On the BC3 Listserv, I see a split between the folks that have a vision of something larger (aka FTTH) and the folks that are more pragmatic (ie DSL is good enough for me).
For me, I’m with the dreamers, and I ain’t the only one.
I’ve been doing a bunch of research lately for a client on the Digital home, which is pretty much the holy grail for a bunch of different industry players (networks, ISPs and Consumer electronics folks). Basically, the digital home will be a convergence of all the networks. DVD size downloads are coming fast and whether you like it or not, the rest of the world wants it. There is tremendous interest, just not happened yet.
Why send those big bulky DVD’s in the mail or face the cold hard rain at the rental store when you can zap it down in an instant? 
Music downloads, DVD video, Skype and Skype- equivalents all are providing pressure on this convergence. But I know we’ve been saying this for a while…
Whether the rural areas get it is still up for debate. John Webb is right that the telcos in Canada and the average person won’t really understand it (until they get it) and the pressure’s not there, but it will grow.
Point is, FTTH is coming to middle America and Canada won’t be too far behind – or maybe we will lead (hahahhhaaahahaa) but it will be here. I am confident that it will happen, but it is the speed that concerns me.
Oh, one more point -> in my travels I have noticed a lot of towns trying to attract boomers and their cash – and lots of boomers are taking up their offers. This kind of demographic shift will play out as well – and the boomers aren’t leaving their computers back in the city…
A number of discussions have been going on in the blogosphere around Net Neutrality. As far as I understand it, it is the idea that the networks should be open access – ie. separating the stuff on the pipes from the pipes themselves. This is something we at the BC3 called open networks and have supported. It’s come up because the US is holding congressional hearings to understand and potentially develop policy on this subject. It’s key for us as my feeling is this current government will follow leads from the US.
Basically, if network neutrality is not supported, ISPs will have carte-blanche to block and prevent services. Ironically, much the arguments from the larger ISPs centres around free-speech – ie. “We ought to have the right to not support things we don’t agree with”. This seems incredibly ironic to me. Anyway, for some specific examples, here’s some from wikipedia – and note how TWO of them are applicable here in BC – (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrality):
Below are examples listed by SaveTheInternet of past examples of abuses by ISP companies where they blocked rivals or unfavorable opinions about themselves.
- In 2004, North Carolina ISP Madison River blocked their DSL customers from using any rival Web-based phone service.
- In 2005, Canada’s telephone giant Telus blocked customers from visiting a Web site sympathetic to the Telecommunications Workers Union during a contentious labor dispute.
- Shaw, a major Canadian cable, internet, and telephone service company, intentionally downgrades the “quality and reliability” of competing Internet-phone services that their customers might choose — driving customers to their own phone services not through better services, but by making their opponents seem worse than they really are.
- In April, Time Warner’s AOL blocked all emails that mentioned www.dearaol.com — an advocacy campaign opposing the company’s pay-to-send e-mail scheme.
Yikes!
Network neutrality is a key concept that must be supported here. While I like the naming of it “open networks” it looks like this is much more the concept that will be being used. Know thine enemy!
I’m working with Alexandra Samuel and Rob Cottingham of Social Signal at a great blogging workshop. It’s an opportunity for me to think more deeply about what I’m working on with this blog. I think that the best answer is that it’s a way for me to develop more strategic thinking. I’m calling this “slow thinking”. Made me laugh when I said it, because of course there’s the idea that slow=stupid, but it kind of works anyway. It’s the idea that thinking needs to slow down and considered. There’s a way to ask innocent questions that actually are revealing. So the idea is to take the time and think deeply about issues that I am passionate about. So, education technology and thinking about the future.