Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
United Kingdom The Internet

UK Government Proposes Minimum 10Mbps Broadband For Poor (thestack.com) 79

An anonymous reader writes: The UK's Local Government Association (LGA) is proposing a social tariff to ensure that minimum broadband access of at least 10 Mbps is available to all UK citizens at an affordable price. Last November, Parliament announced that it would begin work on a Universal Service Obligation (USO), which would grant all citizens the right to request broadband service with a minimum 10Mbps. At the time, Prime Minister David Cameron said, "Access to the Internet shouldn't be a luxury; it should be a right -- absolutely fundamental to life in 21st century Britain." Research by Ofcom in 2014 showed "marked relationships between socio-economic deprivation and [poor] broadband availability in cities". Similar results have been found in rural areas, which means that the demand for increasing broadband service to a minimum level may be high among people with lower incomes.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK Government Proposes Minimum 10Mbps Broadband For Poor

Comments Filter:
  • "...marked relationships between socio-economic deprivation and [poor] broadband availability in cities"

    Face, meet palm.
  • If we could get anybody but Comcast with that speed. Really, I think internet should be and will be a utility akin to electricity.
  • But how about making sure everyone has that at least?

    With no contention?

  • by Anonymous Coward

    This reminds me of the last time the British Government mandated a technology to the masses. The TV.
    Where they allowed even the poorest of people to borrow money from banks just to be able to buy a TV. NO OTHER LOAN WAS ACCEPTED!.

    They REALLY wanted the masses to be propagandized, enough to bank on it.
    The same might be happening here, though id hazard a guess that most people already have internet access of some kind already.

  • by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday October 21, 2016 @02:31PM (#53124425)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • 10 Mbps for the lot of them to split...bloody peasants.

  • Who pays for the computers so the poor citizens can access the internet?
    • The rich, of course, assuming that there are any left who haven't moved to a country that's dedicated to confiscating everything they've got to buy votes from the poor.
    • by sims 2 ( 994794 )

      Here in the US you can get a hotspot with unlimited* data on sprint for just $195/yr
      *deprioritized after 23GB

    • Is there anyone in the US between the ages of 5 and 85 who doesnt have a cell phone that can browse the internet? I kid, a little.
    • I would have say, just pick up a desktop on the streets on your way home, but if it's fully working the OS on it has become even more worthles than it used to (Windows XP, or later Windows already full of malware).

      As another who beat me to it says, the poorest tend to use a smartphone now. So if you don't have a smartphone, be glad you can afford it lol.
      Also why I find those phones despicable. You can buy a $50 one or a $80 one, but to stay afloat on security updates you'd have to buy one every year as soon

  • Similar results have been found in rural areas, which means that the demand for increasing broadband service to a minimum level may be high among people with lower incomes.

    I live in a rural area of the UK (my speed is 2.2 Mbps) and the issue is not being able to afford no better - that is all that is available down the end of a long copper line.

    The are going to have to do a lot of road digging to put in cable before anyone around here gets any better, rich or poor.

    And in rural UK the well-off outnumber the "poor". Most agricultural jobs have gone and the poor have gone to live in towns; their cottages have mostly been modernised and extended for better-off commuters. I live

    • I live in a rural area of the UK (my speed is 2.2 Mbps) and the issue is not being able to afford no better - that is all that is available down the end of a long copper line.

      A&A can double that [aaisp.net].

      It'll cost extra, but you did say that the cost wasn't the issue...

  • It's miserable and unfair to be in poverty. And simply giving them broadband will not solve that. Therefore I offer a simpler solution:

    Why not just mandate that the poor "not be poor" anymore?
    We should just give them all say, $100,000 per year, and then nobody will be poor and everyone will be happy.

    That should work just fine.

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Working...