion Dollars on your War. Obama in 2 years has spent over 2 Trillion.

You obviously have no handle on reality. To help you, consider this. Presidents propose spending. Congress Spends. It's in the Consitution. To fight a war, Bush had to get Congress to declare war and fund it. The Senate vote was 99 Yes, one abstention, if I recall correctly. You blame Bush because you do not understand how the US Government works. Bush was many things, and not one of the great Presidents, but the problems you complain about were the result of Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.

The Presidents job is to enact the will of the Congress. Bush was not responsible for the Hurricane in Lousiana, and Obama was not responsible for the Earthquakes in Haiti or Japan.

Get over it!
0 Votes
+ -
I heartily agree with you!
sissy sue Updated - 12th Apr 2011
@Robert Hahn
This country already has too many do-gooders who make it their ambition to force their agenda on us "for our own good" or "for the sake of the children."

In a free society, people persuade others to change their behavior. In an unfree society, people run to government to force us to change our behavior.

Those of us who believe in freedom are victimized by those who spend most of their waking hours trying to find ways of making us do what they want us to do, while all we want is to be left alone and to leave others alone, as well.

But we who love freedom will not let ourselves be victimized forever.........
0 Votes
+ -
Message has been deleted.
blueskip Updated - 13th Apr 2011
  • Flagged
@sissy sue
Isn't it funny how blueskip would rather fight wars against U.S citizens (tea partiers) than solve the problems conceived over the last 2 presidential administrations. I think he needs to understand that democracy does not mean conceding to extreme liberalism or agreeing to ideas promoted in socialism or communism.
@Robert Hahn "The purpose of government regulations are to make everyone follow the same rules when playing the same game. You don't want to play? Then sit out, but don't whine that greedy cheats ought to be free to do their worst and expect us to support your position."

If you don't see this to be true, you are beyond hope. Sitting out has nothing to do with it. Clueless does. Oh and by the way FACT: Bush bankrupted us. You watch Faux News much?
0 Votes
+ -
@blueskip
**ck the U.N. and any other Bildaberger 1 world government organization. I didn't care for Bush and I certainly don't care for Obama. I do however believe in the Republic which was created in 1776 signed by our forefathers who were certainly more conservative than either the screwed up GOP or Democrats of today!
@blueskip
Capitalism by means of consumer choice is the best means to a fair system. If you don't like the goods or services don't buy them. To follow the same rules as applied by government in your liberal point of view would make it a crime to sit it out. The Tea Partiers you despise so much are very much like the militias of the mid 1700's that desired freedom from the King's rule of England (as today they desire freedom from improper government mandates) Since Bush's term I have seen unconstitutional mandates that have not stopped in Obama's term. An uprising is becoming necessary but not needed against the people whether it be tea partiers (or any other anti government / pro freedom movement). The movement should be against those promoting double standard lies such as PATRIOT ACT or NET NEUTRALITY or FAIRNESS DOCTRINE. These are all lies and unneccesary evils. Oh and by the way I need Faux News as much as I need MSNBC. NOT !!!!!!!!!!!!! Think Independently as our Constitution was once interpreted.
0 Votes
+ -
@blueskip
One more thing you should know. The U.N. was established in 1945. I believe the freedoms which allow you to spew your liberal tripe were established 169 years before in a document which established us as a sovereign nation. Isn't it funny how the word sovereign gets tossed around, and when times get trying we have to give it up to world organizations and liberalism.
0 Votes
+ -
@blueskip

"Bush bankrupted us." That's precious. Wow. All by himself. I guess he signed off on all those bills all by himself too. And got all those earmarks passed. And not to mention he signed off on the bailouts too so that was all him? Please read the next word, it goes a little beyond just calling someone wrong: LIAR. Apparently, beyond just our education system failing you, beyond the basic concepts of what a democracy is having completely bypassed your ability to understand, and beyond all the stupid incessant 15 second jokes and news blurbs, we should all think about this for a minute. Did the president, ANY PRESIDENT, ever sign off on anything? I mean, even when we went to fight the Japanese after Pearl Harbor... wasn't there at least some whiny participation of some congressman and senators involved? I'm not a Bush fanboy by any means. I do fault his administration for creating a superfluous new agency (OHD) and circumventing our basic, most sacred personal protections (aka the constitution). But bankrupting a whole big giant country full of 360,000,000+ people and congressmen and senators? Wow. The POWER he must have. And here I sit thinking that the president still has to itemize every paperclip he uses in his office. Here's some facts, o ye of little historical knowledge: Reagan started us on the path of larger and larger spending - all those tax breaks, all those programs got started under his watch, around 1984. The latest big peak in our spending (Obama) was the result of (1) Clinton's administration pushing for deregulation of Wallstreet and the loan system, and (2) the Bush administration sitting on its hands for 8 years when all the signs were pointing towards a "bubble". By the way, "bubble" is wall street talk for: "we don't know how much longer this will go but hey, we're making a ton of money so who cares?!". There have been "bubbles" since the 1850's....just look up "tulip speculation" if you want to read about a funny "bubble". Between 747's landing inside of buildings, Taliban and Al Qaeda beheading our citizens, and all the other junk that was going on since 9/11/01, I would almost think that they did the best they could. But... given some of your own knee-jerk reactions to this and that and their subsequent knee-jerk reactions (albeit on a grander scale) I can see an awful lot of raw knees. Do yourself a favor and spend a little time watching some decent documentaries and reading more than just the funnies in the NY times. Don't believe that comedy central is actually delivering the real news (or MSNBC or CNN for that matter either). And do go out and vote for the people that have at least half a heart and half a brain left. And quit spewing lies about our presidents. They're in a tough spot, it's crazy out there..... heck, it's crazy in here.
@Robert Hahn You and everyone else who replied to this post:

You do the world no damn good by sitting by and bitching about how socialist someone sounds. Communism has already been recognized as a failure, stop beating a dead horse already and get your asses together on working on the happy medium between the two so people don't have to put up with too much governmental ******** but are still independent. This is what I believe Americans are trying. No, we won't be communist, that obviously FAILS...but if we can provide some governmental support to OPTIMIZE OUR CAPITALISM, then quit your bitching and suggest a better plan if you have one.

Or vote for the guy who you think has the best plan. Until 2012, Sit down, shut up, and give the man a chance to fix ****. If he doesn't show any progress then, feel free to vote him, his cabinet, and his kitchen cabinet out of office. :P

This is why we are a democracy.

Also David: Props to your wife, she knows how to get your goat. :3
@ZazieLavender
"... if we can provide some governmental support to OPTIMIZE OUR CAPITALISM..."

That's what India has done - more by accident than by design - but it's working well.
@Robert Hahn
Your last leap of logic is totally flawed - there is no way to rationally prove linkage between the collapse of the Soviet empire to the absence of a free market economy. If it was that simple, China would have been bankrupt long ago.

The point that the author of this article has not mentioned, but is implicitly assumed as a fundamental reality, is that internet access (a proxy for information access, really) is becoming as much of a basic utility as water, roads and electricity. No developed economy can remain competitive without low-cost access to any of these utilities, and if the US wants to remain competitive, you cannot permit a bunch of oligopolistic service providers to restrict access by predatory pricing. And if the government is encouraging that through distorted policies, they are worse than the Soviets.
@Robert Hahn

It's not good enough for the government to stay out of it anymore. They MADE AT&T. Then, later, they MADE Verizon. These are GOVERNMENT MADE monopolies. This is EXACTLY what Russia did when they nationalized oil. Now, the government can't step out unless first it UNMAKES Verizon and AT&T.
0 Votes
+ -
Two kids in Finland? Seriously ?
mekmar 12th Apr 2011
Actually those two kids in Finland aren't kids at all. Rovio has more than 50 games (most of them where sold, and Agnry Birds are the biggest success so far). That ******* is so patronizing, that it makes me want to puke. I hope it's not really the American way he mentions, because it would be way with a dead end. If he really wants to build strategy for the country (maybe he'll start with buying Mighty Eagle bird from Rovio...)... I am speechless.
0 Votes
+ -
So, you didn't get what you wanted
oncall 12th Apr 2011
What were you expecting? A modest plan, they're going to incentivise some infrastructure, auction off some needed spectrum, and get the heck out of the way. Which is exactly what they should be doing. The angry birds example seemed pretty obvious, the future "big businesses" of the mobile space are out there now, they were not brought into existence by government edict.
@oncall Giving them a subsidy to build infrastucture and discounted prices on public spectrum needs to come with the price of real net-neutrality. If we're going to open up the tax-payers' wallet to these companies (again) and allow them to keep their current subsidies, as well as the government sponsored oligopoly (it's difficult to get permits to run new fibre in most municipalities) we need something in return. ISPs can't have it both ways, they can't get the subsidies and unprecedented monopoly on access to customers without behaving like the utilities that they are.

The reason that a lot of the telecommunications infrastucture that is currently in existence is due to government subsidies. So in a way, yes a lot of it is due to public-private partnerships which invested these things.

Regardless, he's also making the point that we need to work on educating and encouraging people to go into the technology field. You may not realize this but there is a shortage of engineers in the US of all kinds including, electrical, mechanical, and software. How can we retake leadership in that sector? Improving science and technology education and showing today's kids that it's cool to be a scientist or an engineer. We really need to change the narrative around engineering jobs to show that engineers are the heroes in modern society.
0 Votes
+ -
We are getting something in return
oncall 12th Apr 2011
@snoop0x7b

We are getting added infrastructure that we want and need. How it is used is a simple business matter to be handled between businesses and individuals. Unlike water or electricity which is are both monopolies and necessities where the government must micromanage supplier/consumer interaction there is no need for that here. Even the best intentioned government meddling in private business can result in disaster which is why I believe less is better whenever possible.
@oncall If the tax payer subsidizes that infrastructure, which we're doing to the tune of billions of dollars then that company owes something to the tax payer in terms of its policies. And if the tax payer is putting a company into the position of being the only company allowed to run a certain type of line on the utility poles (which a lot of municipalities do), then the free market isn't operating.

Our telecommunications companies are trying to play both sides of this game. On one hand they lobby against regulations, such as cable companies being forced to lease infrastructure to competitors (similar to how phone-chocie works), and on the other hand they lobby to be the only cable provider stringing lines. On one hand they lobby to get subsidies, on the other hand they try to dictate who will get what quality of service.
Are you terribly surprised at this Mr. Gewirtz - considering this comes from a group that wrote a State of Union address that decided to use Sputnik as a 'shining example' of achievement... instead of things like... Apollo?

Regardless of the shades of Pink that appear around the beltway, it appears to be very much business as usual - almost to a level that T.R. tried to reign in.
@Matthew A. Sawtell

Sputnik was definitely an achievement. But what he was saying with regard to sputnik is that it was a moment which challenged America to act and gain its own achievements in space. The phrase Obama used was "sputnik moment" which he went on to further explain as what inspired us to reach for the moon. We can't afford to continue in our current pattern of ignoring others' achievements and shouting "La la la America is the best LA LA LA", because quite frankly, we're falling behind. It's tough to admit, and it's a tough reality to face, but it points to a real need to ask why we have a shortage of engineers in this country. The people who rose to the challenge of Sputnik weren't the sort of people who simply looked at our country and said, "We're the best, no one achieves like us." They were the sort of people who saw what the USSR was doing and asked how they could improve what we're doing to do it better... And ultimately we did.

You're ignoring the actual meaning of that particular phrase and take it out of context to be an attack on America. You need to get past the notion that questioning America's dominance is in some way unpatriotic or unamerican because the only way for us to stay on top is to constantly examine what we're doing (what's right, what's wrong) and what others are doing, and to ask ourselves what we can do better.
@snoop0x7b Agreed.
It's very frustrating when the "sputnik moment" comment is taken out of context and twisted into an "Attack on America" and portrayed as an exaltation of communism. It was a historical achievement for sure, and a wake up call for the U.S. And then the sting of Yuri Gagarin. That really stirred the ant nest.
Wait, Google just doodled the Gagarin flight. Google is celebrating communism!
Verizon?s 4G performance is breathtaking!!?? Are you serious?? Compared to the rest of the world the US is far behind in speed, even Verizon?s supposed 4G speeds. According to Phil Marshall, PhD, Tolaga Research other countries are getting 8 times what we are getting in the US.
Philippines 108 Mbps
Poland 73 Mbps
Chili 50 Mbps
Canada 60 Mbps
South Africa 100 Mbps
Lithuania 106 Mbps
Kuwait 100 Mbps
Namibia 100 Mbps

Maybe a 60?s era VW Bug is a better comparison.
0 Votes
+ -
It's easy to claim faster coverage
oncall 12th Apr 2011
@pllamonica@

When you are covering vastly less area. Go check out a Canadian cell phone companies coverage map for 3G and compare that to Verizons or AT&T's. South Africa, even worse, not even in the same ballpark.

Apples to Oranges.
@oncall So we have the same here as the countries listed in all our major cities is what you're saying? Not even close...
@pllamonica@... But not wirelessly... You need to compare other countries with 4G service to Verizon's LTE service.
@pllamonica@...
I wish I could get 100 Mbps here in South Africa. I have a 384K connection at home, and get up to a Mbps at work (a large research university). The prices are astronomical after that, and I pay about $10 per Gig of data. (No "free" limit -- the "cap" is 0.)
@pllamonica@... LOL, you're not quoting wireless speeds. Verizon 4G is based on LTE, a global standard. Everyone has the same speed.
0 Votes
+ -
Getting tired of blog entries like this
c_hamoen@... 12th Apr 2011
Does ZDNet now pay authors for views & ad revenues?

The title is incorrect - he did not directly claim this. He used Angry Birds as an example - of how much opportunity there is in mobile.
@c_hamoen@... Exactly.
@c_hamoen@... in terms of supporting big wireless telecom companies, perhaps.

Most people who program cute games on mobile devices are playing a crap shoot at best.

http://wmpoweruser.com/average-iphone-app-only-earns-2-per-day-or-why-the-app-store-is-a-fools-errand/

Or for a less-biased article that pretty much says the same thing (though with a slightly higher ROI for us peons who program):
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/03/04/nintendo.apple.games/?hpt=Sbin
you inject too much politics (cynicism) into what should be an objective technical discussion.
@Malcolm in St Louis And he does rightly so. We need more cynicism of business in this country. A LOT MORE...
@blueskip
I have at least 5 business choices to connect with the internet in my neighborhood, and that doesn't even include 3 neighbors with unsecured access. Buy what services make you the happiest. Consumers are what make the internet not the businesses.
If only gov't had forced IBM to sell the original pc for the same price as Commodore 64s, we could purchase them today for less than $1000. What a wonderful world it would be.
@willdy
Thanks to Bill Gates and Windows, you can not only have much more powerful computers for way less than $1000, but you can have them from any of more than 20 manufacturers. It already is a wonderful Windows world!! happy
0 Votes
+ -
Seemed OK
htmapes 12th Apr 2011
Not a particularly compelling presentation, but not silly either. The analogy with the Interstate system seems appropriate and the overall goal is sensible.

The interesting part is the "it will reduce the deficit part." The spectrum auction will produce revenue, but I'd be willing to bet that the investment incentives and the research subsidies will eat up whatever money is realized via the auction. It would make much more sense to stick to the supportable premise that ubiquitous, high-capacity communications drive innovation and profits which are good for everyone. But that wouldn't meet the unspoken goal of allowing for economic meddling and the power that entails.
Enough V coustomers complain or take their business elwhere, they will listen. Same goes for the others or some upstart company comes in with what people want and blows them away.
I don't play games on the phone, nor do I play anything but Freecell on the computer, would never play AB, looks stupid. It would be great to have such speeds at home or phone or both. These commentors do not tell of pricing in these other countries. They also have an advantage in many countries to start from scratch and build great, we have so much legacy infrastructure from having started most of it all that has to be overcome. Over 20 years agao in my previous life at AT&T it was a goal to get Fiber to the Home and just now they are doing it. (UVerse) I have seen mention of Verizon doing it as well. I suppose the cost of FO stuff has come down to where it is more affordable, I don't know. I have been working at your expense for nearly 21 years now at the Federal Govenment.
America's broadband infrastructure (wired, wireless, backbone, et al) will go nowhere as long as the carriers are allowed to continue on the path's they are on. That being greed, nitpicking fees, nickle & dime, caps, non-neutrality, etc.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix