Acidus wrote:
Undoubtedly, you see where I’ve been going with all this. Broadband in 2009 is electricity in 1900. We may think we know all the means to which high-speed Internet access may be put, but we clearly do not: YouTube and Twitter prove that new things are constantly on the way and will emerge as bandwidth and access continues to increase.

I've been making this comparison for quite some time now. I will stick my tongue firmly in my cheek to say that YouTube and Twitter are good examples of quality of life and economic output. I would argue that they are the very reason why broadband does not get serious attention as a standard piece of infrastructure for all citizens. Add to that list the ridiculous fear of kiddie porn and child predators online.

But you absolutely can make this statement when you're talking about mobile health, telemedicine, lowering health care and educational costs, promoting economic development (both hyper locally and versus the world market), and many many other legitimate purposes. YouTube and Twitter just prove that when you get a large community of users with access, ANYTHING is possible. We need to make sure that all citizens get affordable and ubiquitous access across the continent for all of the other reasons.

But it got me thinking about all the hubbub last week about capping smartphone users who download a lot. In Marietta Georgia, where I grew up, there is a Coke bottling plant that bottles Dasani water. Dasani bottled water is just Cobb County municipal water. They are the 2nd biggest water consumer in Cobb County behind Water White Water Park. Do they get capped? Do they pay a premium? Nope. They they pay the same flat water rate as my parents do.

Hmm... probably because the expectations of shareholders for the municipal water supply vendor are much much lower than AT&T. Ironically, shareholders of the local water utility have been pleasantly surprised by the upside surge in profitability and volume due to growth in bottled water sales, whereas the stock performance of AT&T has sucked, despite having the more visible "hot market".

Acidus wrote:

This article examines how people, companies, and cities dealt with the issue of whether or not to electrify communities at the turn of the century.

I love the historical examination of how society confronted and debated something we take for granted now.

If you're interested, the book to read is Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880-1930, by Thomas Parke Hughes. It is the definitive treatment of the subject.

From Amazon:

Awarded the Dexter Prize by the Society for the History of Technology, this book offers a comparative history of the evolution of modern electric power systems. It describes large-scale technological change and demonstrates that technology cannot be understood unless placed in a cultural context.

Through the limited preview at Google Books, you can find an interesting discussion on pages 297-299 about Giant Power, over which the Governor of Pennsylvania battled the head of the Pennsylvania Electric Association. The PEA argued against the proposal at hand, saying:

The very clear purpose of this plan is to take from any electric service system the benefits it thus far accrued by reason of able management, successful financing, painstaking research work, [and] courage in the replacement of apparatus ... Private initiative is to be driven out of the electric service companies and [to] be supplanted by a political plan based upon a socialistic theory and offering all the possibilities of the construction of a state-wide, all powerful, political machine.

It sounds like the contemporary health care debate ...

noteworthy wrote:
Acidus wrote:

This article examines how people, companies, and cities dealt with the issue of whether or not to electrify communities at the turn of the century.

I love the historical examination of how society confronted and debated something we take for granted now.

If you're interested, the book to read is Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880-1930, by Thomas Parke Hughes. It is the definitive treatment of the subject.

From Amazon:

Awarded the Dexter Prize by the Society for the History of Technology, this book offers a comparative history of the evolution of modern electric power systems. It describes large-scale technological change and demonstrates that technology cannot be understood unless placed in a cultural context.

Through the limited preview at Google Books, you can find an interesting discussion on pages 297-299 about Giant Power, over which the Governor of Pennsylvania battled the head of the Pennsylvania Electric Association. The PEA argued against the proposal at hand, saying:

The very clear purpose of this plan is to take from any electric service system the benefits it thus far accrued by reason of able management, successful financing, painstaking research work, [and] courage in the replacement of apparatus ... Private initiative is to be driven out of the electric service companies and [to] be supplanted by a political plan based upon a socialistic theory and offering all the possibilities of the construction of a state-wide, all powerful, political machine.

It sounds like the contemporary health care debate ...

Purchased. Thanks.